NVIDIA to join Mac gaming push, intros new desktop chipsets

[AppleInsider]

With its new mobile chipset platform now embedded in each of Apple's notebook families, NVIDIA plans to step up its efforts to advance Mac game developments. Separately, the chipmaker has just announced similar GeForce 9400 and 9300 chipsets for desktop CPUs, which could find their way into new iMacs.

In support of Mac gaming

Speaking to bi-tech.net last week, NVIDIA General Manager for Notebook GPUs confirmed that his firm would proactively leverage its The Way It’s Meant To Be Played program to encourage developers to release more titles for Mac. He said NVIDIA would also push for cross-platform developers to schedule their Mac gaming releases much closer to their PC counterparts.

The Way It's Meant To Be Played, or TWIMTBP, is a five year-old program that helps game makers with game development and incorporating exclusive features that take advantage of the latest GeForce video cards. Developers who participate in the program are provide extensive guidelines on game performance optimizations and often co-brand their titles with a TWIMTBP splash screens.

New chipsets for desktops

On Monday, NVIDIA said its engineering team was presented with a challenge from an unnamed party, to "deliver a desktop GPU which integrates full system I/O and discrete-level performance in one-half the size of previous integrated graphics solutions."

The result is a new pair of GeForce 9400 and 9300 motherboard GPUs for desktop PCs running Intel processors. The 16-core CUDA-capable graphics architectures provide high-quality video playback with NVIDIA PureVideo HD technology, support for Hybrid SLI technology, and support for advanced audio and video connectivity, such as uncompressed LPCM 7.1 audio, dual-link DVI, and HDMI.

“We’ve combined the power of three different chips into one highly compact and efficient GPU,” said Drew Henry, general manager of MCP business unit at NVIDIA. “In doing so, we’ve redefined the level of performance people can expect from a motherboard solution to enrich visual computing experiences for mainstream systems. You can now have the performance of a discrete GPU in a small form factor PC.”

NVIDIA says the single-chip design has a much smaller footprint than competing chipsets, making it ideal for small form factor and ultra-slim media center PCs. Motherboards featuring the GeForce 9-Series are shipping this month from several motherboard vendors, the chipmaker said. A photo of a GeForce 9-equipped ASUS motherboard can be seen below.



As would be expected, NVIDIA made no mention of Apple while announcing the new desktop chipsets, but is likely to be working with the Mac maker on new graphics solutions for a refreshed line of iMacs due shortly.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[xyz001]

...who wants a 9300 graphics chip in a desktop when even the cheapest and thinnest notebooks have the 9400?

I guess the imac needs a 9600 to become a gaming machine

[ascii]

It would be nice to have more games. Back when PC dominated gaming, making a Mac version was a big deal. But now there are so many platforms (consoles, handhelds) that adding one more should be easier than in past. I mean, they must be writing more of their code to be platform independent than they used to. That is the hope anyway.

[Phong]

They wanted it to fit in the Mini!

Originally Posted by xyz001

...who wants a 9300 graphics chip in a desktop when even the cheapest and thinnest notebooks have the 9400?

I guess the imac needs a 9600 to become a gaming machine

I'm not well versed in this, but I'm pretty sure the notebooks have the 9400M, with an M for Mobile, which Steve illustrated last week doesn't surpass the 8000 desktop series that's currently in the iMacs.

[ltcommander.data]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Separately, the chipmaker has just announced similar GeForce 9400 and 9300 chipsets for desktop CPUs, which could find their way into new iMacs.

Seeing that all Intel iMacs to date seem to have used mobile Intel CPUs, unless Apple decides to switch to desktop CPUs, they won't be using the desktop versions of the Geforce 9400. I don't actually think that Apple will won't to sole source on nVidia. Even if they go with the mobile 9400M in the iMac they'll probably stick to ATI GPUs.

nVidia was always quoting Apple's implementation of the 9400M to be different than what nVidia will be selling to other OEMs. And nVidia confirms that Apple's implementation doesn't support Hybrid SLI. I have a feeling that what makes Apple's implementation unique is that they dropped Hybrid SLI in exchange for making the dynamic integrated to discrete GPU switching technology work with any GPU so that they can stick with the 9400M to satisfy nVidia but can choose to use either ATI or nVidia discrete GPUs.

