Any reason why ESO might not run on the brand new 5k iMacs in ultra high resolution?

spoqster · October 2014

I am considering getting one. They are simply mouth watering. But it would be quite a disappointment if ESO didn't run on ultra-high.

EDIT: Planning to use the native OSX client.

Currently I am playing on a late 2009 iMac and I can run it only at lowest quality.

ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB
12 GB RAM
2.8 Ghz Intel Core i7 (Quad Core)

CapuchinSeven · October 2014

Windows can be a bit weird on my Retina MacBook but I THINK you should be okay, I think. I can't say for sure.

You're right though, as a desktop machine they are pretty nice.

rwross · October 2014

Should definitely work, especially if you set it in Full Screen mode...and I'm referring to the native OS X client. You didn't mention whether you were interested in running it via Bootcamp, but since ESO supports a Mac client I assumed you would take advantage of that.

I'm running the Mac client now and it works fine...except for Cyrodiil crashes...but that's Zos...

Anyway...I'm planning to get one as well, but you will probably have yours before then...please feel free to ask any questions here and definitely let us all know how you like it.

Two-Dogs · October 2014

With my lowly Sabretooth graphics card, a simply solid-state HD and a chunk of ram, running on Ultra-High with no problems. Very cost efficient.

A matey is looking at the 5k iMacs but we've offered to build him a rig that will run ESO easily for under £900 but obviously different folks have different setups and skill-sets at their disposal.

EDIT: Spelling

Nazon_Katts · October 2014

If you want that thing for gaming, don't expect to be playing at full resolution. And better reconsider the purchase.

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/192305-analyzing-the-imac-5k-retina-display-how-do-you-squeeze-5k-out-of-a-last-gen-gpu wrote:

Finally, gaming — and here’s where the reality is going to bite. You aren’t going to be doing any gaming on a 5K display at anything like high detail levels. You may not even pull it off at low detail levels, and for a very simple reason: The R9 M290 is a midrange GPU from 2012 boxing way, way out of its weight class on this one. Despite the term, 5K is not 25% more pixels than 4K — it’s almost two times as many pixels.

Running at such high resolution you're looking at triple SLI/crossfire solutions, maybe dual titans could pull that load, but certainly not a single last gen mobile card.

PBpsy · October 2014

Why would anyone expect anything to run on a overpriced POS mac ?

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Rude and Insulting comments]

Nazon_Katts · October 2014

Considering the 5K display, this particular iMac isn't overpriced, relatively cheap actually, when compared to prices for stand alone displays. It's gonna be great for pics and vids, but games... not so much. It's a good deal, if you buy that thing with the right purpose in mind.

staxjax · October 2014

ok, so the new 5k display imac is running on an R9 'm'290..the *** are they trying to pull, rofl. A gpu made for mobile computers in a desktop. I guess, its better than an intel HD5000 embedded gpu though?

Or are they running on an AMD APU and have crossfire graphics enabled with the embedded gpu and the 290...hmm...doubt it.

rwross · October 2014

Guys,

Chill on the Apple hate... They are never going to be gaming rigs. Stipulated. But if you need/want a Mac and don't want a dedicated gaming box, the new iMac is certainly better than any previous one. I've seen eso on last year's imac and it runs well at high settings although not as well as a dedicated pc box.

But I'm playing on a 5 year old imac now and it it's far from great but certainly gets the job done.

Will the 4k help out with gaming... No... But the eso client will just ignore it and scale the graphics...

So when yOu are done playing you will sTill have a gorgeous screen to look at even if gaming doesn't take full advantage.

rwross · October 2014

Will be interested to hear the first hand account from spoq when he gets his

spoqster · October 2014

Nazon_Katts wrote: »

If you want that thing for gaming, don't expect to be playing at full resolution. And better reconsider the purchase.

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/192305-analyzing-the-imac-5k-retina-display-how-do-you-squeeze-5k-out-of-a-last-gen-gpu wrote:

Finally, gaming — and here’s where the reality is going to bite. You aren’t going to be doing any gaming on a 5K display at anything like high detail levels. You may not even pull it off at low detail levels, and for a very simple reason: The R9 M290 is a midrange GPU from 2012 boxing way, way out of its weight class on this one. Despite the term, 5K is not 25% more pixels than 4K — it’s almost two times as many pixels.

Running at such high resolution you're looking at triple SLI/crossfire solutions, maybe dual titans could pull that load, but certainly not a single last gen mobile card.

Thanks for the link!

No, I am not looking to get the iMac as a gaming rig. I just need to replace my current 2009 machine. The slow hard drive has been bothering me and I have been wanting to get a new one with a fusion drive or upgrade this one to an SSD for some time. Now the release of the 5k display has pushed me over the edge.

