Sketchy Rumor Claims Apple Plans to Announce High-End Gaming MacBook or iMac at WWDC 2020

[sublunar]

I am also fairly skeptical about this position too. I don’t see Apple able to convince dev studios to convert their AAA titles from PlayStation and Xbox to yet another platform. The issue lies within who the demographics are on Apple TV. They don’t fit the same demographics as Xb1/PS4 users.

I think Apple would have an easier time convincing developers to code for the iOS platform over the Mac platform. The Apple Arcade offerings look simplistic but they also really need some AAA titles to lend some credibility to an AppleTV Pro.

The easy way to do this would be to acquire a studio to lead some development for the platform - like Microsoft did with Bungie (ironically a Mac developer) back in the day. The originators of the Marathon series went on to create Halo.

Similarly, Sony bought Psygnosis and they came up with Wipeout.

Obviously, it's very late in the day to be doing this but is it feasible they have secretly funded some development work for a launch game? After all, as Krazzix says:

• Apple launched a subscription gaming service
• Apple added Xbox and PS controller support
• Apple is partnering with Valve
• AMD will probably launch there next GPU family around WWDC time
• iMac / iMac Pro are due for an upgrade
• The most popular esport titles already run on MacOS. Overwatch might be soon to be ported if Apple worked more closely with Blizzard.

While I don't think the Mac platform is destined to be the gaming hub, a new AMD GPU is always welcome - I don't see the iMac being the gaming platform that Krazzix thinks it might be - a more powerful GPU could help Apple implement a Pro-motion 120Hz display rather than help with games on that platform.

Blizzard is incredibly Mac friendly but we've not heard anything about Overwatch which wouldn't actually be an exclusive game if they were to develop an AppleTV or Mac version of it but it would be a headline.

 

[Tech198]

Gaming Mac latop may be good, but the PC industry already has this one covered,. How many games are only on Mac platform, and compare that to how many more games on PC platform?

The answer is clear. WHen you add in Apple/Metal and going for lack of OpenGL.. its still better.

 

[apolkowski]

You can build a top-end gaming dual-booting Hackintosh below $2500.

No. Not top, but decent gaming. For top end config you have to count around 4k$.

 

[smulji]

I think Apple would have an easier time convincing developers to code for the iOS platform over the Mac platform. The Apple Arcade offerings look simplistic but they also really need some AAA titles to lend some credibility to an AppleTV Pro.

The easy way to do this would be to acquire a studio to lead some development for the platform - like Microsoft did with Bungie (ironically a Mac developer) back in the day. The originators of the Marathon series went on to create Halo.

Similarly, Sony bought Psygnosis and they came up with Wipeout.

Obviously, it's very late in the day to be doing this but is it feasible they have secretly funded some development work for a launch game? After all, as Krazzix says:



While I don't think the Mac platform is destined to be the gaming hub, a new AMD GPU is always welcome - I don't see the iMac being the gaming platform that Krazzix thinks it might be - a more powerful GPU could help Apple implement a Pro-motion 120Hz display rather than help with games on that platform.

Blizzard is incredibly Mac friendly but we've not heard anything about Overwatch which wouldn't actually be an exclusive game if they were to develop an AppleTV or Mac version of it but it would be a headline.

"The easy way to do this would be to acquire a studio to lead some development for the platform - like Microsoft did with Bungie (ironically a Mac developer) back in the day. The originators of the Marathon series went on to create Halo. "

Apple has enough cash to buy Nintendo. This is how I'd do it.

 

[Falhófnir]

So Rise of the Tomb Raider and Borderlands 3 don’t count as games for the Mac? 🤔
[automerge]1577739699[/automerge]


Hah, not a chance.

Well they certainly weren't developed for Mac, ported (with various degrees of sloppiness) as an afterthought, maybe. And this is the problem Mac will always have, as Windows has a larger market share along with all the technologies developers use, it will always be targeted by developers and more effort will be put into making things run well. Apple could make a powerhouse machine running an i9 and RTX 2080, but for reasons of optimisation it would still underperform an i9 RTX 2080 Windows computer and almost certainly cost a pretty penny more for the privilege.

 

[JagdTiger]

Apple plans to announce a high-end gaming computer at its annual WWDC developers conference in 2020, according to a questionable and as-of-yet unsubstantiated report from Taiwan's Economic Daily News.

Details are slim, but the report claims that the computer may be a large-screen laptop or all-in-one desktop with a price tag of up to $5,000, suggesting that it could be either a MacBook Pro or an iMac Pro. The computer would supposedly be tailored towards esports, aka competitive video gaming.

