The issues related to logging in to the European PC/Mac megaserver have been resolved at this time. If you continue to experience difficulties at login, please restart your client. Thank you for your patience!
Any reason why ESO might not run on the brand new 5k iMacs in ultra high resolution?
-
Kartalin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭It took me a second to figure out 5k was the resolution and not the cost. I guess technically it could still be both...
I kid, mac users, I kid.-
Tri-faction tryhard but mainly EP in Gray Host lately (PC/NA)
- DISCARNATE - Tertiary Meat - @ Kartalin - Youtube
2 -
spoqster✭✭✭✭✭
Thanks a lot for your input. Hearing some hands on account is great info before getting the thing. Are you planning to play ESO on it as well?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.
0 -
WyndStryke✭✭✭...
Personally, I'd use it in 1440 because the scaling is remarkably good and doesn't require hardly any cycles to accomplish.
...
That would be dropping it down to a 3.6MP display right? In terms of pixel count, less than half of a 4K display and a quarter of the 5K display. IMO that just demonstrates that the GPU they picked is underpowered compared to the display (for the purposes of games playing or 3d rendering).
Edited by WyndStryke on October 30, 2014 9:43AM0 -
rwross✭✭WyndStryke wrote: »...
Personally, I'd use it in 1440 because the scaling is remarkably good and doesn't require hardly any cycles to accomplish.
...
That would be dropping it down to a 3.6MP display right? In terms of pixel count, less than half of a 4K display and a quarter of the 5K display. IMO that just demonstrates that the GPU they picked is underpowered compared to the display (for the purposes of games playing or 3d rendering).
Actually...there are no current rigs that I am aware of that can get to 60 FPS at 5k without an SLI configuration...which is just never going to happen in an iMac. In short, the card they chose is quite robust, but you'd need two of them to game like butter at 5k and 60fps, whether that's in an iMac or an Alienware.
3D rendering at that resolution works fine for CAD programs and Final Cut ran four HD videos simultaneously while editing a fifth. That said, gaming has very different demands than that of more business oriented renders.
Again...I'm trying to keep the thread to the OP's original intent...which was simply does this machine game well enough at for ESO using high settings.
You certainly can get faster desktop Windows machines for less money, but that is entirely beside the point of the thread :-)0 -
WyndStryke✭✭✭...
Actually...there are no current rigs that I am aware of that can get to 60 FPS at 5k without an SLI configuration...which is just never going to happen in an iMac. In short, the card they chose is quite robust, but you'd need two of them to game like butter at 5k and 60fps, whether that's in an iMac or an Alienware. ...
Well, yes, 60fps on 5k is going to be out of reach, but what I don't understand is why they didn't base this machine on the 290X desktop version (or the 295X2 for that matter) which would have performed better than the mobile version, and are reasonably priced. Or the most recent nVidia GPUs which are also good performers (albeit on the expensive side).
Edited by WyndStryke on October 30, 2014 5:30PM0 -
Nazon_Katts✭✭✭✭✭WyndStryke wrote: »...
Actually...there are no current rigs that I am aware of that can get to 60 FPS at 5k without an SLI configuration...which is just never going to happen in an iMac. In short, the card they chose is quite robust, but you'd need two of them to game like butter at 5k and 60fps, whether that's in an iMac or an Alienware. ...
Well, yes, 60fps on 5k is going to be out of reach, but what I don't understand is why they didn't base this machine on the 290X desktop version (or the 295X2 for that matter) which would have performed better than the mobile version, and are reasonably priced. Or the most recent nVidia GPUs which are also good performers (albeit on the expensive side).
Because it would never fit all in a slim screen case."You've probably figured that out by now. Let's hope so. Or we're in real trouble... and out come the intestines. And I skip rope with them!"1 -
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)
the 780M 4GB is good enough for running the game on 2560 x1600 at all ULTRA setting ( everything like sub sampling quality / texture quality / maximum particle system / Anti aliasing ) tho there will be some crashing issue because the OS X client is still running at 32 bit infrastructure )
and the game won't support 5K resolution anyway so it will just scale down to the resolution it supports ) and the retina's iMac 295mx 4GB have even better performance than the 780M
just ignore those so-called pc user thats trying to making fun of you.. lol]
i bet most of them don't even get laid for their whole life , LOL... as you can see they are so proud of their power house rig at their basementEdited by henrycupcakerwb17_ESO on October 31, 2014 2:35AM2 -
KhajitFurTrader✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭henrycupcakerwb17_ESO wrote: »the 780M 4GB is good enough for running the game on 2560 x1600 at all ULTRA setting ( everything like sub sampling quality / texture quality / maximum particle system / Anti aliasing ) tho there will be some crashing issue because the OS X client is still running at 32 bit infrastructure )
The ESO client is 32-bit on both platforms.
0 -
KhajitFurTrader✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Back on topic: ESO can run fine with a slightly tweaked Ultra-High graphics quality in 2560x1440 resolution on a late 2013 iMac with a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M.
It can be expected to do this with the same or slightly better performance in the same configuration on the latest Retina iMac. Lacking a current Mac(Book Pro) with retina display myself, I can't tell whether ESO supports the native HiDPI screen resolution, or gets told by the OS that it runs in a normal DPI environment, because it doesn't (yet) use the correct APIs that would allow it. If it does the former, the necessity to use any anti-aliasing at all would be nonexistent, but given the amount of pixels is quadrupled, I wouldn't expect wonders. But definitely go for the biggest available GC option in any case.
Upcoming changes like the usage of a newer OpenGL version may improve performance further, but that's still unlaid eggs.
0