I know that MacPro's are used mainly in professional applications. As far as gaming though they are the only Macs that could even dare to compete in the high speed graphic video game market. Wouldn't it be nice if Apple could start to lean toward gaming just a bit more. It would open up a whole new, and might I say large market, for Apple and at the same time enhance the present Mac users experience.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac Pro as a main Windows gaming machine?
- Thread starter St. Germain
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Indeed.
I have been asking this around, this apples reluctancy to release the top of the line graphics cards for users.Havent gotten any sane answers. It is like people are completely dumbfounded by the question itself.
What is the reason why APPLE doesnt release top-of-the-line cards??!!"
A) Apple is still stuck in its PowerPC era,when the G4/G5 rigs were "solely" workstations. Well 99% of them. Gaming was non-existant,you could get by in your business (layout,music,photography,videoediting) with a lousy or mediocre gfx card without any problems. Thats why they left the rendering/3d to pc world and didnt even bother to compete with properly.
And making the gfx cards to work with the systems were expensive (manufacturers had to make larger modifications to a niche marke ->apple) so why bother?
No market = No use.
But now with the bootcamp/intel/parallels revolution gaming has become a BIG potential market.
It is attainable to everyone with a intel mac.
Manufacturers need only to take care of the EFI,they dont need to do any HW modifications to the cards anymore.
Apple only needs to write/customise proper drivers to the cards and test them. What does that cost? 10-50.000 per card? They would make that money in upgrade buys alone, let alone potential buyers in gaming/professional world would ramp up the sales in their own.
Even if they would continue the premium pricing they are doing...
WHY isnt Apple being more aggressive in this are?
Tell me!!?
Here are a lot of knowledgable gentlemen(and women) around here, tell me why isnt apple intrested in money and new clients??
Gaming has never been a big feature of Mac OS X. It never has been. (Hence there's no API set like DX on the mac)
Bootcamp and the ability to run Windows with Intel macs is all well and good, but apple are not going to suddenly bow to the pressure and activly promote a rivals operating system for gaming on their hardware.
Especially when to Apple, Mac OS X & all the apple applications are FAR more important than pleasing a few gamers.
But as Steve dosn't play games he won't allow it.
That's it isn't it!
Even if you knew nothing about the make-up of Apple the company, you could probably guess from its product line that it's run by one strong personality, and not a committee. (i.e. it has a well integrated, very focused product line; but is sorely lacking in some areas).
You could easily tell Steve loves music and photos (when was the last demo not to feature sending photos to someone?), but has no interest in gaming.
It's a pity, as gaming is one market segment that's constantly being driven to upgrade - I can web/mail/iTunes on my old G3/350!
But there is the bloody point!!
Catering a top-specced gfx card would be one more option to both gamers and professionals alike!!
It would take anything away from anybody!!
It is just that we macusers shoud change our sheepish mindset from the days when any even remotely decent gfx card was manna from heaven,wich we had to cherish with tears and joy.
When Apple release a Mac worth buying i'll re-enter the fold.
As much as i would like a Mac i hate the hardware straight-jacket that every Apple Mac bar the mac Pro slow-strangles the user with.
I want a fair priced mac that i can upgrade over the years, but as probably isn't going to happen i'll stick with XP.
As much as i would like a Mac i hate the hardware straight-jacket that every Apple Mac bar the mac Pro slow-strangles the user with.
I want a fair priced mac that i can upgrade over the years, but as probably isn't going to happen i'll stick with XP.
Exactly. Apple is basically losing me as a potential Mac Pro buyer because they don't support high end graphics cards that their hardware can more than handle. I've got $3000-3500 burning in my pocket for a new desktop/high end monitor in 2007. I own a MacBook as my first Mac computer and have enjoyed OSX enough to consider getting a Mac Pro. Their choice to not support high end video cards basically means my money will likely be going to a different company.
I could understand them making a deal with ATI or nVidia to support one company or the other, but how difficult can it be for them to keep up with the latest cards if companies like Dell can do it? For Apple to sell low to mid-range graphic cards in premium/premium priced PCs is just ridiculous.
I honestly wonder if people realize how old the video cards are that Apple is selling them. The sad thing is that we're talking SEVERAL generations old, not just one.
GeForce 8800
GeForce 7950
GeForce 7900
GeForce 7800
GeForce 7600
GeForce 7300
Is the ATI card in the Mac Pro not considered high end anymore?
-FleurDuMal
Not to mention the nVidia Quadro in there.
But St. Germain raises a point that's bugged me for a while.