While this would surely be great news for gamers, this report has yet to be backed by other sources, and the Economic Daily News has a mixed track record as it relates to Apple rumors. Just a few months ago, for example, the publication incorrectly claimed AirPods Pro would come in as many as eight colors.

Over the years, many gamers have been hopeful that Apple would eventually come around to full-fledged gaming on the Mac.

"I grew up playing games Doom, Quake, and Starcraft on Mac computers most of my life," esports journalist Rod Breslau told MacRumors. "Throughout that time as a loyal Apple user since a young age, I always hoped they would give even a the fraction of the attention to gaming that my friends got while they played on their PCs. That day never came, and I switched to a PC in my early teens and never looked back. It's almost 20 years later and Apple has still never cared about the gaming community. They're going to need more than Apple Arcade to make that happen."

"So to read that Apple might be developing a gaming-centric Mac on the heels of the popularity of esports is startling and welcome news, if not a bit bewildering," added Breslau. "I'd love for Apple to make a concerted effort for gaming on a Mac including all of the popular online competitive multiplayer games in esports that are all played on PC. But the skeptical side of me knows it's going to take a lot more than just Apple building a gaming computer to bring people over. They need the developers and publishers to be thinking of porting to Mac as a priority when they create their games, and winning over the industry will be as or more difficult as winning over consumers."

WWDC 2020 should take place in June like usual, so we're just over six months out.

Article Link: Sketchy Rumor Claims Apple Plans to Announce High-End Gaming MacBook or iMac at WWDC 2020

That does not much for the a lot of gamers which cannot afford a $5000.00 dollar gaming computer.

 

[DanBig]

As a photographer I would love a larger screen which is 5k with a matte finish screen!
18" MacBook Pro or 34" iMac!
[automerge]1577746054[/automerge]

Do you think they'd ever get it to appeal to gamers? (Is that even the target audience?)

I think the still imaging space photography and image processing would love a larger screen in either iMac or MacBook Pro. Constantly pushing the window around to get deeper into an area without needing to zoom in and out would be so great!

While gamers might find it a good fit too, I'm not sure I see an all-in-one system suits their needs. I see a system thats some where between the new Mac Pro and Mac Mini as more realistic! Even some advanced amateurs & pro's might like a more trimmed down system that lets them manage their GPU boards and internal storage.

 

[xnu]

How fast is $52,000 maxed out Mac Pro for gaming with boot camp compared to one the fastest gaming PC for Windows like Corsair One that cost less than one tenth of the price? I am really curious. I know people don’t buy Mac Pro for gaming, but still.

Games are not going to use 28-cores, maybe 8. Clock speed is important, and of course graphics. NVIDIA is the best performer here at the moment in graphics, while AMD chips have become competitive for CPUs. You can build a very nice gaming machine for less than 10% of the maxed out Mac Pro. If you are doing video capture, streaming and other multimedia your mileage will vary. Apple's disadvantages are cost, heat, clock speed, graphics, APIs and native games.

One game I would love to see is Star Citizen.

 

[DeepIn2U]

Sounds like a misunderstood rumor. Probably just an iMac Pro with a beefy gpu. Makes sense price wise too

mans most likely, hoping & praying for13” to having a dedicated video card.
[automerge]1577748344[/automerge]

The gaming industry makes more than the music and movie industry combined.

This isn’t so off-the-rails considering that when you look at the long term prospects, teenagers are asking for PC’s to game on. So they use Chromebooks in school, and prefer PC’s for gaming at home (I have a small sample size obviously. This is not an absolute.). While I have several Macs at home, besides an iPhone, my children continuously ask for PCs.

arr you really sure about that? Do you have some North American & global numbers to back that claim?

 

[IG88]

Apple could make a powerhouse machine running an i9 and RTX 2080, but for reasons of optimisation it would still underperform an i9 RTX 2080 Windows computer and almost certainly cost a pretty penny more for the privilege.

The 2008 - 2012 Mac Pro was a Xeon with consumer grade GPUs, was it not? The 2012 base MP was a Quad Core Xeon and a Radeon HD 5770 GPU for $2500. Part of that premium was Xeon mobo / CPU.

Sure there's always an Apple tax but I could see a market for this. Gamers that are willing to pay extra to have the flexibility of Windows gaming, and have an expandable Mac tower desktop.
Non Xeon would bring the price down to a reasonable number.

There might also be a sizable number of Apple developers that want an expandable Mac tower but don't need or want that Mac Pro workstation. Mac Pro base config is not a good value. It's really more like an $8000 - $10000 rig with a realistic config. Do iOS / Mac developers really need / want that?

