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

Which games would justify the 680MX?

C

CoreyLahey

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jun 18, 2012
220
0
Aside from not knowing the price for the upgrade to a 680MX, I'm still on the fence about getting one. I don't have any use for that GPU other than gaming and I haven't played PC games in a couple of years, with the exception of diablo 3.

My question is, which exclusive games are there or will be released for PC in the near future, that I couldn't play on my Xbox 360 or Playstation 3?
 
CoreyLahey said:
Aside from not knowing the price for the upgrade to a 680MX, I'm still on the fence about getting one. I don't have any use for that GPU other than gaming and I haven't played PC games in a couple of years, with the exception of diablo 3.

My question is, which exclusive games are there or will be released for PC in the near future, that I couldn't play on my Xbox 360 or Playstation 3?
Click to expand...

It's hard to know the future :)

There are still games that are exclusive to the PC (Windows). Not as many as the past, but they're still there.

Honestly, I know a couple of people that have gone Console-only for their games: less to worry about, comfortable to play on their couch, etc.


The thing is, you buy a computer... chances are you want it to last you at least 2 years. In which point, you can't really guess if there's going to be any game in the next 2 years that you will want to play, that will be a requirements hog, that won't be available on XBox/PS3.
 
karpich1 said:
It's hard to know the future :)

There are still games that are exclusive to the PC (Windows). Not as many as the past, but they're still there.

Honestly, I know a couple of people that have gone Console-only for their games: less to worry about, comfortable to play on their couch, etc.


The thing is, you buy a computer... chances are you want it to last you at least 2 years. In which point, you can't really guess if there's going to be any game in the next 2 years that you will want to play, that will be a requirements hog, that won't be available on XBox/PS3.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm thinking about, just staying with consoles for games. I guess the majority of cross-platform titles will look better on the imac with 680MX though, but the 675MX isn't really "weak" either. If the 675 had 2GB VRam I probably would go with stock at Amazon, provided they offered flash, ssd or the Fusion as an option.
 
Currently I want it for Starcraft II, and in a few months I will want it for Sim City.

My current MBP doesnt handle SCII great even with a mix of medium/high settings.
 
While none of these are exclusives I just ordered Skyrim, and plan on getting Batman: Arkham City and Max Payne 3 so that I can put the iMac through the paces.
 
The answer to your question is dependent on your game selection really. Just do a search for GTX 680 reviews and that should give you a good idea of what type of performance to expect from the 680mx.

I personally prefer Hardware Heaven's and [H]OCP's reviews as they do actual in-game gameplay reviews as opposed to canned benchmarks. The 680mx is clocked about 30% slower than it's desktop brethren, so adjust your expectations accordingly.
 
Skyrim (with full texture mods), Battlefield 3, Bioshock:Infinite, Borderlands 2.

All of those games running at native res in high or ultra will 'max out' the 680MX.
 
MatthewAMEL said:
Skyrim (with full texture mods), Battlefield 3, Bioshock:Infinite, Borderlands 2.

All of those games running at native res in high or ultra will 'max out' the 680MX.
Click to expand...

Which resolution do you mean by native, the iMac's 2560 x 1440?

The 675MX really doesn't look bad btw, seems to have a decent performance with current games http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-675MX.82580.0.html

Given that there will be new consoles by the end of 2013/2014, the best stock model looks better and better, at least for my purposes. But I still have to wait and see, whether I can get faster storage at Amazon etc. and what the actual price for the 680MX will be. I take it the $100 more for an extra GB of VRam in the previous iMacs is nothing to go by, considering this is a different GPU?

----------
Jorojr said:
The answer to your question is dependent on your game selection really. Just do a search for GTX 680 reviews and that should give you a good idea of what type of performance to expect from the 680mx.

I personally prefer Hardware Heaven's and [H]OCP's reviews as they do actual in-game gameplay reviews as opposed to canned benchmarks. The 680mx is clocked about 30% slower than it's desktop brethren, so adjust your expectations accordingly.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the links, I'm checking them out right now.

