New iMacs

Mac Technical Support
Hackintosh. Build one.


hard to build one when you cant find bootloaders any more.
Warderon,

Highly considering turning my Windows PC into a Hackintosh. But disagree that Windows is 10000% better.

I have a very clean Windows install. It's the only time Windows seems to be faster. My PC is a higher spec than my iMac, but the iMac continues to outperform the Windows box by about 10% (in Wow that is - in everything else, all my OS X/Linux/Solaris machines outperform all of my Windows machines).

Windows users are suffering the same fps problems Mac users have been ever since MoP came out. Check the forums on the other side. They're all crying.

With the introduction of Windows 8, maybe they'll have improvements (it's lighter than Windows 7). But performance wise, OS X is a lot more lean that either of the Windows out there. The only thing they have going for them is Direct X over OpenGL.

Any Unix flavour over Windows any day!
Anybody get one of the new iMacs able to say how they are far as WoW and such?
Bump

Interesting to see Apple moving some Mac production state side!
Bump -

The 27 inchers are shipping now. Anyone have one yet?
I am getting the 21.5 imac with the GT 650m this week-end. This will be my wife machine later on once I sold my late 2009 iMac. For myself I will get the 27" imac with the GTX 680mx.

I will return here and post the 21.5" framerates at the native resolution of 1920x1080. I can already tell you the GTX 680MX will run ultra settings with no problems at 2560x1440. That GPU will beat the crap out of most gaming DESKTOP GPU, so its a beast. Dont get fool by the fact its a mobile/desktop hybrid.

Here are the 3dmark11 benchmarks:

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 - 9861
AMD Radeon HD 7970 - 7770
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX - 6880 (27" imac top GPU, add $150, well worth it)
AMD Radeon HD 7870 - 6194
AMD Radeon HD 7970M - 5820
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 - 5033
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 - 5014
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX - 3978 (27" imac based GPU at $2000)
AMD Radeon HD 6870 - 4218
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 - 4267.5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M - 3248
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M - 3131
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M - 2320 (27" imac based GPU at $1800)
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M - 2085 (21.5" imac based GPU at $1500)
ATI Radeon HD 4850 - 1780 (my late 2009 iMac GPU, runs 25fps in 2660x1440 at good settings)
NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M - 1719 (21.5" imac based GPU at $1300)
Intel HD Graphics 4000 - 524 (macbook air GPU, runs fine a low settings)
NVIDIA GeForce 320M - 435 (that GPU is on lots of old MacBooks)

When setting WoW, always go change shadows to low and get the best global settings you can get. Shadows eats up lots of GPU for something that is not worth it imo.
11/01/2012 10:05 AMPosted by Korbendallas
Hackintosh. Build one.


hard to build one when you cant find bootloaders any more.


Chameleon/Chimera is all you need. See http://tonymacx86.com/.

Coming from a late 2009 27" iMac (aka iMac 27 rev 1), my next machine will be a hackintosh. Will probably grab a GTX 670/680 but honestly, at this point anything would be an improvement over this machine's 4850M. It's underpowered for gaming at native 2500x1440 (and no, I won't drop down because sub-max resolutions look terrible on LCDs).

It's really a shame because its quad 2.66Ghz Nehalem Core i5 still performs beautifully, especially when paired with an SSD. It's a workhorse outside of graphics performance.
12/14/2012 10:53 PMPosted by Chroesire
[quote]Hackintosh. Build one.


Coming from a late 2009 27" iMac (aka iMac 27 rev 1), my next machine will be a hackintosh. Will probably grab a GTX 670/680 but honestly, at this point anything would be an improvement over this machine's 4850M. It's underpowered for gaming at native 2500x1440 (and no, I won't drop down because sub-max resolutions look terrible on LCDs).

It's really a shame because its quad 2.66Ghz Nehalem Core i5 still performs beautifully, especially when paired with an SSD. It's a workhorse outside of graphics performance.


It looks like we own the same 27'" iMac, but you should have the radeon HD4850 not the mobile 4850m. If you look at the benchmark in my previous post you will see how it compares. The GT 650m beats it, so its outdated indeed.

When buying a mac for gaming, I recommend getting the best GPU you can afford. If you can afford to get the 2k 27" iMac I strongly recommend you get that + the GTX 680mx instead of going into the hassle of building a mackintosh.

The GTX 680mx is one of the best GPU out there if you don't count the 2 GPU setups (which are very expensive and consume lots of power) I don't think Apple ever offer a GPU so close to the top ones available when the mac was launch. And the optional GTX 680mx has 2gig of dedicated DDR5.
10/23/2012 12:38 PMPosted by Omegal
They really cheaped out on mobile parts. The more they shrink it the weaker they get. The generation gap between this one and last barely makes up for the power loss they keep getting shrinking it.