[plokoonpma]

Originally Posted by xyz001

...who wants a 9300 graphics chip in a desktop when even the cheapest and thinnest notebooks have the 9400?

I guess the imac needs a 9600 to become a gaming machine

I guess you never used an iMac before for play. I use my iMac for play CoD4, Comand & Conquers and CMR. I pwned so many PC dudes over CoD4 and my iMac has only 4gb ram and the Ati card with 256 mb.
Also that GPU could be used on a Mac Mini with great success. I guess that a lot of people will be happy with that potential.

[wheelhot]

I think its both, the iMac and the MacMini will get an update. And maybe and updated Mac Mini looks, thinner, smaller, faster and will look like Apple current offering.

[TheNipponese]

lets be real here guys. what motivation do publishers have to release their games on OSX unless it's a guaranteed mega-hit like COD4? windows still has 90% marketshare, and that's not changing anytime soon.

I think your best bet is this CrossOvers thing:
http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxgames/

[hiimamac]

Originally Posted by plokoonpma

I guess you never used an iMac before for play. I use my iMac for play CoD4, Comand & Conquers and CMR. I pwned so many PC dudes over CoD4 and my iMac has only 4gb ram and the Ati card with 256 mb.
Also that GPU could be used on a Mac Mini with great success. I guess that a lot of people will be happy with that potential.

I know this MUST have been touched on before, but don't you think NO FIREWIRE really translates to NO PRO WORK?

Look, the first Macbook you could NEVER EVER EVER play games, but you could run motion. Different set of instructions that didn't use OPEN GL the way games used it.

That said, first MB went from 70%, to 104%, to 140% all the way to 171% with just upgrading to LEOPARD, Motion users rejoiced.

Then Apple released X300, this brought it back down to 70% again, effecting, not gamers (remember, you could never play a game anyway) but just the small PRO MARKET.

So this release, you can run MOTION, you can play games, but if you want AUDIO/VIDEO (Firewire, a protocol MAC introduced and main general to the world, let alone all those mom an pop iLife users), they removed FIREWIRE.

It has nothing to do (NON FUD) with going USB, USB is slow and USB doesn't support HIGH END AUDIO, VIDEO devices, period. So why is it do you think, Steve is so paranoid that the PRO would buy the cheap system. They would, so what, but they would buy the LOWER end as a second, third machine, not their first.

Apple baffles me sometimes and I can almost assure users that the next gen will have 1394b and that Apple will realize, the consumer used it more than the pro now and will also realize any PRO to the Macbook is offset 100 fold by gamers and mom and pop users.

Its very strange, Plus add in now the MB Pro is cheaper, same construction but with express slot, firewire but higher price point yet cheaper to make.

Hmm.

[plokoonpma]

Originally Posted by TheNipponese

lets be real here guys. what motivation do publishers have to release their games on OSX unless it's a guaranteed mega-hit like COD4? windows still has 90% marketshare, and that's not changing anytime soon.

I think your best bet is this CrossOvers thing:
http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxgames/

PC windows indeed have a lot of the market, you said 90%, lets make it 99%.
I really don't care much about that since that is the very best thing it can happen. Usually we get the best games and publishers scrap their weak titles.

Take a look here and look how discouraged are developers with Mac Gaming.

http://www.apple.com/games/

[plokoonpma]

Originally Posted by hiimamac

I know this MUST have been touched on before, but don't you think NO FIREWIRE really translates to NO PRO WORK?

Look, the first Macbook you could NEVER EVER EVER play games, but you could run motion. Different set of instructions that didn't use OPEN GL the way games used it.

That said, first MB went from 70%, to 104%, to 140% all the way to 171% with just upgrading to LEOPARD, Motion users rejoiced.

