I have a new G5 1.8dual at work and it has the GeForce FX 5200. Guess what? I play Halo on it all the time and even serve Halo games on our LAN (yes I know the card has nothing to do with serving a game - shut up in advance). I have absolutely no complaints about it's performance. There is nothing wrong with this card and it will probably be good for at least 3 more years.
Apple stock took a small hit late today when a major Wall Street firm said delivery of G5 chips is not going as well as hoped. Apple thought they'd catch up in August. Doesn't look like it will happen. Soooooo, don't expect a lot of iMac G5's to be shipping no matter what the configuration. Looks like IBM will continue to keep Apple from reaching its sales goals. The more things change (Moto to IBM) the more they stay the same, unfortunately.
In the News Comments board in the thread "Apple burnt by iMac G5 heat issues" you said something awhile back and I was wondering if you ever elaborated on the statement and what you saw? Did I miss your explanation?
Just fvcking with you, haha!
What I saw were the institutional prices on eMacs, and the a friend's screen grab of the iMac delay page in the Apple store, whcih had already been posted on AI. Doesn't mean I wasn't shown, just means it isn't as interesting as I tried to make it sound.
The only inside info I can scoop for ya relate to edu and urban planning. I can tell you where some Canadian Apple STores will land -- but most people know that already, and I can tell you if/when/how much the "real" edu dicounts are -- not what Apple posts on their site.
Yes! If you want to game seriously then get a PowerMac or a build a hot PC with all the right stuff. I have a new G5 1.8dual at work and it has the GeForce FX 5200. Guess what? I play Halo on it all the time and even serve Halo games on our LAN (yes I know the card has nothing to do with serving a game - shut up in advance). I have absolutely no complaints about it's performance. There is nothing wrong with this card and it will probably be good for at least 3 more years.
It isn't about gaming seriously as much as gaming at all. Great it's a card that can support things from a few years ago but it's being released in a machine today.
Just turning away every person who ever might want to play a game on their computer would be about the stupidest thing Apple could do. You don't need the MP of a PowerMac for a gaming rig you just need a better video card than those iMacs have.
And yet, the fact remains that there will always be a rather large contingent of people for whom games, even those two or three years old, are simply not on their radar as essential or necessary.
And that doesn't even touch on the educational or enterprise markets.
The 5200, if it actually ships in the mid and high end iMacs, may very well be a bad choice for capturing those people who really want to play the latest and greatest games. But there will remain a sizable market for whom it will be not only adequate, but appropriate, as a low-end unit.
And yet, the fact remains that there will always be a rather large contingent of people for whom games, even those two or three years old, are simply not on their radar as essential or necessary.
And that doesn't even touch on the educational or enterprise markets.
The 5200, if it actually ships in the mid and high end iMacs, may very well be a bad choice for capturing those people who really want to play the latest and greatest games. But there will remain a sizable market for whom it will be not only adequate, but appropriate, as a low-end unit.
the markets you name are served very well by the eMac.
I agree, but the *perception* is that they are 'so last year'. Also, they're hellabig compared to a thin LCD. They lack the sex appeal that an LCD flat AIO would have for enterprise. (Okay, I'll admit it, I think they're butt ugly.)
Consider a $999 iMac the eMac Deux, if it materializes. But, for that market a reasonable G5, 5200 GPU and lack of optical is a great package, and will remain so for a few years of lifecycle.
I agree, but the *perception* is that they are 'so last year'. Also, they're hellabig compared to a thin LCD. They lack the sex appeal that an LCD flat AIO would have for enterprise. (Okay, I'll admit it, I think they're butt ugly.)
Consider a $999 iMac the eMac Deux, if it materializes. But, for that market a reasonable G5, 5200 GPU and lack of optical is a great package, and will remain so for a few years of lifecycle.
agreed.
but you agree that above 1299, it's neccessary to have a much improved graphic chip, right?
The 5200, if it actually ships in the mid and high end iMacs, may very well be a bad choice for capturing those people who really want to play the latest and greatest games.
and when was the Xbox version released and PC? just because the mac version was late doesn't mean it's a newer game
PC and Mac versions came out pretty close to each other. Xbox ver is irrellevant since it is console based. Don't you think currently available game cards are considered durng a games developement? It's all about drivers.
FYI Doom 3 supports all nvida FX chipsets according to id's website. Yes I know probably not at 42fps, but hey, turn down yer video settings.