Edit: A bit surprised by the results for Batman
 
Last edited:
New Dragon Age next year I believe.

PC games are always going to be superior than console in some genres, like FPS, strategy, and some RPGs.
 
CoreyLahey said:
Aside from not knowing the price for the upgrade to a 680MX, I'm still on the fence about getting one. I don't have any use for that GPU other than gaming and I haven't played PC games in a couple of years, with the exception of diablo 3.

My question is, which exclusive games are there or will be released for PC in the near future, that I couldn't play on my Xbox 360 or Playstation 3?
Click to expand...

I think that the only reason to spec out an iMac with the GTX 680MX is to future-proof it. That and if you plan on using Boot Camp to play a ton of Windows games on it. 2GB of VRAM even on a mobile card does buy you quite a lot of longevity on something like an iMac, especially with OS X ramping up its dependency on a video card resources with each new release.

CoreyLahey said:
That's what I'm thinking about, just staying with consoles for games. I guess the majority of cross-platform titles will look better on the imac with 680MX though, but the 675MX isn't really "weak" either. If the 675 had 2GB VRam I probably would go with stock at Amazon, provided they offered flash, ssd or the Fusion as an option.
Click to expand...

If we're talking about what you can play on it TODAY, the GTX 680MX buys you little over the GTX 675MX. The decision between the former and the latter has nothing to do with today, but everything to do with years down the road. Unless you're the type that regularly sells your Mac for the next generation, in which case, spending the extra money is pointless.

bigcat318 said:
Currently I want it for Starcraft II, and in a few months I will want it for Sim City.

My current MBP doesnt handle SCII great even with a mix of medium/high settings.
Click to expand...

Any of these iMacs, even the low-end base model 21.5" iMac will handily run StarCraft II on high settings if not ultra.
 
Hi guys,
just to show you how the 'gaming comp. looks & feels.
Here are some shots:
Comparison in AIDA64 Extreme to other hi end set-ups;
My HDs set-up & how it sees even my Lion back-up HD;
My Hexa-core using all 12 threads...
Where is that Poki - to pick again on me...
 

Attachments

  • AIDA64 test results.png
    AIDA64 test results.png
    124.1 KB · Views: 247
  • AIDA64 test results2.png
    AIDA64 test results2.png
    126.7 KB · Views: 168
  • Reading Mac HD on a PC.png
    Reading Mac HD on a PC.png
    153.1 KB · Views: 214
  • 12 cores working.png
    12 cores working.png
    27.1 KB · Views: 103
Yebubbleman said:
I think that the only reason to spec out an iMac with the GTX 680MX is to future-proof it. That and if you plan on using Boot Camp to play a ton of Windows games on it. 2GB of VRAM even on a mobile card does buy you quite a lot of longevity on something like an iMac, especially with OS X ramping up its dependency on a video card resources with each new release.



If we're talking about what you can play on it TODAY, the GTX 680MX buys you little over the GTX 675MX. The decision between the former and the latter has nothing to do with today, but everything to do with years down the road. Unless you're the type that regularly sells your Mac for the next generation, in which case, spending the extra money is pointless.



Any of these iMacs, even the low-end base model 21.5" iMac will handily run StarCraft II on high settings if not ultra.
Click to expand...

A sheynem dank, that actually sounds like I'll be fine with the stock high-end 27. Would be great though, if Amazon and BestBuy can offer the Fusion Drive as an option.
 
CoreyLahey said:
A sheynem dank, that actually sounds like I'll be fine with the stock high-end 27. Would be great though, if Amazon and BestBuy can offer the Fusion Drive as an option.
Click to expand...