Then Apple released X300, this brought it back down to 70% again, effecting, not gamers (remember, you could never play a game anyway) but just the small PRO MARKET.

So this release, you can run MOTION, you can play games, but if you want AUDIO/VIDEO (Firewire, a protocol MAC introduced and main general to the world, let alone all those mom an pop iLife users), they removed FIREWIRE.

It has nothing to do (NON FUD) with going USB, USB is slow and USB doesn't support HIGH END AUDIO, VIDEO devices, period. So why is it do you think, Steve is so paranoid that the PRO would buy the cheap system. They would, so what, but they would buy the LOWER end as a second, third machine, not their first.

Apple baffles me sometimes and I can almost assure users that the next gen will have 1394b and that Apple will realize, the consumer used it more than the pro now and will also realize any PRO to the Macbook is offset 100 fold by gamers and mom and pop users.

Its very strange, Plus add in now the MB Pro is cheaper, same construction but with express slot, firewire but higher price point yet cheaper to make.

Hmm.

Really don't know how much this have to do with potential desktop GPU/Nvidia pushing gaming on Mac... But the lack of Firewire on the new MacBooks is by no means any downturn. Actually MacBook specs are the best ever for that kind of notebook. Now you can run Final Cut Pro and all their apps, even Motion. If you are a Pro you should be more than happy with the new MacBooks cause since you are a "Pro" you should know how to use a network, a USB2 pocket Drive or External HD, also MobileMe service is handy moving/backing/sharing data.

Also this first generation of unibody MacBook/MacBook Pro is not cheap, they are using this particular method of production for the first time in such large numbers. The use a single sheet of aluminum for the Mac Pro and the iMac but both lack of the integrated machining performed on the unibody of the laptops. Eventually when Apple manage to turn all its production to unibody they will see some prices goes down.
Aluminum is not cheap and the actual process discard way too much of the brick which needs to be collected, washed & recycled. That cost money too.

[ByronVanArsdale]

Originally Posted by plokoonpma

PC windows indeed have a lot of the market, you said 90%, lets make it 99%.
I really don't care much about that since that is the very best thing it can happen. Usually we get the best games and publishers scrap their weak titles.

Take a look here and look how discouraged are developers with Mac Gaming.

http://www.apple.com/games/

What I'm curious about is with the move to Intel, why develop Mac games at all? I admittedly do not know how well COD4, etc. games run on Mac computers running XP/Vista work. Can you run a PC title using XP/Vista on an Intel Mac with any luck or does Parallels/Bootcamp make it impossible?

[John French]

Running Windows games on Mac computers via bootcamp is fine. It's as though you're running them on an equally hard-ware equipped PC. Can't say the same for Parallels though. Developing Mac versions of games is fine, But it is targeted at those that Don't have a copy of Windows XP/Vista to use with BootCamp. I gamed on OS X for years before installing XP via BootCamp and using that for games.

[plokoonpma]

Originally Posted by ByronVanArsdale

What I'm curious about is with the move to Intel, why develop Mac games at all? I admittedly do not know how well COD4, etc. games run on Mac computers running XP/Vista work. Can you run a PC title using XP/Vista on an Intel Mac with any luck or does Parallels/Bootcamp make it impossible?

Hi bro, I used to play CoD4 and Race Driver Grid over BootCamp with my iMac. So I had to boot on XP with the option key at start up. Parallels wont run any of those titles or Bioshock or Crysis. A 24" iMac or a Mac Pro will be better for the last 2 titles. The reason why I got rid on BootCamp and its XP was it finally got the Mac version of CoD4 and since I have Colin McRae for Mac that one will patch the lack of Grid which will be ported or is planned to be by Feral.
Other great games will come in the near future like Gears of War and StarCraft and no one wants to be rebooting their systems to go to the crapy world of windows.
To make some history around the time the first iMac G3 Macs had the edge on pricing and performance and many developers delivered so many games. That changed when Intel/Windows developed better integration and the promotion of the direct x standard. Some companies like Blizzard, Feral and Aspyr never dropped the support of Mac as EA and others did.