PC and Mac versions came out pretty close to each other. Xbox ver is irrellevant since it is console based. Don't you think currently available game cards are considered durng a games developement? It's all about drivers.
FYI Doom 3 supports all nvida FX chipsets according to id's website. Yes I know probably not at 42fps, but hey, turn down yer video settings.
several months is not pretty close. and the xbox version is relevant as the graphics were designed for a 733Mhz P3 and a Geforce 3 level card.
I have installed hundreds of AIO Macs and found that most (85%) never add anything to the machine except RAM. After having the machine anywhere from 3-5 years they just replace the machine.
They obviously would not receive any benefit by the additional complexity and cost of an upgradeable iMac.
OMG you mean most people (85%) never add anything (other than ram) to a machine that is NOT very upgradeable in the first place? Gee I wonder how many would have added more had they been easier to upgrade. If that's your argument I suggest you start over.
One of the biggest reasons that the iMac2 and likely the iMac3 did not and won't do as well as the original is the display.
People bought the iMac1 because it was a decent price even if the monitor were to die out in a year's time. Today's iMac2 on the other hand has monitors attached that are either modestly expensive all the way to 'good lord I could buy another comp for that'.
If Apple were to come up w/ a design that allowed them to market the iMac3 w/ all 15" LCD's that could be upgraded to 17" or 20" (and in cases where an LCD died, replaced) then they'd be better able to hit price points that don't look insane. This would get people to look who otherwise wouldn't. If they don't look in the first place they'll never buy it.
FYI Doom 3 supports all nvida FX chipsets according to id's website. Yes I know probably not at 42fps, but hey, turn down yer video settings.
They don't go any lower. Sub 30 fps really isn't acceptable as you start seeing choppiness. The conclusion to that article pretty flatly states the nvidia 5200 chipset isn't acceptable even on the lowest settings for Doom 3.
Comments
Originally posted by WelshDog
I have a new G5 1.8dual at work and it has the GeForce FX 5200. Guess what? I play Halo on it all the time and even serve Halo games on our LAN (yes I know the card has nothing to do with serving a game - shut up in advance). I have absolutely no complaints about it's performance. There is nothing wrong with this card and it will probably be good for at least 3 more years.
Yeah and Halo is like what... 2-3 years old?
Just wait until you fire up Doom 3 on that card. Enough said.
Originally posted by rickag
Matsu
In the News Comments board in the thread "Apple burnt by iMac G5 heat issues" you said something awhile back and I was wondering if you ever elaborated on the statement and what you saw? Did I miss your explanation?
Just fvcking with you, haha!
What I saw were the institutional prices on eMacs, and the a friend's screen grab of the iMac delay page in the Apple store, whcih had already been posted on AI. Doesn't mean I wasn't shown, just means it isn't as interesting as I tried to make it sound.
The only inside info I can scoop for ya relate to edu and urban planning. I can tell you where some Canadian Apple STores will land -- but most people know that already, and I can tell you if/when/how much the "real" edu dicounts are -- not what Apple posts on their site.
Originally posted by WelshDog
Yes! If you want to game seriously then get a PowerMac or a build a hot PC with all the right stuff. I have a new G5 1.8dual at work and it has the GeForce FX 5200. Guess what? I play Halo on it all the time and even serve Halo games on our LAN (yes I know the card has nothing to do with serving a game - shut up in advance). I have absolutely no complaints about it's performance. There is nothing wrong with this card and it will probably be good for at least 3 more years.
It isn't about gaming seriously as much as gaming at all. Great it's a card that can support things from a few years ago but it's being released in a machine today.
Just turning away every person who ever might want to play a game on their computer would be about the stupidest thing Apple could do. You don't need the MP of a PowerMac for a gaming rig you just need a better video card than those iMacs have.
Originally posted by utsava
Yeah and Halo is like what... 2-3 years old?
Actually no Halo Mac was released on December 3rd, 2003 so it isn't even a year old.
Originally posted by WelshDog
Actually no Halo Mac was released on December 3rd, 2003 so it isn't even a year old.
and when was the Xbox version released and PC? just because the mac version was late doesn't mean it's a newer game
And that doesn't even touch on the educational or enterprise markets.
The 5200, if it actually ships in the mid and high end iMacs, may very well be a bad choice for capturing those people who really want to play the latest and greatest games. But there will remain a sizable market for whom it will be not only adequate, but appropriate, as a low-end unit.