Well, it's worth waiting to see how much Apple is going to charge for these upgrades as, for now, they only list what upgrades will be available and not what they'll cost. If it's not much more money, you might be able to further future-proof the machine by maxing out that video card. But who knows. The other thing to consider is whether or not the previous thermal issues in the 2009-2011 iMacs is at all improved with these ones. I'm hopeful that the 21.5" iMac has improved in this regard. I am not so much about the 27" model, and it is possible that the heat difference between the three GPUs that one can outfit a 2012 iMac with could be substantial enough to consider. Again, we know annoyingly little given that Apple is delaying the release of these suckers until November (21.5") and December (27").
 
Yebubbleman said:
Well, it's worth waiting to see how much Apple is going to charge for these upgrades as, for now, they only list what upgrades will be available and not what they'll cost. If it's not much more money, you might be able to further future-proof the machine by maxing out that video card. But who knows. The other thing to consider is whether or not the previous thermal issues in the 2009-2011 iMacs is at all improved with these ones. I'm hopeful that the 21.5" iMac has improved in this regard. I am not so much about the 27" model, and it is possible that the heat difference between the three GPUs that one can outfit a 2012 iMac with could be substantial enough to consider. Again, we know annoyingly little given that Apple is delaying the release of these suckers until November (21.5") and December (27").
Click to expand...

I know, wish the pricing was announced already, I change my decision about which model to get about three times a day, when I can't really even make that decision at this point.

If they wanted only $100 more for the GPU, it's a no-brainer, but that doesn't feel realistic.

Does anybody know how much the student discount would take off a $2,500 machine? Would it at least make up for sales tax?

Edit: calculated the student discount with the MacBook Pro, seems like it takes off the desired amount.
 
Surely it's going to be an extra £100.

The old upgrade graphics to 2gb ram was £80 so I can't see them going mad on the price. Especially considering its already more expensive than its predecessor even though it has less components (FireWire, DVD burner).
 
Another issue is, what kind of heat will this card produce? And how much fan noise can you expect?
 
CoreyLahey said:
Which resolution do you mean by native, the iMac's 2560 x 1440?

The 675MX really doesn't look bad btw, seems to have a decent performance with current games http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-675MX.82580.0.html

Given that there will be new consoles by the end of 2013/2014, the best stock model looks better and better, at least for my purposes. But I still have to wait and see, whether I can get faster storage at Amazon etc. and what the actual price for the 680MX will be. I take it the $100 more for an extra GB of VRam in the previous iMacs is nothing to go by, considering this is a different GPU?

----------



Thanks for the links, I'm checking them out right now.

Edit: A bit surprised by the results for Batman
Click to expand...

The 675MX isnt a bad gpu by any stretch. However, the 680MX is so much faster/better.

For example in transistors, clock speeds, cuda cors, memory etc etc.

To say it easy

gtx 675MX is about 15-20% slower then gtx 680M

However the gtx 680mx is about 15-20% faster then the gtx 680m. That means theoretically the gtx 680mx should be around 30-40% faster then the gtx675mx
 
Soundburst said:
Surely it's going to be an extra £100.

The old upgrade graphics to 2gb ram was £80 so I can't see them going mad on the price. Especially considering its already more expensive than its predecessor even though it has less components (FireWire, DVD burner).
Click to expand...

I hope you are right, but with the previous model you paid for an extra Gigabyte on the same card, where with the new one you get a completely different card. For $150 I wouldn't think twice about getting the 680MX ; )

----------
henrikrox said:
The 675MX isnt a bad gpu by any stretch. However, the 680MX is so much faster/better.

For example in transistors, clock speeds, cuda cors, memory etc etc.

To say it easy

gtx 675MX is about 15-20% slower then gtx 680M

However the gtx 680mx is about 15-20% faster then the gtx 680m. That means theoretically the gtx 680mx should be around 30-40% faster then the gtx675mx
Click to expand...

Sounds like a worthy upgrade, especially for games. Would you know how important the CPU is for games? Would I get a lot out of the i7 or is the stock i5 enough?
 
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