The Mac market is growing and those who left are coming back, thats the main reason I think we have our titles and will have so many more for many years.

[ecking]

Originally Posted by plokoonpma

Now you can run Final Cut Pro and all their apps, even Motion. If you are a Pro you should be more than happy with the new MacBooks cause since you are a "Pro" you should know how to use a network, a USB2 pocket Drive or External HD, also MobileMe service is handy moving/backing/sharing data.

Wow, you just proved you're not a pro with a comment like that. You think being a pro is just about moving data? lol If that was all it was no one would care about the lack of firewire. Go edit multiple streams of HD from an external usb scratch disk connected to a new MBP and then plug that same disk into the MBP's fw port and come back.

[wally007]

how about nvidia releases desktop GPU that's same generation as their pc siblings. it's utterly lame that with my almost $4k Mac pro my options are limited to two generations old nvidia gpu or god knows how old ( probably close to two years ) Ati.

i use my mac maily for After Effects and that doesnt really use gpu for anything useful , but once developers learn how to use gpu for more that just rotating , zooming and apple doesnt improve gpu suckage , i'm going back to windows.

[plokoonpma]

Originally Posted by ecking

Wow, you just proved you're not a pro with a comment like that. You think being a pro is just about moving data? lol If that was all it was no one would care about the lack of firewire. Go edit multiple streams of HD from an external usb scratch disk connected to a new MBP and then plug that same disk into the MBP's fw port and come back.

hehehe, dunno what you try to prove. But a Pro usually use Pro machines like Mac Pro and MBP. In the case of the new MacBook happens that the target are consumers that are supposed to run MS office, iLive, iWork, light games, etc.
If you work as a Freelance, work with audio and basically on a budget the lack of FW on a MacBook will hurt your feelings. Anyways you can still use the white consumer MacBook that is around 1k and do your Pro work since still has FW.

I do care about the use of FireWire, but since I have a lot of Computers and perform my work on my network, the lack of FW in a computer I do not intend to purchase it really doesn't bother me. I can survive with all my Mac Pro's, iMacs, MBP's, eMac and my beloved PBg4 first generation that is still alive and kicking.

[wilco]

Originally Posted by plokoonpma

Now you can run Final Cut Pro and all their apps, even Motion. If you are a Pro you should be more than happy with the new MacBooks cause since you are a "Pro" you should know how to use a network, a USB2 pocket Drive or External HD, also MobileMe service is handy moving/backing/sharing data.

A "pro" using USB2 and MobileMe to handle FCP Suite's files?

How high are you right now? Have you ever used any of the things you mentioned?

Stick to bragging about how you "pwned" your fellow nerds in WOW...

[plokoonpma]

Originally Posted by wilco

A "pro" using USB2 and MobileMe to handle FCP Suite's files?

How high are you right now? Have you ever used any of the things you mentioned?

Stick to bragging about how you "pwned" your fellow nerds in WOW...

My point is to show that you can use other stuff than FireWire, since that dude seems to be still in shock cause the lack of FireWire on a consumer laptop. I almost don't use USB2 for nothing since I have decks for feeding the video to the Mac Pros, I use the network in a heavy way and yes, I use MobileMe for some files I show to customers when they are in another country. I don't use FTP or have a FTP or another kind of server only to stack a couple of gygabytes. Generally when I finish something it will go to tape, transfer film or a DVD DL. For pictures and some storyboards I can even use web gallery with password protection.

And for how high I am... I am pretty sober. At least I keep it real and read carefully other post and not miss quote others.
The only game I brag I don't have and never will is WoW, so a cup of coffee will do wonders with your present state.

[SpamSandwich]

It's about time Apple recognized that people with enough disposable income who want to own high-end, reliable computers is so they can play more games and consume all of their leisure time.