Originally posted by Kickaha
And yet, the fact remains that there will always be a rather large contingent of people for whom games, even those two or three years old, are simply not on their radar as essential or necessary.
And that doesn't even touch on the educational or enterprise markets.
The 5200, if it actually ships in the mid and high end iMacs, may very well be a bad choice for capturing those people who really want to play the latest and greatest games. But there will remain a sizable market for whom it will be not only adequate, but appropriate, as a low-end unit.
the markets you name are served very well by the eMac.
Consider a $999 iMac the eMac Deux, if it materializes. But, for that market a reasonable G5, 5200 GPU and lack of optical is a great package, and will remain so for a few years of lifecycle.
Originally posted by Kickaha
I agree, but the *perception* is that they are 'so last year'. Also, they're hellabig compared to a thin LCD. They lack the sex appeal that an LCD flat AIO would have for enterprise. (Okay, I'll admit it, I think they're butt ugly.)
Consider a $999 iMac the eMac Deux, if it materializes. But, for that market a reasonable G5, 5200 GPU and lack of optical is a great package, and will remain so for a few years of lifecycle.
agreed.
but you agree that above 1299, it's neccessary to have a much improved graphic chip, right?
Originally posted by Kickaha
The 5200, if it actually ships in the mid and high end iMacs, may very well be a bad choice for capturing those people who really want to play the latest and greatest games.
I tend to agree.
Originally posted by applenut
agreed.
but you agree that above 1299, it's neccessary to have a much improved graphic chip, right?
As I've said all along, yes, an improved graphics chip in the higher end machines would attract more consumers, is my opinion.
Whether they *need* it, or it's just a 'whose is bigger' match is anyone's guess.
In any case, we'll see what's actually in the beasts when they're announced.
Originally posted by bunge
I tend to agree.
Originally posted by applenut
and when was the Xbox version released and PC? just because the mac version was late doesn't mean it's a newer game
PC and Mac versions came out pretty close to each other. Xbox ver is irrellevant since it is console based. Don't you think currently available game cards are considered durng a games developement? It's all about drivers.
FYI Doom 3 supports all nvida FX chipsets according to id's website. Yes I know probably not at 42fps, but hey, turn down yer video settings.
Originally posted by WelshDog
PC and Mac versions came out pretty close to each other. Xbox ver is irrellevant since it is console based. Don't you think currently available game cards are considered durng a games developement? It's all about drivers.
FYI Doom 3 supports all nvida FX chipsets according to id's website. Yes I know probably not at 42fps, but hey, turn down yer video settings.
several months is not pretty close. and the xbox version is relevant as the graphics were designed for a 733Mhz P3 and a Geforce 3 level card.
Originally posted by REM#1
I have installed hundreds of AIO Macs and found that most (85%) never add anything to the machine except RAM. After having the machine anywhere from 3-5 years they just replace the machine.
They obviously would not receive any benefit by the additional complexity and cost of an upgradeable iMac.
OMG you mean most people (85%) never add anything (other than ram) to a machine that is NOT very upgradeable in the first place? Gee I wonder how many would have added more had they been easier to upgrade. If that's your argument I suggest you start over.
Originally posted by WelshDog
FYI Doom 3 supports all nvida FX chipsets according to id's website. Yes I know probably not at 42fps, but hey, turn down yer video settings.
Yeah, turn'em all the way down, and it'll still be chop chop chop (i.e. below 30 FPS very often). High-quality gaming experience.
People bought the iMac1 because it was a decent price even if the monitor were to die out in a year's time. Today's iMac2 on the other hand has monitors attached that are either modestly expensive all the way to 'good lord I could buy another comp for that'.
If Apple were to come up w/ a design that allowed them to market the iMac3 w/ all 15" LCD's that could be upgraded to 17" or 20" (and in cases where an LCD died, replaced) then they'd be better able to hit price points that don't look insane. This would get people to look who otherwise wouldn't. If they don't look in the first place they'll never buy it.
Originally posted by WelshDog
FYI Doom 3 supports all nvida FX chipsets according to id's website. Yes I know probably not at 42fps, but hey, turn down yer video settings.
They don't go any lower. Sub 30 fps really isn't acceptable as you start seeing choppiness. The conclusion to that article pretty flatly states the nvidia 5200 chipset isn't acceptable even on the lowest settings for Doom 3.