PCs Offer 'Better Gaming Experience Than 100% of Mac Laptops,' Intel Claims in Ongoing Anti-Apple Campaign

[Stella]

Meanwhile on Earth One… 🤓

Awww, it must hard for you to accept provable facts… so you reply like this.

 

[GSWForever8]

Heh. It’s kinda the opposite for me. Windows is for work and games. There’s no mac software hardly. Never has been. Vast majority of businesses have no use for macs. I saw macs mainly for artist, photographers, and video editing. It’s still mainly that which is apples idea of a pro user..lol. Reg consumers basically get macs to surf and do Facebook. Usually these were the nontechie users. We see more and more of these type users in the forums. They’ll spend 2-3k just to surf the web while crying about needing more ram or how the colors look.

I was able to make a Mac work for me at home with windows and parallels. Not happening with m1. Though I did get an m1 mini for the kids to do school work on. Great chip. Good computer if you don’t need niche pro apps like me or games. I’m talking real pro apps. Not the two “pro” apps that apple sells with every Mac.

What do you mean two pros app?

 

[Slartibart]

It is not clear why you keep posting this irrelevant chart. Does it disprove Intel's claim that PCs are superior in gaming?

First it corrects an error in the post I response too. Then it shows that Intel claims have even less relevance - beside the obvious pointed out here eloquently by many over and over again - Mobile gaming is eating Intels lunch. 🤓

 

[Slartibart]

Awww, it must hard for you to accept provable facts… so you reply like this.

Where can I actually buy it for the price you… imagine posted? Now.

 

[diamond.g]

But the title “cuts it” to quote the post I was replying to, right?

Otherwise: on whatever grounds the dev bases their business decisions - that’s for sure no valid sustainable motivation to convince customers… off topic: I think this is particularly interesting and closely watched by the industr, because it tries to move the threshold for “what is an adequate price for a game/app”.

If Sony has no incentive on itself to do so - and if you look on them or e.g. Nintendo in the past, they overwhelmingly haven’t- why would they? Why should Apple change that?
Sony seems happy with what they have. It might be difficult to accept on a personal basis, but I think the gain for Apple in its areas of interest IF these two are available on its platforms is minimal. At best.

I never said DOS2 wasn't a AAA game. I am saying users who want AAA games need to buy the game so they will continue to port others.

Money is Sony's incentive, Apple has it to burn, with giant banners for advertising the game coming to Mac and iPad. With millions of eyeballs, and a good conversion, again assuming folks pay it could pave the way for other "cinematic gaming experiences" from other Console/PC devs to come to Apple's platforms.

 

[TopherMan12]

I never said DOS2 wasn't a AAA game. I am saying users who want AAA games need to buy the game so they will continue to port others.

Money is Sony's incentive, Apple has it to burn, with giant banners for advertising the game coming to Mac and iPad. With millions of eyeballs, and a good conversion, again assuming folks pay it could pave the way for other "cinematic gaming experiences" from other Console/PC devs to come to Apple's platforms.

Apple would have more luck going after a game like Control by Remedy. Independent third party developers like Remedy need that cash a lot more than Sony does. Just because Apple has money "to burn" doesn't mean Sony is interested in a quick cash grab for one of their prime titles.

I don't think Apple would be interested in that either way. Doesn't fit either one of their styles.

 

[falainber]

First it corrects an error in the post I response too. Then it shows that Intel claims have even less relevance - beside the obvious pointed out here eloquently by many over and over again - Mobile gaming is eating Intels lunch. 🤓

Nobody buys mobile phones just for gaming. Intel is not selling any games so Mobile gaming is not eating anything Intel here. And as far as the market size is concerned, all Intel cares about is the computer market. It's bigger than just gaming. Intel ad is targeting people who consider gaming as one of the factors when choosing a computer. That's all there is to it. Mobile gaming has no bearing here.

 

[Ethosik]

The Intel Xeon in that machine has an MSRP of $2000 on its own. Different specs for a different purpose. If you have a need for an enterprise workstation class machine then you go buy that.

There is no point with those facts. I had the same argument when I got my 2010 Mac Pro when the Xeon itself was $1,000 and people just kept saying they could build a PC better for $500. Literally, the processor MSRP was $1,000. You absolutely CANNOT build the PC for $500.