[extremeskater]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

It's about time Apple recognized that people with enough disposable income who want to own high-end, reliable computers is so they can play more games and consume all of their leisure time.

Heat and size are the issue. You can't get into high end gaming unless you have a system and can handle the size of modern day GPU's or the heat the create.

My nvidia 260gtx runs idle at 61c and under load can get well above 80c. Not to mention is wider then an iMac and needs two six pin connectors for a max power consumption of 195watts.

If Apple made a mid range tower they could do it easy but that isn't going to happen.

Steve Jobs isn't into gaming systems because he would have to build a functional system not a stylish system and it wouldn't be quiet.

[dopplerd]

The ASUS motherboard pictured shows what annoys me about Apple. That motherboard has:
Display Port
HDMI
VGA
DVI
6 USB
eSATA
5 Internal SATA
PATA
4 ram slots
optical audio
PCI
and probably runs less than $200.

To get the same amount of configureability in a Mac there is nothing other than the Mac Pro at $2500+. Yes the Mini is a great computer, I own one, but I also would like a Mac that I can throw a few hard drives in along with a full sized optical drive and a "real" desktop processor. Regardless of what el Jobso says a desktop processor IS faster and cheaper. The article makes a good point that Apple only uses Intel's laptop and server offerings and has yet to make a computer designed to handle the desktop TDP. An Apple desktop using commodity hardware would sell like hotcakes in the enterprise and to the computer tinkers. Psystar is a start but not a truly viable option or really all that great of a value.

[robb01]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

It's about time Apple recognized that people with enough disposable income who want to own high-end, reliable computers is so they can play more games and consume all of their leisure time.

What about the business user demographic? They just need a reliable notebook.

__________________

[superkaratemonkeydeathcar]

Here's hoping the new Mini will get the Nvidia soon!


--
-BTW: Could this challenge to Nvidia somehow be related to an xMac?
...hope springs eternal

[xwiredtva]

Originally Posted by ltcommander.data

Seeing that all Intel iMacs to date seem to have used mobile Intel CPUs, unless Apple decides to switch to desktop CPUs, they won't be using the desktop versions of the Geforce 9400. I don't actually think that Apple will won't to sole source on nVidia. Even if they go with the mobile 9400M in the iMac they'll probably stick to ATI GPUs.

nVidia was always quoting Apple's implementation of the 9400M to be different than what nVidia will be selling to other OEMs. And nVidia confirms that Apple's implementation doesn't support Hybrid SLI. I have a feeling that what makes Apple's implementation unique is that they dropped Hybrid SLI in exchange for making the dynamic integrated to discrete GPU switching technology work with any GPU so that they can stick with the 9400M to satisfy nVidia but can choose to use either ATI or nVidia discrete GPUs.

You can run a Mobile CPU on a desktop chipset no problem. I think the nVidia chipsets WILL be used in iMac's however I think they'll use the latter model explained. The first 9300 will most certainly be headed to the AppleTV and MacMini.

[bloggerblog]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

In support of Mac gaming

Riiiight! I'll believe when when I see it. SJ said the same thing when Bungie introduced Halo for the Mac at the NY MW Expo, I believe it was 1999. It's been 9 years. This is very typical of Apple, they've been doing this forever, they talk about games then nothing happens!

Besides Apple does not have a Mac where one can exchange the video card with a better one, all their affordable desktops use laptop grade mobos and those are not good for hardcore gaming.

The formula is simple, wanna get into gaming and make a dent in sales for main-stream business, bring out a mid-tower.

[xwiredtva]

Originally Posted by wilco

A "pro" using USB2 and MobileMe to handle FCP Suite's files?

How high are you right now? Have you ever used any of the things you mentioned?

Stick to bragging about how you "pwned" your fellow nerds in WOW...

One person's Defenition of "pro" is another's amateur. Let it go at that.

Like I said before it's NOT the equipment but how you use it that MAKES YOU A PRO.

And anyone who is capable of the reply to this using those services which he/she already has without having to think is, in my book, a pro.