 

[Squishy Tia]

Let's see now:

Thin: Check.

Lacks heat dissipation for the hardware involved? Check.

Uses only AMD because nVidia is still being cockblocked by Apple? Check check.

Costs even more than a superior Alienware with multiple drives and SLI? Cheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeck.

Likely to attempt to drive an insane display with mediocre (i.e. can barely do 4k) GPU? Almost a certain check.

I really wish Tim Cook would wake up and realize we don't look at our computers from the side while we work or game. I couldn't care if it's as thick as a brick wall behind that display as long as it doesn't thermally throttle, make a crapton of noise, and has at least GPU and RAM upgradeability. And something other than those flimsy as hell USB-C ports so I don't need dongles and adapters just to use all the hardware I already own.

My current rig is an aging, but still powerful hackintosh with a 4770k, 32 GB RAM, and a 1080 Ti. My new components for a 9900k/64 GB build are waiting to be assembled into my Cosmos II case so this rig can go to my grandpa in the HAF XB EVO case I got for that purpose. I build for overkill.

However, this next build is becoming more and more likely to be a Windows only PC because as an nVidia user I'm stuck on 10.13.6 and many apps, including emulators, are now targeting 10.14 and above only. They may work on previous OSes, but it's only a matter of time until XCode itself can't target lower than 10.14, meaning if I made the new rig a hackintosh, I'd either be stuck on a less and less viable OS or have to shell out for a subpar GPU for gaming from the AMD lineup to have current OS compatibility. The latter isn't going to happen. AMD's best GPUs are barely above a 1080 Ti and about equal to the 2080 vanilla (let alone Super). They may cost less, but they also perform worse as well at the same tier vs. nVidia.

But it'll be a cold day in hell before I pay Apple for non-upgradeable, overpriced "gaming" Macs. They might entice me with something aking to a "gMac" using the Mac Pro case and say, an HEDT Intel setup inside instead of a Xeon setup. That I could go for, if nVidia was allowed to release drivers once again. Outside of those two things, forget it. Apple's got nothing worth my time as a gamer otherwise.

 

[Icaras]

Well they certainly weren't developed for Mac, ported (with various degrees of sloppiness) as an afterthought, maybe. And this is the problem Mac will always have, as Windows has a larger market share along with all the technologies developers use, it will always be targeted by developers and more effort will be put into making things run well. Apple could make a powerhouse machine running an i9 and RTX 2080, but for reasons of optimisation it would still underperform an i9 RTX 2080 Windows computer and almost certainly cost a pretty penny more for the privilege.

I guess I’m the cup is half full perspective here. The fact that Gearbox ported Borderlands 3 on their own without the help of Aspyr or Feral (and by the way, god bless these two companies), and within the same calender year shows to me that some major game devs are putting a little more effort into the Mac, which I think is fantastic.

Sure there’s still a long way to go on the Mac but the fact that there are some solid AAA titles being released shouldn’t be ignored, regardless if they’re less than stellar ports.

 

[amgff84]

Macs can already do games. My 2019 MacBook Pro runs Wolfenstein 3D with only minor frame choppiness.

Best comment yet.

 

[JosephAW]

Yes and we are still waiting for the G5 PowerBook. Probably the Power 8 multi core is faster now than Intel.

 

[amgff84]

I'm not sure anyone else is interested in this, but I game on my Late 2008 MacBook...

shadow-cloud-gaming-on-macos.2217810
[automerge]1577753853[/automerge]

I can only see this making sense if this happens hand-in-hand with an ARM-based processor move on macs, so anything in the app store would require less work to make the desktop version. The bionic chips are outperforming some of the 7th gen Intel processors, imagine if they were able to cool them properly.

But still, the games in the iOS world aren't terribly demanding on the GPU.

This always interests me. I would think this would be the trend in the future with all computers, but then again, what about all the old software? Will it still run on ARM systems? I would think not, unless done through emulation.

 

[Botts85]

There is a gaming Mac. It's an iMac 5K with Boot Camp.

With an i9 and Vega GPU, it'll be more than enough for 1440p gaming in windows. Update it with a 5700XT option and you're in awesome shape.

That said, software needs to come before hardware. If Apple ever wanted to do a "gaming" Mac, they'd need to heavily induce development of games for macOS.

Most games with official Mac ports tend to perform far better in Windows at the moment. Maybe we need a tool for converting DirectX to Metal.