 

[Putzytart]

How ironic that intel are slagging off the intel macs. We are listening intel, we will take your advice and buy the new Apple Silicon Macs instead. Slow clap.

 

[Alan Wynn]

Nobody buys mobile phones just for gaming.

People certainly buy tablets just for gaming and that is part of the mobile gaming market.

Intel is not selling any games so Mobile gaming is not eating anything Intel here. And as far as the market size is concerned, all Intel cares about is the computer market. It's bigger than just gaming.

We do not care about what matters to Intel but what matters to customers. If enough high quality titles are ported to iOS/iPadOS, and those are made available on macOS thanks to Apple Silicon and tools like Swift UI/Catalyst, it fills the same requirement for many users.

Intel ad is targeting people who consider gaming as one of the factors when choosing a computer. That's all there is to it. Mobile gaming has no bearing here.

Mobile gaming matters because many of the highest end iPadOS games (a large chunk of the 13+ billion dollar tablet segment) are games that compete for PC gaming dollars. Especially if they are easily able to be offered on macOS thanks to Apple Silicon.

 

[Putzytart]

Also how many Mac gamers are out there that might move to PCs because of this campaign??? None right?? What is the point of this campaign I don’t get it??? Most gamers are already on PCs, so this little niche market of Mac gamers are their target market. I just can’t work out what the angle is here. Also yes, of course the new intel chips are faster than old ones in macs. Which are about to be replaced by M2 chips that will blow these PCs away. I DON’T UNDERSTAND YOU INTEL WHAT IS THIS MOVE

 

[Alan Wynn]

I agree we'll see more mobile games on ARM Mac computers. Sure. People who buy PCs for gaming aren't looking for mobile games, which is the target market Intel are referring to.

Many of the $13+billion tablet gaming market are higher end games, and they absolutely overlap with the $33 billion in PC games. It is true that the small part of the market looking for the highest end performance are likely not completely served by macOS versions of these games, but they will make many more games available on macOS and that may very well start people considering Macintosh systems even for their gaming needs. That does not cover 100% of gamers, but it would be a much larger set of them than were previously served.

AppleTV won't be powerful enough to accommodate AAA games, for a long time anyway.

Based on what? One of the rumors is that Apple plans to release an A14x or A15X based AppleTV targeted at the gaming market. That is expected in the next year. I guess it depends on your definition of “long time” but I would not be shocked to see it by the fall, although I am not counting on it one way or another.

The current generation certainly isn't. For starters, the max storage space of 64GB is way too small to store multiple games. No one wants to wait for downloads to finish before playing their next AAA game.

First, as I noted in the original post, this would be a new device. Second, even the current generation is probably fine for streamed AAA games. Finally, the current design of games in a primarily digital download world means that one need not wait until the whole game is downloaded to begin playing. While I would expect a gaming focused AppleTV to support more storage, that would not be a show stopper.

Intel and especially AMD aren't going to stay still waiting for ARM to catch up. Nvidia and AMD are going to continue to push out more powerful GPUs, which Apple will find hard to complete against.

Right, just as Apple has had a hard time competing against Intel’s CPUs. Got it.

 

[Alan Wynn]

Sure, "theoretically". "theoretically", Intel Mac could have been on par with Windows, *if* Apple had shipped decent GPUs.... *if* Macs had better heat management, blah blah blah.

Sorry, you completely miss the point. In a world where Apple uses X86_64 CPUs and commodity GPUs, the best they could do is be as fast as the Windows competition. In a world where they are designing their own Apple Silicon, and they do not need to serve any customers but their own, they have the possibility to be much faster.

With ARM Based Macs, *ifs*"....

Yup, we are all speculating based on Apple’s custom silicon track record since the A7. It is possible that they have hit the ceiling, but many of us (Intel included) are betting that is not the case.

I suspect ARM based Macs will be great for mobile games, the same games we see on iPads

They already are great for those, and those are getting pretty good (several examples have already been posted on this thread, so I will not duplicate them).

but not much else, because game developers by in-large, won't bother to cater for a small user base.

With M1 based iPad Pros and the newer iPad Air/iPad 8 systems being able to out perform a large chunk of PC desktops/laptops, developers have a pretty large customer pool they can address. Add all the Apple Silicon macOS systems and the market gets much more interesting. This is especially true if they release a gaming targeted Apple TV.