I will do some gaming, but mostly I am getting it for the quality of the display. My machine currently does not allow me to run high quality graphics, so if the new iMac allows me to run ultra-high at 2560 x 1440, I will be content.

spoqster · October 2014

staxjax wrote: »

ok, so the new 5k display imac is running on an R9 'm'290..the *** are they trying to pull, rofl. A gpu made for mobile computers in a desktop. I guess, its better than an intel HD5000 embedded gpu though?

Or are they running on an AMD APU and have crossfire graphics enabled with the embedded gpu and the 290...hmm...doubt it.

There is a good reason for this and it is a smart decision. The iMac is not a gaming rig, not even a max power rig. They've got the Mac Pro for that.

The main focus in designing the iMac is to make the computer part of it as small as possible. Basically, what they want to do is to create a computer that looks like a screen. They want to hide computer. The new iMac's are 5mm thin at the edges and overall not very bulky. If they need to put a notebook graphics card in there to achieve that I am fine with it.

Now on a completely different note: The gaming sector in general. Apple has taken great strides in the past 15 years taking over the pc market (no one in my company even owns a windows pc any more) and they slaughtered the mobile sector. But they have completely ignored the gaming sector. Microsoft and Sony are dominating this market and many of my friends have Windows pcs only for gaming and own xboxes or playstations.

I'm assuming Apple would do a pretty good job at creating a gaming console. They would do it right, push their own standard and get the major game labels on board. I think it's a big growth opportunity for them and I'd be surprised if they will keep away from it much longer.

Welka · October 2014

PBpsy wrote: »

Why would anyone expect anything to run on a overpriced POS mac ?
[Moderator Note: Edited quote to match moderated version]

PC/Mac war aside, and I know everyone has his reason to chose one or another. But honestly, why people go for Mac when you can get better for a lot cheaper is still beyond me.
I have to say that Apple nailed their marketing campaigns and have been very aggressive/effective. Holding my hands up on that.

spoqster · October 2014

Not everything is about price. Why do people buy overpriced [insert brand here] sneakers if they could just get sneakers for a few bucks at Walmart?

Quality issues aside it comes down to design, style and usability. For me personally the design on Apple's products is worth the extra coin. And I personally prefer OSX over Windows, so it makes sense for me.

But I really did not intend this thread for this type of discussion. Let us please not start this kind of discussion. I am happy to indulge in a separate thread if someone feels strongly about this.

Let's keep this thread to the new iMac and it's ability to run ESO at ultra-high video settings. Thanks!

sean.plackerb14_ESO · October 2014

As some others have said I highly doubt the 5k imac could run ESO at high/max settings at its native resolution. It takes some serious GPU power to push 4k for games, let alone 5k. At the very least you would want to do the build to order option with the Radeon R9 M295X 4GB (+$250). The stock option is 2GB, running a game at 5k with 2GB of VRAM dosen't seems like it would work to well. But still I don't think that M295X upgrade would be enough for 30FPS at 5k. Curious to see some benchmarks though.

Now playing the game at 1080p or a little above shouldn't be a problem, but not native 5k resolution.

KhajitFurTrader · October 2014

If I remember correctly, any app that wants to take full advantage of HiDPI needs to use the correct APIs and tell the OS that it's HiDPI-aware. If it doesn't, the OS simply tells it that it's running in a normal DPI environment, and transparently boosts it's windows/graphics to 4x the resolution, so that it won't look small on the screen. But it might look bad, especially with game graphics.

For ESO to become HiDPI-aware there would need to be code changes. It isn't at the moment, so any Mac with a Retina display will tell it at the start that the maximum display resolution is only half on each axis of what's physically there. You won't even be able to select a higher resolution in the graphics settings.

rwross · October 2014

KhajitFurTrader wrote: »

If I remember correctly, any app that wants to take full advantage of HiDPI needs to use the correct APIs and tell the OS that it's HiDPI-aware. If it doesn't, the OS simply tells it that it's running in a normal DPI environment, and transparently boosts it's windows/graphics to 4x the resolution, so that it won't look small on the screen. But it might look bad, especially with game graphics.

For ESO to become HiDPI-aware there would need to be code changes. It isn't at the moment, so any Mac with a Retina display will tell it at the start that the maximum display resolution is only half on each axis of what's physically there. You won't even be able to select a higher resolution in the graphics settings.

Emphasis mine...but I think that's a key point. I don't think any one looking at the iMac has an illusions that it will be gaming at a resolution not capable even with a dedicated rig and top powered cards.

Speaking for myself, I want the high resolution when working on detailed work projects and jus want ESO to play well at 1080p.

rwross · October 2014

Oh...and for the OP...I forgot to add this link earlier....it's from Apple support.

Should help you a bit...if you don't want to read the whole thing, just search for "3D"

Bear in mind it's the KB for a Macbook Retina, but the logic holds for the new iMac as well.

http://support.apple.com/kb/ht5266

KingRebz · October 2014

Im on a Macbook Pro 13'3 using ultra high. Rare problems but it is beautiful!