Why the heck do ATI and nVidia have to produce "Mac Flavored" video cards anymore? I hoped that with the Intel transition, I could go to any Fry's and pick something off the shelf (as long as it wasn't a POS).
I mean, wouldn't that solve the issues here?
It is a generation behind the Radeon X1950, and if you compare it to the nVidia 8800, it's several steps behind.Is the ATI card in the Mac Pro not considered high end anymore?
The current Quadro FX4500 that Apple sells is also a generation behind in its family...
NVIDIA Quadro FX 5500
NVIDIA Quadro FX 4500 X2
NVIDIA Quadro FX 4500
I guess that's my point, people are paying premium prices but getting older generation video cards. I'd almost be willing to bet that many Apple users don't even realize they're buying older cards when they purchase their high end priced Mac Pro.
Not just me then.
+
I grew up with the Spectrum and the Amiga.
While the Spectrum was mostly closed, (this was the mid-80's) the Amiga was not.
You could upgrade everything in the Amiga.
That, is what i consider is a "proper computer".
Now while the Mini and the iMac are fantastic machines, there lack of "properness" to me is a real turn off.
+ I grew up with the Spectrum and the Amiga.
While the Spectrum was mostly closed, (this was the mid-80's) the Amiga was not.
You could upgrade everything in the Amiga.
That, is what i consider is a "proper computer".
Now while the Mini and the iMac are fantastic machines, there lack of "properness" to me is a real turn off.
But when it came out it was high end wasn't it? Apple have always released products in leaps rather than little steps - and thats not going to change even if they did make a genuine effort to accommodate gamers. That's always been Apple's business plan, and it makes them more money than if they started releasing a Mac-compatible version of every bleeding-edge video card just to satisfy the (small) number of mega-gamers with £100's burning holes in their pockets.
When the next revision of the Mac Pro is made, which will probably be quite soon, there will no doubt be a new bleeding-edge video card. And then in a few months a few gamers will complain that what was top end a few months ago is no longer. And then Apple will release another revision of the Mac Pro with the latest graphics card...and thus continues the circle of life.
In which case it makes perfect business sense for Apple to carry on as they are.
When video card makers begin to implement EFI and BIOS compatibility in their cards, then you open up the possibility of using off-the-shelf video cards in your Mac Pro. Just about every new GPU works fine in the Mac Pro as long as you are in Windows where BIOS is emulated at startup. On the Mac however, it is not even recognized since the card has no EFI layer. Regardless, once you get an EFI video card, you still have to worry about having proper drivers and neither Apple nor nVidia/ATI will be much help there.
But when it came out it was high end wasn't it? Apple have always released products in leaps rather than little steps - and thats not going to change even if they did make a genuine effort to accommodate gamers. That's always been Apple's business plan, and it makes them more money than if they started releasing a Mac-compatible version of every bleeding-edge video card just to satisfy the (small) number of mega-gamers with £100's burning holes in their pockets.
When the next revision of the Mac Pro is made, which will probably be quite soon, there will no doubt be a new bleeding-edge video card. And then in a few months a few gamers will complain that what was top end a few months ago is no longer. And then Apple will release another revision of the Mac Pro with the latest graphics card...and thus continues the circle of life.
When the MacPro's came out I'm not sure the video cards were even high-end then. Even if they were Apple should make it possible to purchase more advanced video cards as the technologies progress just like on a PC. When you go to price a new MacPro today you are stuck with the older generation video cards and when you go to other areas of the store for add ons there aren't any upgrades for video cards beyond what is already offered. Not just for gamers but for the fact that your buying a $4,000+ system (mid-ranged upgraded) it only makes sense to have access to cutting edge technology in video card selection with all the technology your buying and the money your paying.
First, it's PCI-E that is required and not PCI-X. Also, you cannot downplay the importance of Macs using EFI and everyone else (basically) still using BIOS. Mind you, eventually everyone will transition to EFI but with Vista not even sporting it, what are the chances that Dell or HP pick it up anytime soon?You'd think that anything that fits in a PCI-X slot along with some universal drivers could be made to work.
Not exactly a 'generation' behind the X1950XT
More of 1 small revision behind. Framerate wise it's not too far behind that a person would notice generally.
As for the NV8800, I'm sure either it or the R600 based ATI will make it into the MacPro eventually, however it's debatable for most mac users will see the difference a DX10 hardware card will make to them in their daily life (if they never boot up bootcamp & vista)
The DX10 issue has always worried me, wether or not there'll be a compatible card and not months late. I play a lot of games and the X1900XT has been great for me so far though
-topgunn
Ah-HA! The EFI thing! Didn't even think of it.
Ok, I'm committing this one to memory - very good info there.