To be honest, I believe you're not being 100% fair here. Apple still chooses mostly good/best parts to include on their hardware. Yes, the iMac is indeed a desktop machine with notebook grade hardware, but that is probably all you need for 98% of all things you can do with a computer these days.

That said, the upgrade performance from Sandy to Ivy is mostly Intel's fault. However, that upgrade is quite interesting for anything older than Sandy. Plus, the GeForce GTX680MX is the best mobile video card you can possibly get. Not even gamer laptops have one of those. That iMac 27" should be really interesting for gamers.
It looks like we own the same 27'" iMac, but you should have the radeon HD4850 not the mobile 4850m. If you look at the benchmark in my previous post you will see how it compares. The GT 650m beats it, so its outdated indeed.

When buying a mac for gaming, I recommend getting the best GPU you can afford. If you can afford to get the 2k 27" iMac I strongly recommend you get that + the GTX 680mx instead of going into the hassle of building a mackintosh.

The GTX 680mx is one of the best GPU out there if you don't count the 2 GPU setups (which are very expensive and consume lots of power) I don't think Apple ever offer a GPU so close to the top ones available when the mac was launch. And the optional GTX 680mx has 2gig of dedicated DDR5.


I don't disagree that the top 27" is a nice machine, because it is, and its price is largely justified by its panel. That said, I've exclusively used iMacs since 2000 (400Mhz indigo iMac DV → 1Ghz 15" iMac G4 → 2Ghz 20" iMac G5 → 2.66Ghz 27" iMac) and inupgradability is really starting to grate on my nerves, especially now that software outside of games is using the GPU (Blender's new 3D rendering engine, for example, uses CUDA to greatly accelerate 3D rendering).

I built my younger brother a hackintosh back in 2009… 2.8Ghz Core 2 Duo with a 8600GTS. It runs great, just as well as a real Mac. Costed a grand total of $350 back then and a few months ago he upgraded to a factory-OC'd Radeon 6850. Though my machine is better at serious work (Photoshop, audio encoding, anything CPU-intensive) his machine spanks mine at any sort of game.
I don't think building a Hackintosh is really worth it if you ask me. There are so many things that could go wrong with it and half the time many of the Mac services will not work with a Hackintosh. If you know what you are doing they are great but for the average person I would stay clear away from it. If you really want good graphics performance your best bet would to honestly go with a Windows Computer. If you are not a fan of windows 7 try 8 and if you are not a fan of windows 8 windows 7 is still a damn good OS.

Just thought I would put some thoughts down.
Bithal
Mine is the high end model I got a few months ago. It plays WoW on ultra settings and i have not noticed any lag. (knock on wood) the screen is gorgeous. I'm very happy with mine.
I don't think building a Hackintosh is really worth it if you ask me. There are so many things that could go wrong with it and half the time many of the Mac services will not work with a Hackintosh. If you know what you are doing they are great but for the average person I would stay clear away from it. If you really want good graphics performance your best bet would to honestly go with a Windows Computer. If you are not a fan of windows 7 try 8 and if you are not a fan of windows 8 windows 7 is still a damn good OS.

Just thought I would put some thoughts down.
Bithal


It was pretty shaky in the early days, but now it's very solid as long as you pick the right components. Many audio/music/video professionals who are sick of waiting for a Mac Pro update have turned to hackintosh workstations for their needs.

For me, Windows is not an option. I am an artist and programmer and not only does Windows negatively impact my productivity, but one of the platforms I develop for (Ruby on Rails) runs horribly and is just generally a pain to deal with on Windows.
12/14/2012 06:22 PMPosted by Herbapou
I will return here and post the 21.5" framerates at the native resolution of 1920x1080. I can already tell you the GTX 680MX will run ultra settings with no problems at 2560x1440. That GPU will beat the crap out of most gaming DESKTOP GPU, so its a beast. Dont get fool by the fact its a mobile/desktop hybrid.

don't be so sure of that. this is a MOBILE GPU. in fact. barefeats has posted their initial impression of the 680MX to show that although it spanks the last imac thoroughly. it under performs to even a 2010 mac pro with a real DESKTOP gpu in it.

an imac will never rivial a gaming desktop build with similar or cheaper desktop versions of parts. They will however provide a more affordable mac to those that don't want to wait for a 2013 mac pro (assuming tim ever delivers on that).

http://www.barefeats.com/imac12g1.html

As for purchasers. Like i said earlier in thread. if your intent is gaming. you really are left with 27 inch model. the 21 inch is even weaker than the 2012 macbook pros. it even gets out performed by a mini in some tests. it's a facebook computer.
I will return here and post the 21.5" framerates at the native resolution of 1920x1080. I can already tell you the GTX 680MX will run ultra settings with no problems at 2560x1440. That GPU will beat the crap out of most gaming DESKTOP GPU, so its a beast. Dont get fool by the fact its a mobile/desktop hybrid.


don't be so sure of that. this is a MOBILE GPU. in fact. barefeats has posted their initial impression of the 680MX to show that although it spanks the last imac thoroughly. it under performs to even a 2010 mac pro with a real DESKTOP gpu in it.


