Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

The Significance of Steam and Valve's Games for Mac

rmbrown09 said:
Reduce power consumption(useless),reduce heat output, smaller physical board, and (thereby) more space.

Allowing for something else to take up room, say a larger processor, or GPU.

More freed space and lower heat output means more space for a bigger piece of something else, and being able to handle it's heat requirements.
Click to expand...
Once again I'd still like to know the benefits of Nano ITX over the current Mac mini's form factor and internal layout.

Micro ATX and Nano ITX are still very different.

rmbrown09 said:
That and motherboard architecture needs a revamp. Its been the same since the 70's.
Click to expand...
Step up then. BTX was the last attempt but that was to handle the +130W processors Intel was going to be releasing.

rmbrown09 said:
Like I said, you want what the Mac Pro can do (be upgraded) without the price... Otherwise you wouldn't be talking about this you would go buy a Mac Pro.

And, again, this is Apple, they don't do this kind of thing.

Get one of these and fulfill your plug in desires.
http://www.ibuypower.com/Store/Configurators.aspx?mid=375
Click to expand...
I'm sure a $299 Dell is just as professional since you have expansion slots.
 
Clive At Five said:
A MacBook's GPU, however, would barely handle Half Life 2 on low settings and how many years old is that game?
Click to expand...

I play all of Valve's games at 60+ FPS with max settings on my 2.0 GHz C2D late-2008 Macbook. Hell, I still play the newest games and get good performance if I turn things down to medium-low. The 9400M really isn't that bad of a GPU.

P.S. Crysis runs silky smooth on medium.
 
rmbrown09 said:
Like I said, you want what the Mac Pro can do (be upgraded) without the price... Otherwise you wouldn't be talking about this you would go buy a Mac Pro.

And, again, this is Apple, they don't do this kind of thing.
Click to expand...

One year ago, Apple didn't "do" tablets.
Three years ago, Apple didn't "do" phones.
Eight years ago, Apple didn't "do" portable media players.

What Apple DOES do is make quality products for the market niches they decide to woo. One upon a time, that used to be prosumers. Since the days of the prosumer-oriented G3s & G4s, Apple has shifted the line up and out of practicality for our needs and catered it more toward media production specialists. It's no secret that one size does not fit all when it comes to the needs of pros & prosumers, and, likewise, the Mac Pro does not fit the needs of a lot of prosumers. While it has the feature of customizability, even the base model is WAYYY overkill for what I need (see previously listed specs). It's not as much a matter of price as it is a matter of buying what I need. I wouldn't buy a car if my commute was a 10-minute walk, but I may buy a bike...

Apple makes tennis shoes (MacBooks, Mac Mini), and Segways (MacBook Pros, iMacs), and Formula One race cars (Mac Pros). What I need is a nice bike, or a modest car...

-Clive
 
Clive At Five said:
Apple makes tennis shoes (MacBooks, Mac Mini), and Segways (MacBook Pros, iMacs), and Formula One race cars (Mac Pros). What I need is a nice bike, or a modest car...

-Clive
Click to expand...
What's really bothersome is that you do want to give Apple your money but then they stop providing products you actually want. Brace yourself for yet more suggestions not to buy a Mac.
 
Eidorian said:
Once again I'd still like to know the benefits of Nano ITX over the current Mac mini's form factor and internal layout.

Micro ATX and Nano ITX are still very different.
Click to expand...

Benefits have been listed....

Eidorian said:
Step up then. BTX was the last attempt but that was to handle the +130W processors Intel was going to be releasing.
Click to expand...

Mac Pro still utilizes BTX, even though it's not BTX complaint.

Eidorian said:
I'm sure a $299 Dell is just as professional since you have expansion slots.
Click to expand...

The image was a jest...
how about this?
Quad_SLI_5.jpg
 
rmbrown09 said:
The image was a jest...
how about this?
silverstone-tj09-s-300x300.jpg
Click to expand...

I think I was just a little bit sick in my mouth :eek:

But in all honesty, gimme a cube like design with upgradeable GPU and I'd maybe buy one just 'cause its a cube, damn that was one sexy machine!
 
Eidorian said:
And those over the Mac mini are?

From my perspective you don't have a definition of Nano ITX or are confusing it with Micro ATX.
Click to expand...

What I was originally saying was they should put a ITX board in the mini's allowing for better components.

Im not putting anything over a mini...

from my perspective you seem to not be following what I'm saying
 
rmbrown09 said:
What I was originally saying was they should put a ITX board in the mini's allowing for better components.
Click to expand...
There's no gain in doing so though. The Mac mini is already effectively at Nano ITX scale. Moving to a more standard layout doesn't offer any benefits.

You're still going to be stuck with lower power processors, SO-DIMMs, and no expansion.

As I've said before Nano ITX isn't Micro ATX.

rmbrown09 said:
from my perspective you seem to not be following what I'm saying
Click to expand...
The feeling is mutual.
 
ShiftyPig said:
Gaming on Mac will never surpass PC. First, for the price of a base MBP/iMac, I could order a beast of a PC gaming system. Second, hardcore gamers like to build their own setups, and you can't install OS X on your own machine.
Click to expand...


1) i didn't buy my macbook pro for games
2) I can play L4D2 on my macbook pro.