I'm in the market for a gaming pc also. I'm thinking of getting the Mac Pro for about $2500 and adding XP on there to game. Or am I better off building my on Gaming PC?
Hey guys... just popping in. Here's my two cents.
A Mac Pro has several advantages, and also some disadvantages to a home-brew system. While it is less configurable than you might be able to make a home brew system, and therefore may cost you a bit more, it is also an extremely CLEAN and well-designed system. You don't have cable mess that you'd have to deal with when you open it up, and something that I really like... the display slot can accommodate a 2-slot wide card without taking up the adjacent slot. Good thinking.
The Mac Pro is also an extremely good performing machine, and has proven itself against similarly configured machines. Intel really made Apple a good motherboard to use in that system, and those Xeons are no slouch.
What you will want to consider is what is important to you? Is gaming the most important thing to you? Is getting the next best graphics upgrade when it comes out going to be important, or can you live with an X1900XT until Apple or its partners deliver an upgrade (which they will at some point, just probably a little behind our PC brethren)? Also, do you care about having OSX? A custom rig won't support OSX at all, so that is a big difference.
I already have a setup today which consists of a PowerMac Quad and a self-built gaming box. However, if I didn't have either and I was purchasing, I would probably go for a Mac Pro, or perhaps even a 24" iMac with the upgraded graphics to save some money.
And there's my 2 cents.
A Mac Pro has several advantages, and also some disadvantages to a home-brew system. While it is less configurable than you might be able to make a home brew system, and therefore may cost you a bit more, it is also an extremely CLEAN and well-designed system. You don't have cable mess that you'd have to deal with when you open it up, and something that I really like... the display slot can accommodate a 2-slot wide card without taking up the adjacent slot. Good thinking.
The Mac Pro is also an extremely good performing machine, and has proven itself against similarly configured machines. Intel really made Apple a good motherboard to use in that system, and those Xeons are no slouch.
What you will want to consider is what is important to you? Is gaming the most important thing to you? Is getting the next best graphics upgrade when it comes out going to be important, or can you live with an X1900XT until Apple or its partners deliver an upgrade (which they will at some point, just probably a little behind our PC brethren)? Also, do you care about having OSX? A custom rig won't support OSX at all, so that is a big difference.
I already have a setup today which consists of a PowerMac Quad and a self-built gaming box. However, if I didn't have either and I was purchasing, I would probably go for a Mac Pro, or perhaps even a 24" iMac with the upgraded graphics to save some money.
And there's my 2 cents.
Although I want a better Nvidia card for my mac as much as the next Mac Pro gamer. the reality is this. Apple are not trying to compete in the gamers market. It does not suit their business model to try and hold up a market share in a field which is moving so rapidly and which is SOOO benchmark trend crazy.
Without using the term 'unified shader' or quoting 3dmark scores explain to me the differnce between, a 7900gts, a 7900gtx, a 7950 gx2, a 7950gtx, an 8800gts and a 8800 gtx !?
oh the wiseguys amongst you will say Frame-rate right ! nonsense it like 10fps total and once you are over 50fps who cares ! It's circuitry porn ! The games market is a big heaving machine driven by the promise of being able to squeeze 4 extra frames out of some old FPS you don't even play anymore, at a res your monitor doesn't support !
Look, the Mac Pro is sold as a workstation. Apple decided to make a concession and offer a decent (no best-absolute-up to the milisecond) GPU as an option. Sure there are better cards out there, but if you must have the to die for gaming rig. Go and mod your own box with water-cooled 8800's in SLI and a Asus Srtiker Extreme board and all all those silly coloured lights inside a box with a demons head on it. and spend 11k for those extra 12fps in Chronicles of riddick.
Without using the term 'unified shader' or quoting 3dmark scores explain to me the differnce between, a 7900gts, a 7900gtx, a 7950 gx2, a 7950gtx, an 8800gts and a 8800 gtx !?
oh the wiseguys amongst you will say Frame-rate right ! nonsense it like 10fps total and once you are over 50fps who cares ! It's circuitry porn ! The games market is a big heaving machine driven by the promise of being able to squeeze 4 extra frames out of some old FPS you don't even play anymore, at a res your monitor doesn't support !
Look, the Mac Pro is sold as a workstation. Apple decided to make a concession and offer a decent (no best-absolute-up to the milisecond) GPU as an option. Sure there are better cards out there, but if you must have the to die for gaming rig. Go and mod your own box with water-cooled 8800's in SLI and a Asus Srtiker Extreme board and all all those silly coloured lights inside a box with a demons head on it. and spend 11k for those extra 12fps in Chronicles of riddick.