win xp games on an imac (1 Viewer)

[felix_suwarno]

Uh, guys, i am considering to make a switch from pc to mac. I know that win xp can be used on an imac now. But how about playing the latest directx 10 games on an imac? I REALLY want to play the latest games such as Tomb Raider : Anniversary in its fullest glory.

I am a professional photographer, and I do tons of work on Photoshop CS3. I am also an occasional 3D modeler, using Rhinoceros3D and Maya.

Current system is opteron 250 2.39 ghz with 2gb of ram, geforce 6800 ultra.

 

[Oren]

I have a few links for you:

First, Tomb Raider:Anniversary (http://storefront.steampowered.com/v...ame&AppId=8000) seems to be directx 9.0c. I don't see it on the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ctX_10_support.

The ATI 2xxx series in the new iMacs is directx 10 compatible, though, unlike the previous cards. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari... _R600_series.

Second, check out barefeats.com for speed tests on the new iMacs (see especially under windows at http://barefeats.com/imacal3.html).

The conclusion is that, for 3D games, the 2400XT is poor, and the 2600 PRO is OK but not great. They're both a lot better under Windows than under OSX. What these cards offer is hardware H.264 decoding, so it looks like Apple is focusing on video, not 3D. Probably good enough for the casual gamer, but not much more. A lot depends on the resolution, FSAA settings, etc.

Looking at the VGA charts at tomshardware.com it looks like your 6800 ultra is faster than the 2400XT, and slower than the 2600XT. So, the 2600 PRO would be in the middle, more or less where your current card is for directx 9 games. The iMac would be directx 10 compatible, though.

Hope that helps....

 

[felix_suwarno]

thanks oren.

but are you talking about games that run under windows xp there? or are you talking about games on osx?

 

[felix_suwarno]

i am sorry but perhaps i should re-word my question. when you said "They're both a lot better under Windows than under OSX", does that mean windows and OSX on imac pro, or are you comparing pc windows versus imac pro OSX?

 

[Devin U]

Why dont you just build a pc and burn the $500 premium that the Apple name commands on something else? But seriously, the ATI 2xxx series cards have gotten subpar reviews compaired to the Nvidia 8xxx cards, especially the 88xx series. Also, DX 10 is only avalible in Vista (currently, though rumor is dx 10 support with a XP SP3 next year). Can macs be dual booted with Vista?

Personally, if you plan on doing alot of PC gaming, go with a pc. If you want to play around with a mac, get a mac mini and a kvm switch and put it on your desk next to your pc. Unless you have a really small desk, it should work fine, those mini's arnt much bigger than a external hdd. Or put OSx on your pc. Its been reverse engineered to work on normal hardware you can put together yourself, though I think its quite a bit of work.

 

[Aaron Reynolds]

Yes, like the software you'll need to do proper colour calibration in Windows for your professional photo work.

It's not the name that commands the money -- it's the other stuff that you get that may not be obvious or necessary to everyone.

 

[DaveF]

This is the chronic weak link in Mac hardware: sub-par graphics cards from a gaming perspective.

If you want a computer for professional work, and want a bit of gaming on the side, then a Mac is a fine way to go. But if gaming is the goal, with some dabbling of work on the side, get a Windows PC. (Or an XBox 360 )

My MacBook Pro runs StarCraft, UT 2004 demo, and Half Life 2 demo fine (in boot camp). So I can play good games I've missed in recent years. I've not tried anything new like BioHazard.

 

[Christ Reynolds]

Exactly. If Microsoft actually offered the same features as OS X, paying the Apple "premium" wouldn't make a lot of sense. There is a reason our machines cost more, and as long as the quality stays, I will always pay it.

CJ

 

[Oren]

Under Windows on the iMac. They installed Windows on the iMac using bootcamp. So, the point is that on the exact same hardware, the games did a lot better under Windows than under OSX.

There are a variety of reasons for this. The drivers (so critical to getting the most out of a video card) are older and better optimized under Windows than under OSX.

Another interesting result from this is that the ATI 2xxx series performed closer to the nVidia cards under Windows than under OSX. That suggests that with better drivers, the ATI 2xxx cards in the new iMacs should yield better performance.