[xwiredtva]

Originally Posted by bloggerblog

Riiiight! I'll believe when when I see it. SJ said the same thing when Bungie introduced Halo for the Mac at the NY MW Expo, I believe it was 1999. It's been 9 years. This is very typical of Apple, they've been doing this forever, they talk about games then nothing happens!

Besides Apple does not have a Mac where one can exchange the video card with a better one, all their affordable desktops use laptop grade mobos and those are not good for hardcore gaming.

The formula is simple, wanna get into gaming and make a dent in sales for main-stream business, bring out a mid-tower.

They have the platform for it. Trouble is it takes something like 100 people to develop the big name games. So that's retraining those people onto Xcode's layout and Objective-C.

Rather Apple does have OpenGL/AL and coming soon to a finder near you CL.

If I were an investor and wanted to play a part in Gaming on the Mac I'd start with a small company with less than 10 people. I'd probably keep the first 2 years releases on Both platforms then dump the windows side entirely and offer up the only reason as "Mac is better and easier for us to develop on" statement. I would probably use a dual platform game IDE as well something like Tourque game builder system. AND if I had some friends who were into gaming and Mac's I'd probably look at starting a small partnership with them working on weekends or over the web on creating games on that platform asn TGB's pricing for Indie's is perfect.

That's just me... A guy who doesn't play games and when he does (FLAM SUIT ON) is on a Sonly Playstation hooked to my Mac Mini powered Home theater (that's the 1st gen, grey sled not the nice White one from 98').

Apple, Inc. should play NO PART aside from the groundwork fundamentals for the Mac Platform for the aspect of games and that's it.

[plokoonpma]

Originally Posted by xwiredtva

One person's Defenition of "pro" is another's amateur. Let it go at that.

Like I said before it's NOT the equipment but how you use it that MAKES YOU A PRO.

And anyone who is capable of the reply to this using those services which he/she already has without having to think is, in my book, a pro.

It doesn't look like they understand, but you nailed as it is.
Have a good day

[Wiggin]

Originally Posted by plokoonpma

I guess you never used an iMac before for play. I use my iMac for play CoD4, Comand & Conquers and CMR. I pwned so many PC dudes over CoD4 and my iMac has only 4gb ram and the Ati card with 256 mb.
Also that GPU could be used on a Mac Mini with great success. I guess that a lot of people will be happy with that potential.

A mini upgrade would be very nice, as long as it doesn't drop the Firewire port. My aging PPC mini hosts all my backup disks, music, and video storage; and half of those drives are FW-only! Unlike the Macbook where you can move up to the MBP, the next step up for the mini is the Mac Pro. And that won't fit behind my plasma TV!

Originally Posted by TheNipponese

lets be real here guys. what motivation do publishers have to release their games on OSX unless it's a guaranteed mega-hit like COD4? windows still has 90% marketshare, and that's not changing anytime soon.

I think your best bet is this CrossOvers thing:
http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxgames/

What percentage of that 90% is for business users? I don't have a clue, but I assume that takes a pretty big chunk out of the potential customer pool. So it's less a 9-to-1 customer base advantage for PC games and maybe more like 5-to-1. Still a big difference, but the spread might not be as big as we think.

Originally Posted by ByronVanArsdale

What I'm curious about is with the move to Intel, why develop Mac games at all? I admittedly do not know how well COD4, etc. games run on Mac computers running XP/Vista work. Can you run a PC title using XP/Vista on an Intel Mac with any luck or does Parallels/Bootcamp make it impossible?

I think (?) the newer versions of Parallels and/or VMWare now support hardware acceleration for video, don't they? Bootcamp would work fine. But then you still have to pony up another $300 for a copy of Windows. Are you going to pay $350 to play a $50 game?

[plokoonpma]

[QUOTE=Wiggin;1327820]A mini upgrade would be very nice, as long as it doesn't drop the Firewire port. My aging PPC mini hosts all my backup disks, music, and video storage; and half of those drives are FW-only! Unlike the Macbook where you can move up to the MBP, the next step up for the mini is the Mac Pro. And that won't fit behind my plasma TV!

