Source: Tom's Hardware UK – Keywords: Guide, Macs, Gaming
Categories: Gaming
Solutions and Emulation
We can generally find four types of games for Mac OS X. We can’t overstate how important it is that you check the type of game you’re getting. The performances partly depend on the way the Mac version was developed. The first type, the rarest, is the games developed for Windows and Mac OS X in tandem, with simultaneous releases. The best example is the Blizzard games: the two versions are given in the game box; there is no Mac OS X/Windows segregation.
The three other types are ported games. They are usually third party, which are specialised such as Aspyr or MacSoft. The first type of port is when the game uses the OpenGL in its Windows version. The port is generally quite simple and the performances very good: the OpenGL is a Mac OS X standard as we’ve stated. The second case is when the original game uses Direct3D: the team which ports the game has to partly modify the rendition engine because Mac OS X doesn’t support Direct3D. Long story short it just means that the performance can suffer. Finally there is the solution recently used by the Electronic Arts games. The company doesn’t really port games but uses an emulator which allows you to use a Direct3D game in a seamless manner in Mac OS X (generally with Cider- Transgaming’s solution). The performances are often a step back, but the porting doesn’t take long and they arrive on the shelves sooner.
Since January 2006 Macs have been using x 86 processors, the same as our PCs in Windows. Before, Apple used PowerPC processors (IBM or Motorola). This can oftentimes be pretty problematic. A certain number of old games only exist in the PowerPC version, while a portion of more recent games only work with Intel processors. In the first instance, the Macs equipped with an Intel processor can run PowerPC programs (with a certain loss in performances of course). The second instance is that the Intel games only work on PCs with Intel processors. Finally, the games which were released between the end of 2005 and 2007 are generally Universal Binary programs: they exist in PowerPC and Intel versions (sometimes requiring a patch).
Of course, there exist other possibilities than using Mac OS X to play on a Mac. Here are three ways you an get around it that we examined for this test.
- Previous page The Macs to Test
- Next page More Solutions Still
- To Leech and to Share - Fibrionic's BitTorrent Box
- Vista Workshop – Performance Boost with 8GB of RAM
- Hardware News Roundup - February 2008
- Candid Camcorders - A brand new guide to HD Camcorders
- Upgrade Modules – Remote Controls for Media Centers
- Build Your Own System Rescue CD
- Neuros OSD vs. Archos AV500: Face-Off
- Christmas Buyers' Guide 2007: Media Players
- Christmas Buyers' Guide 2007: Last minute gift ideas
- An introduction to LAN file-sharing protocols
Do you mean ultimate? (as far as I'm aware there is no "ultra" version of vista) and was it ultimate 64bit or 32bit?
There is a 256 version of the MacBook Pro, which if you are a gamer would be the one you go for...
You CAN scale the res on all those machines, and even have the apps autoswitch them, so I don't understand your comment that the Mac cannot do resolution scaling so you had to go with full res...
While I agree you should not be buying a Mac if what you want is gaming, this article was just uninformed....
I still found the review very interesting because it directly compares the performance with Parallels and VMWare to OS X native and Windows native. One of the big selling points of Parallels (which I bought) is that it emulates accelerated 3D graphics in Windows. And this review shows that this is just marketing hot air as that 3D acceleration makes the difference between 5 FPS and 1 FPS, 5 times as fast in marketing speak, still completely unusable in the real world.
So, big thanks for making the effort!
PS: I am not a native english speaker myself but the english in this article is pretty hard to understand in places. I am sure you'd find english-speaking volunteers to edit / proof read this...
But some readers jump to conclusions (e.g. "Bottomline, Macs are no good for games"--geez did you read this at all?), and even the writers of this article have many misconceptions--it is obvious you are out of your element a bit. But I applaud your efforts nonetheless, don't get me wrong.
Windows is basically 'owned' now by OS X, OS X has Windows running in a window, or available at the touch of a button. And there are plenty of instances of "It is even faster, generally, than on Windows."
Thanks for pointing out that even WINDOWS runs better on Mac! Which it does. And, you don't have to rely on Windows horrible and almost complete lack of security.