 

[Abazigal]

Also how many Mac gamers are out there that might move to PCs because of this campaign??? None right?? What is the point of this campaign I don’t get it??? Most gamers are already on PCs, so this little niche market of Mac gamers are their target market. I just can’t work out what the angle is here. Also yes, of course the new intel chips are faster than old ones in macs. Which are about to be replaced by M2 chips that will blow these PCs away. I DON’T UNDERSTAND YOU INTEL WHAT IS THIS MOVE

I guess maybe Intel is trying to stop people from migrating over to the Mac?

I can't explain it. Maybe it's the optimisation of the OS for the hardware. There's something about the M1 which makes macOS on my M1 MBA run even more smoothly compared to my 5k iMac (with 40gb ram and a SSD drive). Apps open faster. Reddit loads faster in Safari. Everything just feels snappier. So this ends up being another scenario where people obsess over specs in a vacuum and do not pay enough attention to the overall user experience.

I think the value proposition of the M1 is clear. For many people, it more than suffices for the work they need to do, and the M1 chip goes the extra mile in enabling a more fluid experience, made possible by Apple's control over hardware and software, in a way that Intel or even AMD never can (unless Microsoft is willing to work closely with them in this regard and even then, I imagine there's simply too many versions of Intel's processors to make this worth their while). I suppose this is one advantage of Apple consolidating so many Macs around the M1 chip - easier to optimise the OS when you only have 1 processor to work with.

And for this group of users, gaming is really the last thing on their mind.

It's pretty amazing how Apple has taken a standard industry practice (differentiating processors at the price / performance level), unified it, and now differentiates it at the hardware PC level. You get the same chip in the MBA, MBP, Mac mini, iMac and iPad, and you just need to decide which form factor best suits your needs. No more wondering whether the bulk of the MBP is worth the extra performance, for example.

I feel this simplicity will really help Apple win over many more PC users, now that a large chunk of that complexity has been removed from the buying equation.

 

[Zdigital2015]

Are you saying Apple shouldn’t pursue Sony to get Uncharted 4 and Days Gone on MacOS and iOS?

No, Apple shouldn’t pursue a company for IP it will never license to another platform. Uncharted is a PS exclusive and Sony wants to sell PlayStations, not Macs. Actually they want to sell you subscriptions more and then the console. Besides, once game streaming issues get resolved, they’ll gladly let users stream Uncharted to iOS and macOS without wasting effort on porting to arcane graphics engines. Time better spent on Uncharted sequels exclusive to the PS5 and beyond.

 

[Think creative]

I'm fine not doing most gaming on my macs. Hell, I'm very excited about the new apple silicone machines because they can run dolphin well so old gamecube games here I come. The real issue for me is that I miss playing Age of Empires and a few other resource games like that on a computer. I have no clue if Skyrim, Fallout 4 run well on apple chips. If they did, that's all I really need. I have a switch and PS5 for everything else.

 

[Abazigal]

Hell, I'm very excited about the new apple silicone machines because they can run dolphin well so old gamecube games here I come.

Slight tangent, but I notice spelling it as "silicone" quite often. Isn't that the stuff that goes into breast implants? Or is that some alternative spelling for "silicon" that I am unaware of?

 

[Stella]

Yup, we are all speculating based on Apple’s custom silicon track record since the A7. It is possible that they have hit the ceiling, but many of us (Intel included) are betting that is not the case.

I'm never suggested the Apple Silicon ceiling has been hit. Apple Silicon has a lot of room to grow.

With M1 based iPad Pros and the newer iPad Air/iPad 8 systems being able to out perform a large chunk of PC desktops/laptops, developers have a pretty large customer pool they can address. Add all the Apple Silicon macOS systems and the market gets much more interesting. This is especially true if they release a gaming targeted Apple TV.

If we are talking about having high performing games we see on Consoles and PCs, given Intel's pitch, you can instantly forget about this current generation of iPad Air and 8. Also, forget about the current AppleTV, not enough storage space - again, no one wants to wait for a game to be downloaded from an appStore. These will be restricted to mobile games and older game ports. M1 iPad is impressive and sure, it's "theoretically" possible, but I still, I doubt very much we'll see many high profile games that can be played on PCs or Consoles.