I am sorry that you are stuck with the misconception that computers are single use devices.
 
myca said:
Although I agree that notebooks will never do for "Serious" gaming needs, i.e Fallout 3, Crysis, Bioshock or any really graphically intensive game, they're more than perfectly fine for the casual market, and Steam has a ton of casual and indie games, so for an average person they're fine, but any core "PC gamer" will still be wanting a desktop. I wouldn't trade my quad core rig with a GTX260 for anything (except mabe an i7 with a GTX480 :cool:)
Click to expand...


Fallout 3, Crysis, and Booshock all run fine on a 9400m. What are you blabbering about?
 
CountBrass said:
That takes about 10 minutes, ok no big deal.

And what will you do for the 3-6 hours it takes to download each game (assuming your friend and his family aren't downloading porn in the background)?

Compare this to you friend installing two copies of the game in advance of your arrival from those terribly old fashioned silver disk things so you can play as soon as you get there.

I've spent a fortune on buying games on Steam but I think you've let your breathless enthusiasm run-away with you.
Click to expand...

Sorry about your slow internet connection bro, I normally get 2-3mbps from the content servers.
 
Eidorian said:
There's no gain in doing so though. The Mac mini is already effectively at Nano ITX scale. Moving to a more standard layout doesn't offer any benefits.

You're still going to be stuck with lower power processors, SO-DIMMs, and no expansion.

As I've said before Nano ITX isn't Micro ATX.

The feeling is mutual.
Click to expand...

Sapphire 785G Mini-ITX motherboard
DDR3, I5-7 CPU support, PCI-e 16.....
how do you mean no expansion?

Also
Albatron Mini-ITX
 
rmbrown09 said:
Sapphire 785G Mini-ITX motherboard
DDR3, I5-7 CPU support, PCI-e 16.....
Click to expand...
When did Mini-ITX become Nano-ITX?

In order to clarify for you, Micro ATX is where I draw the line at mini-computer. Anything smaller starts to incur penalties for size. Until the advent of the two chip system Mini ITX wasn't as much of a viable option. If you can find a Mini-ITX board for $59 and a PCIe x16 slot feel free to show me.
 
Eidorian said:
When did Mini-ITX become Nano-ITX?

In order to clarify for you, Micro ATX is where I draw the line at mini-computer. Anything smaller starts to incur penalties for size. Until the advent of the two chip system Mini ITX wasn't as much of a viable option. If you can find a Mini-ITX board for $59 and a PCIe x16 slot feel free to show me.
Click to expand...

The board sizes are 2 inches in difference. Putting them in the same ballpark.
Nano (4.7x2)
Mini (6.7x2)

Edit: ok ok it's $124
http://www.amazon.com/Zotac-GeForce-Wi-Fi-Motherboard-GF9300-G-E/dp/B002UJ0RZC
51oLZf2rvyL._SL500_AA280_.jpg
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Ibjr said:
Fallout 3, Crysis, and Booshock all run fine on a 9400m. What are you blabbering about?
Click to expand...

Sorry you fail, big time, as good as an integrated GPU the 9400m is it will not, and I repeat WILL NOT be able to play Crysis on high settings at a decent resolution, you may get a couple of frames per second if you are lucky, and Fallout 3 everything on high with AA and AF, no chance.

As for Booshock, I've never heard of that game, but maybe you mean Bioshock.

Benchmarks
More Benchmarks
Even more Benchmarks of the desktop variety

Granted it seems to handle id Tech 4 games well, and the source engine games well, but not the Cryengine 2, and I couldn't find any benchmarks for the Unreal 3 engine, on which Boo.. I mean Bioshock is built (well Unreal 2.5 with some additional Unreal 3 goodness thrown in there).

Edit,

But it's a whole lot better than my macbooks GMAX3100, dedicated GPUs are just so much better.
 
myca said:
Sorry you fail, big time, as good as an integrated GPU the 9400m is it will not, and I repeat WILL NOT be able to play Crysis on high settings at a decent resolution, you may get a couple of frames per second if you are lucky, and Fallout 3 everything on high with AA and AF, no chance.

As for Booshock, I've never heard of that game, but maybe you mean Bioshock.

Benchmarks
More Benchmarks
Even more Benchmarks of the desktop variety

Granted it seems to handle id Tech 4 games well, and the source engine games well, but not the Cryengine 2, and I couldn't find any benchmarks for the Unreal 3 engine, on which Boo.. I mean Bioshock is built (well Unreal 2.5 with some additional Unreal 3 goodness thrown in there).
Click to expand...

•*This wouldn't surprise you if you knew anything about the IdTech4 and Source engines. Both are pretty much CPU limited.
•*No one ever talked about running Crysis on high, I only talked about running it.
•*I admire your ability to figure out "Booshock" meant "bioshock," you must be highly functional in the real world.
 
Can't we be civilized?

All I want is some new Civ action, but that's because Civ is pretty much all I know.

Well, I was on Eve for a while, but too much of a time-suck (and an 'I suck' at it).

I refuse to have any sort of MS nonsense on my machine, so I am waiting with anticipation to see what happens.
 
Ibjr said:
•*This wouldn't surprise you if you knew anything about the IdTech4 and Source engines. Both are pretty much CPU limited.
•*No one ever talked about running Crysis on high, I only talked about running it.
•*I admire your ability to figure out "Booshock" meant "bioshock," you must be highly functional in the real world.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but running the game, and watching the game run in slow motion is a completely different thing.

Plus FYI with higher resolutions and AA the Tech 4 engine eats up the GPUs ram, and another thing I'd imagine my knowledge is pretty good seeing as I work in the games industry, so I have a pretty keen interest in game/tech related issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back