I think you're comment are misleading, the "2010" MacPro was using a very "2012" GTX 680 desktop. Of course the desktop GTX 680 will outperform the MX... Those guys are trying to prove that if you used a box you can upgrade it? kind of obvious to me already. And to top it off the tested GTX 680 GPU in the MacPro was overclock. There is a tread about those tests on the MacRumors forums.

( http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1506807&page=4 )

The 680 MX is right between the 680m and the 680 desktop. The mx IS a hybrid between the mobile and the desktop, its not a pure mobile GPU. The performance gains from the 680m compare to the huge power consumption and heat of the desktop 680 is very impressive.

The MX series are GPU specially made for iMacs, you can read more about them at:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-680MX.83519.0.html
Good news, I found the World of Warcraft benchmarks on MacRumors:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1506807&page=7

680MX World of Warcraft speed tests
WoW: Mists of Pandaria. This is our Narache Village Totem to Tree to Totem test results for various Macs. All were running Ultra Preset.

iMac 3.4 680MX
2560x1440 = 86.7 FPS average
1898x1068 = 111.8 FPS average
1456x820 = 118.2 FPS average

iMac 2.9 650M (got similar numbers for rMBP 15")
1920x1080 = 58.2 FPS average
1456x820 = 71.0 FPS average

2011 iMac 3.4 Radeon HD 6970M
1456x820 = 59.7 FPS average
(will get more examples of this Tuesday but clearly slower than 680MX)

Mac Pro 3.3 Radeon HD 5870
2560x1440 = 57.4 FPS average
1898x1068 = 70.4 FPS average
1456x820 = 78.9 FPS average

Mac Pro 3.3 GeForce GTX 680 Classified
2560x1440 = 107.5 FPS average (only beats 680MX on top rez)
1898x1068 = 108.2 FPS average
1456x820 = 111.2 FPS average
I will return here and post the 21.5" framerates at the native resolution of 1920x1080. I can already tell you the GTX 680MX will run ultra settings with no problems at 2560x1440. That GPU will beat the crap out of most gaming DESKTOP GPU, so its a beast. Dont get fool by the fact its a mobile/desktop hybrid.


As for purchasers. Like i said earlier in thread. if your intent is gaming. you really are left with 27 inch model. the 21 inch is even weaker than the 2012 macbook pros. it even gets out performed by a mini in some tests. it's a facebook computer.


Here is the World of Warcraft benchmark for the late 2012 21.5" iMac ($1500) running the GT 650m GPU:

1920x1080 = 58.2 FPS average
1456x820 = 71.0 FPS average

58.2 FPS on ultra at native 1920x1080 is one hell of a facebook computer... looks like my wife is going to love her new Mac :-)
none of that really says much if you don't say where the tests were conducted. there is a HUGE difference between say for example jade forrest vs ghostlands.

Also a HUGE difference depending on number of players or npcs around. the true test is always the LFR test really. some CPUs/GPUs choke the hardest on that. it shows the true performance bottleneck scenarios then. Those are the numbers i want to see.

Or you want the ultimate test. Galleon on a high pop server. On my server this is typically at LEAST 120 people in one place.
I plan to get a 27" with the 680mx. I will most likely upgrade the ram myself to 32gb (yeah overkill). As far as hard drive, I am not sure yet.

From what I seen with the older iMac's using the Radeon HD 6970 2gb version was getting 60-100 fps with shadows on low and view distance at good. Which I think most people do turn shadows down a bit on some high end pc rigs. Shadows are very taxing. Note that the game was running at maxed resolution. 2560 x 1440. Battlefield 3 which is a very intense game normally get's 30 - 45 fps.

Anyhow the gtx 680mx should run any game now days. If you really want high FPS then you can drop your resolution down to 1080. Turn down shadows. I believe the 680mx get's 15% give or take performance boots vs 6970m. So you should be in good shape running wow at ultra and get 60+ fps.

You might want to step up bootcamp to run games as you may get better performance.

People are going to tell you straight up if you want a gaming rig to build a pc. True, but I simply like the mac os. So if you plan doing nothing but gaming, you can save money by getting something else, but I do use the features of the mac and do video editing and stuff along that line. Mac are great for that.

So answer the question, if you like macs, this will play games (bootcamp might be needed if just pc only) and you should get high settings if not ultra. There may be a few things to turn down but remember, your playing on a good looking 27" screen. That should make up for it.
I would turn down all other settings long before turning down the resolution. Lower resolutions were a great method of boosting FPS on CRTs but anything lower than max looks like crap on LCDs. The crispness loss is just too much.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum