Why no gaming all-in-ones?
Hi all,
Here's something that's confusing me. I was hoping to get a new iMac, partly with a view to playing top level new 3D games under boot camp, because I really like OS/X for non-gaming purposes and I really, really like the idea of a good looking all-in-one computer (hate clutter and cables...).
So I was disappointed with the new iMacs - and went looking for a windows gaming PC all-in-one. And found.... nothing.
What's confusing me is that there are laptops like this on the market:
http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives...ook_ships.html
Now, if you can cram that into a notebook, why can't you cram it into an all-in-one? I mean, they are basically just notebooks on a stand with a detached keyboard, aren't they?
Is it that there is some extra technical limitation associated with the screen being so close to the processor etc.? Or that there's a hole in the market? Or just that the demographic looking for a gaming all-in-one is tiny (i.e. just me)?
Here's something that's confusing me. I was hoping to get a new iMac, partly with a view to playing top level new 3D games under boot camp, because I really like OS/X for non-gaming purposes and I really, really like the idea of a good looking all-in-one computer (hate clutter and cables...).
So I was disappointed with the new iMacs - and went looking for a windows gaming PC all-in-one. And found.... nothing.
What's confusing me is that there are laptops like this on the market:
http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives...ook_ships.html
Now, if you can cram that into a notebook, why can't you cram it into an all-in-one? I mean, they are basically just notebooks on a stand with a detached keyboard, aren't they?
Is it that there is some extra technical limitation associated with the screen being so close to the processor etc.? Or that there's a hole in the market? Or just that the demographic looking for a gaming all-in-one is tiny (i.e. just me)?
Comments
All-in-ones are there for good performance and looks. Nothing more.
The reason is because for major gaming, it need desktop grade parts while the ones in the all-in-one computers are made of notebook parts.
These are the specs:
# 24" LCD 1920x1200
# 2.93GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
# 4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
# 640GB Serial ATA Drive
# ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB
# Apple Mighty Mouse
# Apple Keyboard with Numeric Keypad (English) and User's Guide
$1,999.00
$2,000 for the 24" Radeon 4850 is definitely okay for an all-in-one at that premium market segment.
How about just the 20" though. I mean, 20" is a decent big size.
I think the major problem is that laptop parts and desktop parts are on two very divergent paths.
I think the major problem is that laptop parts and desktop parts are on two very divergent paths.
But ASUS are just releasing this laptop:
http://www.trustedreviews.com/home-c...Gx-Notebook/p1
A quad core QX9300, with a 260M GTX GPU. That's way ahead of any all-in-one I'm hearing about.
There's a whole genre of "Gaming Laptops", Alienware and others specialise in them. So why not an all-in-one?
But ASUS are just releasing this laptop:
http://www.trustedreviews.com/home-c...Gx-Notebook/p1
A quad core QX9300, with a 260M GTX GPU. That's way ahead of any all-in-one I'm hearing about.
There's a whole genre of "Gaming Laptops", Alienware and others specialise in them. So why not an all-in-one?
Certainly Asus, Alienware, HP/Voodoo, etc. are pushing the envelope in blurring the line between desktop and laptop. So yes, there's some hope there, and it shows an all-in-one shouldn't be that painful to design and sell.
Problem is these "Gaming Laptops" are still too niche and still too expensive. IMHO.
But I agree, why not an all-in-one? What's going on there? An all-in-one with the entry-level *desktop* quadcore, 20" screen and *desktop* class Radeon 4850 (maybe underclocked slightly) shouldn't be that hard to make! There's a lot of space for a nice 20" all-in-one if it's just twice as thick as the completely anorexic iMac.
Here's the killer feature: user upgradeable CPU, user upgradeable graphics. User upgradeable hard disk and RAM. Just these 4 things.
Basically I'm talking about a hybrid physical architecture. With just the right level of control over design and just the right level of upgradeability.
There's a gaping hole in the market and user needs. You show me an all-in-one with the above and I'll show you good sales, an engaging product and something that would give non-gaming PCs, PCs, laptops, consoles a good run for the money.
Apart from Apple's little market, all-in-one computers do not sell.
All-in-ones have a real potential for convenience, some portability, etc. They just need a right level of upgradeability using common desktop parts ESPECIALLY CPU and GPU upgradeability... as I have outlined in my post above.
It's a few hundred million market in profits sitting there for the bold entrepreneur. Somewhere between a 17" laptop and a [Box+Screen] PC is an all-in-one that can really change the game.
The HP Firebird is an interesting one but misses the mark slightly.
The ASUS C90 was an "upgradable" gaming laptop but I don't recall it doing very well.
You can upgrade Sager/Clevo/Etc laptops to a point but it costs an arm and a leg. They start as barebones and take MXM-IV cards and handle SLI.
2) Since the overwhelming majority of people are content to play at "Recommended" settings--if they ever even open the settings dialogs--Apple is content to ship good, but not great, gaming hardware.
3) Game developers are just getting used to designing for two core systems, which present a fairly major design challenge to an industry whose ideal platform is one core running really, really fast. What a quad core system allows you to do at this point, basically, is run the operating system on the cores that the game isn't using, yielding a measurable but modest boost in performance.
The iMac with the ATI 4850 should be a fine gaming machine. I have no complaints about my previous generation 24" iMac, which has a much weaker GPU. But the simple fact is that if you want an up-to-the-second gaming rig you want a PC. The number of hardcore PC gamers who want to run their games on Macs is far too small to justify their own model. But this latest update is the most gamer-friendly iMac to date, simply because it offers the option of a nice GPU.
The hardcore gamer will be going for desktop powerhouses, and the "mid-range" to "casual" modern PC gamer would go for mid-range desktops and laptops.