PC vs MAC

Pages: 12
In terms of gaming what is better?
Is that even a comparison?
PC = Personal Computer
MAC = short for Macintosh computers


Are you trying to compare apple to Microsoft - windows/mac?

If so for gaming generally windows is better than *nix and mac since they aren't always supported on the other latter two operating systems.
yes i meant windows vs osx
closed account (S6k9GNh0)
The "better" comes down to actual 3rd party support, i.e. whether hardware vendors choose to support one platform over another. Linux is making a [very] large push but Windows will be ahead in vendor support for quite some time.

Given that the only games I play are generally available on Linux or through WINE, I'm okay with Linux.
There are also many games that are unplayable on OS x, if you're into the big EA shooters or something.
I run a Windows desktop for that reason. Pretty much use my MacBook for any other type of work that requires productivity because I prefer OS x for doing work.
ok so windows for games, and osx for work
Windows for Games, as DirectX is widespread.
Ubuntu for Work, as it's free and by default has multiple workspaces which makes it REEEEALLLY easy to work with.
By far the most non-windows feature I use.

Can't tell for OSX, never tried, didn't even mind anyways, Me and Apple always had some no-no thing.
closed account (S6k9GNh0)
DirectX is widespread? I thought it only supported the Windows and Xbox platforms...
You're not wrong, computerquip, but Windows is still run on many more computers than OS X or Linux (though the gap is closing) and many game engines are written using DirectX rendering APIs rather than OpenGL.

-Albatross
I thought Linux could run on any hardware that Windows could run on? My laptop and desktop were both Windows Vista computers and while my laptop is Linux only now, my desktop runs Vista and Linux. Never used a Mac because I can't afford it, cheaper to pay $600 to get PCs or Laptops than thousands for a Mac.
@BHXSpecter
I think she meant actual, physical computers rather than different varieties. Linux is available for more architectures than Windows, but there are many more Windows installations than Linux ones (at least for desktop). That being said, I'm not sure whether Linux is actually more portable (rather than more ported) than Windows -- NT is designed with portability in mind. Microsoft just don't take advantage of it, although Windows did used to be available for ARM and I think it still is available for Itanium.
Steam OS. Oh wait, it's still 2013. Windows. Mac gaming == a joke within the PC Master Race.
@chrisname
Oh, yeah, I have issues with misreading or misinterpreting things on a regular basis.
@Cherapy: SteamOS has been released in beta a couple days ago:

http://store.steampowered.com/steamos/

But only works with NVidia Graphics, and will wipe your entire Hard Drives and all the partitions you had will be gone.
This will probably not happen in the end phase, just remember it's a beta.
Perhaps it works on VMWare.
Last edited on
@Cheraphy,
What would you say is a good processor for PC gaming? I want to get into PC gaming some more but I worry that my processor is too weak.
I've got it installed EssGeEich. I realize it's beta, hence I pointed out the year :P Give it time.

@The Prince:
You can get away with a decent i5. i7 would be great but possibly overkill. As for AMD, I a bit out of date with them. But for building a computer to game on, there is a rule. Either go AMD cpu/gpu or intel nVidia cpu/gpu. AMD ones are designed to work together these days. Personally I prefer intel and nvidia. But I miss 3 way multi monitor on one card. Can't do that with my nvidia card.
@Cheraphy,
Thank you.
closed account (S6k9GNh0)
? I'm pretty sure that CPU and GPU functionality is abstracted behind the motherboard. To take special advantage of either would have to be done in software from the application side. There's no reason to do so otherwise as it wouldn't bring benefit like you think it would.
Cheraphy wrote:
Either go AMD cpu/gpu or intel nVidia cpu/gpu. AMD ones are designed to work together these days.

What's the logic behind this? Does the hardware play better when its paired up like that?

Only reason I ask is because for a short while Apple machines were built with Intel CPUs and AMD GPUs. My iMac has an i5 and a Radeon 6970M. I've Bootcamp'd Windows onto it, which is what I use as a go-to for gaming (not often, to be honest). I've never had any issues in three years of usage (running games at a reasonable spec).

EDIT: Ha! I've just found this from a couple of months ago. Right in my iMac purchase period as well. Hopefully it's not going to crop up. :-) http://www.anandtech.com/show/7228/apple-initiates-video-card-replacement-program-for-radeon-hd-6970m-equipped-mid2011-27-imacs
Last edited on
AMD processors and graphics cards are designed to work together. IT's their hole fusion thing they started a few years ago. And AMD drivers used to clash with nvidia. Don't know if they still do.

Also AMD south bridge chips are designed to work better with that combo.


It's not that you'll have problems, it's that you're not getting the fullest potential from your cards
Last edited on
Pages: 12