Source: Tom's Hardware UK – Keywords: Guide, Macs, Gaming
Categories: Gaming
Introduction
The idea struck us a couple of months ago to write a piece on the latest Macs (particularly the Macbook Pros) when we noticed that they come equipped with fairly well-rounded gaming equipment and graphics cards that qualify them as “mobile gaming PC’s” up there with Windows PC manufacturers. Read on to see how they compare…
First things first: There are some games under Mac OS X, as we will see, which have the capability of installing windows, with Boot Camp, which is a huge advantage. For the price of a Windows license you have access to the huge game library under Windows with a Mac. On top of this, the virtualisation programs (such as VMware or Parallels) boast that their support of 3D acceleration allows you to play more recent titles. How to test it? For the test we tried to get a couple of Mac games as well as their PC counterparts. We tried each game with Windows, with Mac OS X and in virtual console programs. Our results are not thorough though because there were too few Mac games. The tests do give us a good idea of a Mac’s gaming performance.
We tested three Apple machines: a MacBook (a start of the range laptop), a MacBook Pro (a high-end laptop) and an iMac (a high end desktop). The prerequisites were simple: 2 GB RAM and Apple’s latest OS. We didn’t test any Mac Pros for three reasons. The first is that the Mac Pro is, as its name suggests, a professional machine. The second is that the basic equipment is very basic: 1 GB RAM and a 256 MB nVidia Geforce 7300GT. The last is the price: once properly equipped for gaming, (2 GB RAM and a 512 MB ATI Radeon X1900), the machine runs somewhere in the region of €3000 without a monitor.
The test machine is a black MacBook equipped with a 2.16 GHz Core 2 Duo processor (in 667MHz bus) and a GMA Intel graphic card. Like in the majority of laptops, the Intel controller works at 250 MHz. The dual channel was activated (two 1 GB barrettes). The Windows part was tested with Windows Vista Ultra Edition. The screen (13.3”) works in 1280 x 800. This resolution will be used for all tests (we will come back to this later on). We will note that the model used use GMA X3100, but the performances aren’t really any better; this is because it only accelerates the speed a little.
- Next page The Macs to Test
Best offers
- high end laptops
- high end laptop
- how to check your windows license
- laptop graphics card for gaming
- mac pro pc case
- run pc without monitor
- how to get any game windowed
- high end pc games
- better than macbook pro
- games in a window
- games 2 screens
- little program to test graphic card
- laptop graphics card
- virtual pc graphic card
- laptops highend
The Bottom Line (corrected): Macs = No good for games (maybe battleships and doom II)
Do you mean ultimate? (as far as I'm aware there is no "ultra" version of vista) and was it ultimate 64bit or 32bit?
A very weak and uninformed review. The MacBook and MacBookPro are not designed for gaming, but for media and business use. So why test them? The IMacs that can play games very well, Just search in Youtube.com for "Imac crysis" and watch the videos. Why did they use Vista? everyone knows that it creates a huge performance hit for games, that why Mac Gamers who use boot camp use Windows XP. The bottom of the range MacPro was excluded? why? because it might have shown a result that the authors didn't like? it only costs $2299. Not $3000 and comes with the HD2600 XT card not the 7300 mentioned in the article. I guess the article was written some ago before 10.5.1/2 as both updates have enhanced features that benefit gaming and in bootcamp you can put any Windows graphics card in. I guess that Pierre already had his conclusion and wrote an article to back it up. Very poor composition, certainly not constructive journalism! Why not find someone who knows about Mac's to write an article on getting the best out of gaming on a mac, just pop along to http://forums.macrumors.com/forumdisplay.php?f=125 there are lots of people there who could tell you differently. Overall a disappointing article for its lack of accurate information and depth.
Pretty bad review....
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....
Good points above - a proper review should use the latest machines.
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...
Face it, the MAC is a far better computer because it has support for a far better operating system. Windows is just BS, as you will see quite easily for yourself if you actually use the computer and don't just play games. Life is short folks, do yourself a favor and give it a try. Be warned though, it's very true, once you go Mac you don't go back.
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.
Macs suck
What we wanted was a more direct comparison between hardware and OS. Macs use PC hardware now so the comparison should be much easier. I suspect Tom is being paid, forced or coerced into not showing us this important comparison. Macs suck but I suspect their OS is far less addled than vista.
Are They Any Good For Gaming? The reveiw is flawed in some ways yes, but the definitive answer is that if you want to play the latest and best games, why get a mac?
I had a mac, and I'll never go back...to mac that is. I can buy 3 pc laptops with similar internal hardware for the price of a mac nowadays. Macs are to computers what Starbucks is to coffee. The folks that drink it can come up with all kinds of reasons why they are right to pay 3 times as much for their 'super special' coffee. More power too ya, but seriously, macworld...wake up. Macs just can't compete.