As for how Apple embraced Nvidia 9400 and the news today of the desktop version of those chips I have to say that my bet is that they (Apple) will use indeed those chips cause they support their new LED display and they have to expand that new format across the desktop consumer line (Mac Minis/iMacs)
I guess there will be a lot more people pissed at Apple but they will follow this tendency, you can have no doubt about it.

[Marvin]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

NVIDIA says the single-chip design has a much smaller footprint than competing chipsets, making it ideal for small form factor and ultra-slim media center PCs.

I don't think the Mini needs to be any smaller than it currently is so if they put one of those chipsets in, keep firewire, add an option for a fast HD, you've got a great all round desktop computer, which I will be buying.

One thing I don't quite get about the iMac is why they keep updating them so often and not the Mini? I understand that the Mini is less profitable so they will want to sell older hardware longer but who is upgrading iMacs every 6-12 months?

The people I know with iMacs have had theirs for 2 years or more and have no desire to upgrade, especially not to the newest model.

I on the other hand would quite happily put down the cost of a Mini every 6 months (selling the old one of course) if they kept the updates coming - they're so easy to replace. If they made the hard drive easy to remove, I could just pull it out and switch it with the blank one in a new machine. Since the original dual core Mini, there has been almost no reason at all to upgrade, which is why they won't sell so many.

[plokoonpma]

Originally Posted by Marvin

I don't think the Mini needs to be any smaller than it currently is so if they put one of those chipsets in, keep firewire, add an option for a fast HD, you've got a great all round desktop computer, which I will be buying.

One thing I don't quite get about the iMac is why they keep updating them so often and not the Mini? I understand that the Mini is less profitable so they will want to sell older hardware longer but who is upgrading iMacs every 6-12 months?

The people I know with iMacs have had theirs for 2 years or more and have no desire to upgrade, especially not to the newest model.

I on the other hand would quite happily put down the cost of a Mini every 6 months (selling the old one of course) if they kept the updates coming - they're so easy to replace. If they made the hard drive easy to remove, I could just pull it out and switch it with the blank one in a new machine. Since the original dual core Mini, there has been almost no reason at all to upgrade, which is why they won't sell so many.

Mac Minis have been quite close to end of live so many times the last year and half. If it survive the next november it will get updates to match the entire line and support Snow Leopard.

[Bregalad]

The iMac uses notebook parts (other than its HD) so the only GPU heading to the iMac is a mobile one.

If Apple wants to stick with the tradition of using GPUs from both ATI and nVidia that retail for $80-100 in the Windows world, we can expect to see the Radeon 2600 replaced with a Radeon 4650.

If Apple chooses to dump ATI this time we're likely to see a base iMac with an integrated 9400M, mid range iMacs with the 9400 and 9600 just like the MacBook Pro, and a high end iMac with both 9400 and 9800.

The problem Apple and nVidia need to overcome is truly pathetic Core Image performance. The lowly Radeon 2600 is substantially faster than the 8800GS found in the most expensive iMac.

[Bregalad]

The Mac Mini has always been overpriced because it's a custom design. If the very first Mini had been a bit larger it could have used the iBook motherboard and thus cost a lot less money to produce.

I think the time is right for the Mini to be replaced by a Mac Nano that is a MacBook minus display, keyboard and battery. Production cost would go down, performance would go up and everyone would be happy.

[bloggerblog]

Originally Posted by xwiredtva

They have the platform for it. Trouble is it takes something like 100 people to develop the big name games. So that's retraining those people onto Xcode's layout and Objective-C.

Rather Apple does have OpenGL/AL and coming soon to a finder near you CL.