I suspect the future of gaming on iPads and indeed, ARM based Macs and maybe for the game industry as a whole isn't local gaming but streaming services, especially as mobile and home based internet speeds increase. Gaming companies only need to build a client, and the risk of creating games specifically for platforms that haven't got a large gaming user base, such as Apple, becomes largely irrelevant.

If you want a good gaming system, IMO, PC gaming rig is best, followed by Consoles and this won't be changing anytime soon. Apple devices will remain mobile gaming, with a trickle of AAA type games, and streaming-game services, no matter the possible potential. For gaming, the full potential will probably never be met ( unfortunately ) on Apple devices.

Add: As I said earlier in another post - I really wish that Mac gaming would take off, because it would be more convenient and cheaper - no need for a PC rig! I'd love to play the games on Mac OS that I do on PC, but I really, I don't see it happening. :-(

 

[quarkysg]

What on earth are you talking about?

Goto your major banks in your country, goto your mining corporations, goto educational infrastructure- guess what OS their running?

problems occur at any OS server or desktop or notebook.

I was referring to the general consensus that’s prevalent in the computing world during the 80s.

 

[Think creative]

Slight tangent, but I notice spelling it as "silicone" quite often. Isn't that the stuff that goes into breast implants? Or is that some alternative spelling for "silicon" that I am unaware of?

this was a typo with me writing fast on a work break.

 

[quarkysg]

I suspect the future of gaming on iPads and indeed, ARM based Macs and maybe for the game industry as a whole isn't local gaming but streaming services, especially as mobile and home based internet speeds increase. Gaming companies only need to build a client, and the risk of creating games specifically for platforms that haven't got a large gaming user base, such as Apple, becomes largely irrelevant.

RTT between your device and the game server would need to come down really low and stay consistently low for the cloud service to take off tho. At the moment, if the server is on another continent from you, the RTT will be quite high and fluctuates. Kills interactive responses.

 

[Stella]

deleted.

 

[quarkysg]

Absolutely correct. However, solutions will be found for technical issues, CDN will be improved to solve the geographic issues you mention. We are in the very early days of remote gaming, and technology in terms of software and hardware ( networks etc ) will improve to negate the issues we encounter today. It's going to have to, if streaming services are going to take off.

From what I know from my experience in web-app development, CDN only really helps with static contents. The contents of a game are not cacheable by any traditional CDNs that I know of, since the images are dynamically generated based on user inputs. Also, when there're logics (e.g. control responses in the game that resulted in the different movement rendered on screen) involved, it always goes back to the main server that does the actual computation.

So cloud gaming service providers would have to invest a tremendous amount of capital into building up the server infrastructures in the geographical regions that they are interested in serving, and ensure that their subscribers are sufficiently setup with low latency path to their servers to have an enjoyable experience.

IMHO, quite a mountain to climb at the moment.

 

[TopherMan12]

From what I know from my experience in web-app development, CDN only really helps with static contents. The contents of a game are not cacheable by any traditional CDNs that I know of, since the images are dynamically generated based on user inputs. Also, when there're logics (e.g. control responses in the game that resulted in the different movement rendered on screen) involved, it always goes back to the main server that does the actual computation.

So cloud gaming service providers would have to invest a tremendous amount of capital into building up the server infrastructures in the geographical regions that they are interested in serving, and ensure that their subscribers are sufficiently setup with low latency path to their servers to have an enjoyable experience.

IMHO, quite a mountain to climb at the moment.

Massive mountain. Cloud gaming is playing a game on a remote computer many many miles away. That computer sends back images, frame by frame, across the internet. You send your input to the computer via controller or keyboard/mouse. That is a lot of images/information going back and forth over many miles. Not ideal.

Coud gaming really isn't a solution for AAA gaming at this point. Not even close. Maybe there will be massive breakthroughs that harken in a new age of gaming via cloud one day, but I've tried all the major cloud gaming providers and they just flat-out suck. This doesn't work folks like me and I don't think I'm alone in this at all.

Nothing is replacing local gaming anytime soon.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Also how many Mac gamers are out there that might move to PCs because of this campaign??? None right?? What is the point of this campaign I don’t get it???

As with Samsung, they go against Apple because anything related to Apple will get you LOTS of free publicity. They could compare against AMD (using similarly constructed numbers), but there would be zero buzz about that. Make it Apple and even the morning programs will be talking about it