Nazon_Katts · October 2014

I'd test beforehand, how 1080p look on that display. Would be a shame if it turns out to be all blurred.

spoqster · October 2014

According to this post the game will run at least at 40 fps at 4K on the new iMac (with the 4GB upgrade for the graphics card). And at minimum 64 fps at 2560 x 1600 which is most important to me.

EDIT: These values apply to the desktop cards, not to the Radeon R9 M295X used in the iMac. I missed the missing M in the card name and got excited too quickly.

Thank you all for your input!

Nazon_Katts · October 2014

Those are all desktop cards and as thus more powerful than the mobile versions of the iMac. You're looking at a performance comparable to something between the 7950 and 7970, so at roughly 30FPS. Tho I suspect it'll be considerably lower, as the overall perfomance of the iMac's CPU, memory and mainboard will be less than was used in that benchmark.

I very much doubt your going to reach pleasing FPS with it at such a high resolution.

spoqster · October 2014

Nazon_Katts wrote: »

Those are all desktop cards and as thus more powerful than the mobile versions of the iMac. You're looking at a performance comparable to something between the 7950 and 7970, so at roughly 30FPS. Tho I suspect it'll be considerably lower, as the overall perfomance of the iMac's CPU, memory and mainboard will be less than was used in that benchmark.

I very much doubt your going to reach pleasing FPS with it at such a high resolution.

Wow, I missed the M in front of the 290. Thanks for pointing that out. Sorry for the misinformation.

Although this is a bit disappointing, looking at the other graphs in the post it looks like I'll at least have a decent chance to play VHQ at 2560 x
1441. But still, overall a bit anti-climactic.

rwross · October 2014

It will be fine at 2560 x 1400...and honestly...that will look awesome. Resolution is only one aspect of a good pic and that retina iMac has a very nice display color.

That said...and before anyone turns this back into Mac bashing...a PC based gaming rig will always be better...for gaming...but some of us want/need to use a Mac and for that...this will be super...can't wait.

Please be sure to post your hands on findings so I can live vicariously though you til Christmas :-)

spoqster · October 2014

For anyone who is interested: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/10/the-retina-imac-and-its-5k-display-as-a-gaming-machine/

Gedalya · October 2014

spoqster wrote: »

I am considering getting one. They are simply mouth watering. But it would be quite a disappointment if ESO didn't run on ultra-high.

EDIT: Planning to use the native OSX client.

Currently I am playing on a late 2009 iMac and I can run it only at lowest quality.
ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB

12 GB RAM

2.8 Ghz Intel Core i7 (Quad Core)

You gave the specs on your old machine; but what are they for the new one you are considering?

Gix · October 2014

ESO works fine at 2560x1440 so I don't doubt that it'll run okay on a 5k iMac. I wouldn't put the settings on maximum, though... you'll most likely drop to 20fps on occasion otherwise.

The Mac Pro contains slower-but-stable video cards and it's doing a good job at max but I don't think any iMac have the necessarily horsepower to pull it off consistently and with stability.

Welka wrote: »

why people go for Mac when you can get better for a lot cheaper is still beyond me.

We have a really different ideal on what to consider "better". It's not what you can do with it, it's HOW you do it that matters to some of us.

VictorBrav0 · October 2014

Don't get it for gaming. ESO will run like a turd with that resolution on that hardware. The problem is that the hardware isn't good enough to support a game at such a resolution. You will most likely have to scale back quite a bit on the resolution to run the game well.

WyndStryke · October 2014

Yeah, a bit worried that the graphics card they've used won't be able to adequately support the resolution. I use a 290X (desktop) on 4k, 'ultra'. It's great overall, although the framerate is adequate (typically 40s) rather than great. Significantly increasing the pixel count (from 8MP-ish to 14MP-ish) and using a 'mobile' GPU would mean that the framerate is a lot lower for the same settings, perhaps in the 20s, and lower in demanding areas.

It wasn't until I'd read this thread that I realised which GPU they'd used. I'm really surprised that they matched a 5k display with that GPU, seems wildly unbalanced to me.

Robocles · October 2014

spoqster wrote: »

I am considering getting one. They are simply mouth watering. But it would be quite a disappointment if ESO didn't run on ultra-high.

EDIT: Planning to use the native OSX client.

Currently I am playing on a late 2009 iMac and I can run it only at lowest quality.
ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB

12 GB RAM

2.8 Ghz Intel Core i7 (Quad Core)

It's not a console.

rwross · October 2014

FYI....I went hands-on with this machine running both benchmarks and games and it works fantastic at 1440p in ultra (not ESO but gaming equivalents I could access), and about 30-34 FPS in 5k mode.

Personally, I'd use it in 1440 because the scaling is remarkably good and doesn't require hardly any cycles to accomplish.

I think the Ars article pretty much got it exactly right. Normal caveats apply...this is the perfect machine for a Mac user who wants to play games in addition to all the things they normally do on their Mac. It is not the most robust or cost effective gaming rig one could get by a country mile...but then no one is saying it is.