And we're quickly moving to a time where services like Stadia, Shadow, or GeForce Now! become the most viable option. I.e., The Witcher in 1080p at 90+ FPS on my slow 12" MacBook? Works great with GeForce Now!

 

[amgff84]

Let's see now:

Thin: Check.

Lacks heat dissipation for the hardware involved? Check.

Uses only AMD because nVidia is still being cockblocked by Apple? Check check.

Costs even more than a superior Alienware with multiple drives and SLI? Cheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeck.

Likely to attempt to drive an insane display with mediocre (i.e. can barely do 4k) GPU? Almost a certain check.

I really wish Tim Cook would wake up and realize we don't look at our computers from the side while we work or game. I couldn't care if it's as thick as a brick wall behind that display as long as it doesn't thermally throttle, make a crapton of noise, and has at least GPU and RAM upgradeability. And something other than those flimsy as hell USB-C ports so I don't need dongles and adapters just to use all the hardware I already own.

My current rig is an aging, but still powerful hackintosh with a 4770k, 32 GB RAM, and a 1080 Ti. My new components for a 9900k/64 GB build are waiting to be assembled into my Cosmos II case so this rig can go to my grandpa in the HAF XB EVO case I got for that purpose. I build for overkill.

However, this next build is becoming more and more likely to be a Windows only PC because as an nVidia user I'm stuck on 10.13.6 and many apps, including emulators, are now targeting 10.14 and above only. They may work on previous OSes, but it's only a matter of time until XCode itself can't target lower than 10.14, meaning if I made the new rig a hackintosh, I'd either be stuck on a less and less viable OS or have to shell out for a subpar GPU for gaming from the AMD lineup to have current OS compatibility. The latter isn't going to happen. AMD's best GPUs are barely above a 1080 Ti and about equal to the 2080 vanilla (let alone Super). They may cost less, but they also perform worse as well at the same tier vs. nVidia.

But it'll be a cold day in hell before I pay Apple for non-upgradeable, overpriced "gaming" Macs. They might entice me with something aking to a "gMac" using the Mac Pro case and say, an HEDT Intel setup inside instead of a Xeon setup. That I could go for, if nVidia was allowed to release drivers once again. Outside of those two things, forget it. Apple's got nothing worth my time as a gamer otherwise.

Your rig that is soon to be retired sure sounds plenty fast. More than what I'm used to.

 

[Demigod Mac]

Sounds like bull. And $5000 is a non-starter price.

That said, if they wanted to make something like this work,
It'd be smarter for Apple to target the content creator market (streamers / gaming Youtubers) for something like this than esports. But first they need to narrow the wide gulf between Mac and Windows in 3D gaming performance as well as woo some AAA developers to bring more titles to Mac. Overwatch would be a good start.

 

[tegranjeet]

What should we call them? Isn't putting an e at the beginning enough to distinguish something from football or basketball. You send email, right? No one complains that it's not really mail because some guy isn't driving to your house and putting it in your mail box. Also, physical exertion? You don't have to be sweating buckets, nervousness could count as physical exertion and video games can be very nerve wrecking. Stop making something big out of nothing.

Arguing semantics is a bit of a stretch. But to offer my two cents, I would call it virtual competition. A sport is a direct interaction with your competitor(s) in the world. You open your body and mind to all physical sensations, sight, smell, touch, etc. along with the mental requirements of hand eye coordination, working with teammates, and the possibility of sustaining injury and physical pain. Video games lack quite a bit of what constitutes reality and what your body is capable of doing. You spar with your competitors through a visual medium, and while that immense focus does raise heart rate, that’s about it. Real injury isn’t possible, and a lapse in focus will just cost you the game.

That said, both sports and virtual competitions are an activity, something you do for experience. I would say more physical activities offer more for your growth in this world, but that’s anecdotal.

 

[ipponrg]

Guy, it’s not sports.

I mean, if you want to believe that, go ahead.

Were you one of the non-athletes that gotten beaten up in high school and perhaps now you can feel like you’re a jock by saying you participate in esports?

How about just calling them “professional gamers?”

As for “making something out of nothing,” you’re on a computer fan messaging board.

There’s a whole lot of “nothing important” being said here.

Are you looking for highbrow discussion on an Apple fan site? Really?

Although I have my own opinion of what a sport is, many of the e-sports players are able to get VISAS that are typically granted to traditional immigrant sport players.
[automerge]1577759225[/automerge]

Real injury isn’t possible, and a lapse in focus will just cost you the game.

