+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Tips and Deals (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: Sitting on a fence... (/showthread.php?tid=54575)
Pages:
1
2
Sitting on a fence... - Tom Goode - 05-09-2008
...and too dumb to get off.
Will I be happy with a Macbook?
More specifically, will I be happy with the onboard x3100?
I currently have a souped up G4 QS, with an ATI 9800, 256mb, aftermarket-silenced video card. It also has an OWC 1.2 Ghz (tweaked to 1.33) processor card, an acard 6280m card (that allows large hard drives to be used), 1.5GB ram, an Alchemy tv card and USB 2.0 pci card...and a few extra fans...phew!
So, I am not a high end gamer, but I like Call of Duty and Ghost Recon, and would like to play more modern games (like CoD 2), and would also like to stream video and the like, which brings this monster to its knobbly old knees.
Does the x3100 blow the 9800 out of its shell and leave it shriveling in the hot sun?
And if it doesn't, does the massively more powerful processor of the Macbook make up for the deficiencies of the video card?
BTW, how much would you want if you sold the G4? Not, how much would you pay for it.
My bottom is sore...please help.
Thankyou
Re: Sitting on a fence... - Forrest - 05-09-2008
You won't be happy with the MacBook and those games. Save your pennies for a MacBook Pro.
Re: Sitting on a fence... - jdc - 05-09-2008
[quote Forrest]You won't be happy with the MacBook and those games. Save your pennies for a MacBook Pro.
Ditto.
current 2.4 is $1770 after $150 rebate + no tax and free shipping
next bet is refurb 2.2, $1449 from apple store + tax = about $1600
Re: Sitting on a fence... - St. Bernard - 05-09-2008
Thirding the opinions. It's a virtual certainty that your current setup is more capable for games than a MacBook.
An MBP can game pretty well. I have a Santa Rosa MBP 2.2 and it runs Crysis, Oblivion, CoD4, BioShock on Vista Boot Camp to my satisfaction (can't max out all settings, but quite good performance).
Honestly, and it really hurts me to say this, you probably want to go a different route altogether if you're into gaming. Either go with a comparably priced Winblows craptop (perhaps one that can be Hackintoshed to run OS X) with a better video card, a tower (at least a MacPro's video card can theoretically be upgraded), or a console (e.g. Xbox 360, PS3, Wii).
Re: Sitting on a fence... - Tom Goode - 05-09-2008
Ok thanks...my fence is getting lower and my feet are nearly on the ground.
So the Macbook is out.
How about the Radeon 2600 in the iMacs?
Is it much better than the ATI 9800?
I do other things than game and this machine is definitely struggling in the modern webworld.
And lastly, would you sell this Mac for $450?
Thanks
Re: Sitting on a fence... - Tom Goode - 05-09-2008
St. Bernard, I've used a Mac for over 10 years, and cannot in good conscience get a PC.
However I appreciate the comment.
I looked at the refurb towers, but they start at about $2000, and have the 7300 card, which is also a bit toothy.
I like the tower for the expandability and upgradeability, but they cost $500 more than I paid for this 733 QS almost 7 years ago...although I've obviously spent $$'s on upgrades.
Damn fence.
Re: Sitting on a fence... - d0e - 05-09-2008
ghostrecon will run on a 400mhz blue and white so that game should run fine on the macbook. Now cod or cod2 i never tried so i can say but i do remember i forum member who has a new imac and plays cod2 search the forum it should come up. pretty much and new mac is going to be fast than you g4. i'd say macbook pro from amazon would be the best choice (no tax/free shipping/$150 rebate)
Re: Sitting on a fence... - modelamac - 05-09-2008
Tom - I have the sam QS except dual 1.8GHz and no TV card.
I also have the MB Core Duo (1st gen.), and the 9800 does a better job, at least on the surface. We use the MB for travel and have a Slingbox. Using Sling Player on both to watch local TV programs, the 9800 seems to handle the video better than the MB (testing both here at home.)
Go for the MBP.
Re: Sitting on a fence... - clay - 05-09-2008
why not an imac? Is there a reason that you want the portability of a laptop? The imac is going to be a step up from the laptop, at least in terms of drive speed and also graphics, i believe. Not a huge step, but step nonetheless. You also get a bigger screen and more bang for the buck. If you don't need portable, go with an imac.
Re: Sitting on a fence... - jdc - 05-09-2008
actually, PC mag found the 17" MBP to be the fastest laptop "PC" they ever tested running Vista -- and games -- last year
>> The MacBook Pro outperformed the rest of the notebooks we tested, all of which claim Windows as their primary--nay, their only--operating system. We loaded Windows Vista Home Premium on the Apple notebook, and it snagged a WorldBench 6 Beta 2 score of 88. In games it achieved a blazing frame rate of 141 frames per second in Far Cry (with antialiasing turned off).
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,135062-page,1-c,notebooks/article.html
if you do decide to go with an imac, get the last model 2.4 or current 2.66 so you can get the better card