If I were an investor and wanted to play a part in Gaming on the Mac I'd start with a small company with less than 10 people. I'd probably keep the first 2 years releases on Both platforms then dump the windows side entirely and offer up the only reason as "Mac is better and easier for us to develop on" statement. I would probably use a dual platform game IDE as well something like Tourque game builder system. AND if I had some friends who were into gaming and Mac's I'd probably look at starting a small partnership with them working on weekends or over the web on creating games on that platform asn TGB's pricing for Indie's is perfect.

That's just me... A guy who doesn't play games and when he does (FLAM SUIT ON) is on a Sonly Playstation hooked to my Mac Mini powered Home theater (that's the 1st gen, grey sled not the nice White one from 98').

Apple, Inc. should play NO PART aside from the groundwork fundamentals for the Mac Platform for the aspect of games and that's it.

I'm not a hardcore gamer, I prefer the simple mind-numbing pacman style classics. However, it's been disappointing to those who are hardcore gamers.

Bungie was a Mac only developer, one of the best ones out there with about 10 developers or so, but after repeated disappointments by Apple they thew in the towel. Many game developers have been vocal about Apple's empty promises when it came to gaming.

[Pantone-User]

Heya all,

First time poster here. Been lurking for years.

I plan on buying a new 24", or whatever is largest, of the iMacs when the new ones are released.

I only do two things on my home computer, since I sit in front of one all day.

I edit photos from my side photography gig using Photoshop and Lightroom, and I am sadly, according to my wife, a World of Warcraft addict.

With all this talk about the nVidia boards, and Mac gaming "maybe" making a comeback, will the current iMacs and any new ones be decent for the tasks listed above?

I currently use a G4 Dual 1GHz 1.75g of ram, and a 256mg ATI video card. I can play WoW, but cant do 25 man raids because of lag.

Thoughts?

Help a new poster!

[IrishMac]

Originally Posted by dopplerd

The ASUS motherboard pictured shows what annoys me about Apple. That motherboard has:
Display Port
HDMI
VGA
DVI
6 USB
eSATA
5 Internal SATA
PATA
4 ram slots
optical audio
PCI
and probably runs less than $200.

To get the same amount of configureability in a Mac there is nothing other than the Mac Pro at $2500+. Yes the Mini is a great computer, I own one, but I also would like a Mac that I can throw a few hard drives in along with a full sized optical drive and a "real" desktop processor. Regardless of what el Jobso says a desktop processor IS faster and cheaper. The article makes a good point that Apple only uses Intel's laptop and server offerings and has yet to make a computer designed to handle the desktop TDP. An Apple desktop using commodity hardware would sell like hotcakes in the enterprise and to the computer tinkers. Psystar is a start but not a truly viable option or really all that great of a value.

Exactly what I thought. Jobs doesn't want us to have that level of options. Shame really, we pay enough as it is, we should be given more choice. Speaking of the number of ports I nearly laughed when I saw that the new display has more usb ports than the new MB Pro.

[Wiggin]

Originally Posted by Bregalad

The Mac Mini has always been overpriced because it's a custom design. If the very first Mini had been a bit larger it could have used the iBook motherboard and thus cost a lot less money to produce.

I think the time is right for the Mini to be replaced by a Mac Nano that is a MacBook minus display, keyboard and battery. Production cost would go down, performance would go up and everyone would be happy.

Or if the new NVIDIA integrated chip allows them to make the mother board smaller maybe they could make room for a desktop hard drive which would be both faster and cheaper. They could share the motherboard design with the MB Air, that's pretty small, isn't it?

Oh, and if a DisplayPort can support HDCP over a DisplayPort-to-HDMI cable and Apple then starts renting HD movies via iTunes instead of only on AppleTV.... but I guess I'm getting a little ahead of myself...

[hmurchison]

I'm actually very interested in these new nVidia MGPU for HTPC application.

Seeing as how a Blu-ray/HD DVD combo drive is $124 and the HTPC cases are
looking better and better it makes sense for me to build a beefy system around
these highly integrated motherboards.

I'm not a big gamer but it wouldn't hurt to do a little gaming on a HDTV and be able to
access the internet and other stuff.