Yeah arthritis, carpal tunnel, tennis elbow, wrist pain, and high blood pressure arent real injuries from the grueling trainings that they go thru. It’s why the lifespan of an e-sports player is very short

 

[tegranjeet]

Although I have my own opinion of what a sport is, many of the e-sports players are able to get VISAS that are typically granted to traditional immigrant sport players.
[automerge]1577759225[/automerge]


Yeah arthritis, carpal tunnel, tennis elbow, wrist pain, and high blood pressure arent real injuries from the grueling trainings that they go thru. It’s why the lifespan of an e-sports player is very short

Those injuries are overuse, stemming from an imbalance pushing yourself too much, not allowing yourself to adapt at an acceptable rate.

 

[Rotten_Apple_]

I would call it virtual competition

Okay, well, one day when you're managing a giant spectator event and you're dealing with advertisers and share holders and you're trying to appeal to as many viewers as possible, you go ahead and name it whatever stupid name you want to. This is what I meant when I asked what should it be called. Esports is short and memorable and how much different is electronic sports from virtual competition, seriously? You guys are just grasping at straws. Let's assume that the game being played was Madden 2020, how far of a stretch would it be to call it an electronic sport, the game being played is football, just through electronic means, much like an email. Also, semantics? This conversation began on the meaning of the word sports, it only makes sense.

 

[tegranjeet]

Okay, well, one day when you're managing a giant spectator event and you're dealing with advertisers and share holders and you're trying to appeal to as many viewers as possible, you go ahead and name it whatever stupid name you want to. This is what I meant when I asked what should it be called. Esports is short and memorable and how much different is electronic sports from virtual competition, seriously? You guys are just grasping for straws. Let's assume that the game being played was Madden 2020, how far of a stretch would it be to call it an electronic sport, the game being played is football, just through electronic means, much like an email. Also, semantics? This conversation began on the meaning of the word sports, it only makes sense.

Alright, sounds fine to me. I just thought I would offer my thoughts. Good day.

 

[fairuz]

The gaming industry makes more than the music and movie industry combined.

This isn’t so off-the-rails considering that when you look at the long term prospects, teenagers are asking for PC’s to game on. So they use Chromebooks in school, and prefer PC’s for gaming at home (I have a small sample size obviously. This is not an absolute.). While I have several Macs at home, besides an iPhone, my children continuously ask for PCs.

You're equating the gaming industry and PC gaming, but they're very different. I'll bet nearly all of that is from games that are mobile or otherwise don't require a gaming PC. Those little games like Clash of Clans print money like nothing else.
[automerge]1577761521[/automerge]

I’m a bit embarrassed that I bothered doing a quick duck duck go search just to confirm I wasn’t crazy- that statement is so obviously intensely incorrect!

FYI, since I already did the legwork:
$43.4 billion + $19.1 billion is NOT less than $2.25 billion.

afterthought:
to be fair - in statistics that add all gambling machines revenue to “video games profit” that does indeed change the statistics immensely... however, I don’t think anyone here thinks Apple is going to start manufacturing one arm bandits for the casino industry, so that’s probably a bit moot

You gotta provide sources on that, though. I'm also wondering what the scope is. $2.25B sounds like US PC gaming revenue, not all US gaming revenue, and certainly not worldwide gaming revenue. I can believe all video game revenue (excluding gambling machines) > all movie and music revenue, as sad as that is.

 

[fairuz]

You can build a top-end gaming dual-booting Hackintosh below $2500.

Yeah, but it'd be suboptimal using an AMD GPU for games, and it'd be somewhat broken running macOS on a Nvidia GPU. Also, being a Hackintosh, it probably won't sleep properly or be able to use virtual machine optimization or generally play nicely at all with macOS updates.
[automerge]1577761861[/automerge]

Also, semantics? This conversation began on the meaning of the word sports, it only makes sense.

lol
[automerge]1577762100[/automerge]

Not sure about this? Cook's process so far seems to be to throw new product against the wall and see what sticks. Unfortunately for Cook, not much has stuck recently. But I see this, if true, as just another thing that Apple will try for a year or two and then abandon.

The other problem is that gamers are not easily fooled by flashy gimmicks, which are Apple's stock and trade these days.

Lots of things are sticking. Someone else named them. The only thing not is the iPad, and that's cause it was a flawed idea since before Tim Cook was even CEO.

Btw, "gamers are not easily fooled by flashy gimmicks," yes they are, more than anyone else. That's what aesthetics-only DLC (e.g. skins) are all about. If you want to compare apples to apples more, look at a gamer's LED-encrusted desk setup or his PC which is either overly equipped or full of parts that seem cool but don't actually help. Also I don't know what percentage of gamers are young kids, but it's probably a lot.