Apple's recently unveiled M4 lineup of SoCs have received overwhelmingly positive reviews. The highest-end variant of the lineup, the M4 Max, packs up to 40 GPU cores for excellent graphics performance. But is that enough for a pleasant gaming experience?https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-M4-Max-MacBook-Pro-flexes-its-muscles-in-Cyberpunk-2077-Black-Myth-Wukong-Resident-Evil-4-with-excellent-performance.916940.0.html
And none of the mentioned games are offered by Steam for MacOS...
This means:
- buy it separately (even if you already have the game on Steam);
- buy without any significant discounts;
- your achievements from the apple gadget will not be in steam...;
- and not the fact that there will be cross-platform support in multiplayer games.
It's not a "free market" as far as I'm concerned.
Running on arm APU? Really great!
Performance? Great but personally one thing I'm not overly excited about is that M4 Max can eat up to 90W, so than there are gaming laptops which I guess might do at least the same. I think the interesting factor is how well these games can run on 10W M4, to have an idea when SteamOS on arm is coming, what we can squeeze out of these...
Is this a paid/sponsored article? How does it "flexes its muscles" when it gets 50-70 fps with upscaling, when on same graphical detail and upscaling Radeon 890M iGPU reaches those same or higher numbers? What is a 75W 4050m then (besides weak), the most powerful GPU on the planet?
well yea but it's also not a native game and going through multiple translation layers. Compare again once native macOS port is released. Despite the above it's still likely gives slightly better battery life and produces a bit less heat than an 890m even with all that overhead which is somewhat impressive for this level of performance.
Also, have you seen the pricing of GPDs zen 5 handhelds? They make apples recent pricing of M4 Mac mini actually seem decent and competitive.
It's funny how we want to stress how powerful the M* Max chips are for the power they use, but we never mention how expensive a Mac with such a chip is as if it's entirely worth it - that is, a PC with 4070/4080 is cheaper, but uses a lot more power.
Well yeah, Intel/AMD-based gaming PCs are not efficient, but a Macbook Pro with M4 Max chip is a $3k+ machine, not mentioning the games don't all run the same either given it's a hit or miss with the software layer that allows many of them to be usable at all (while the Mac ports of games are few and far between again and again).
I'm typing this on a MBP with M1 Max, I absolutely adore this machine for working, but it's definitely not a viable gaming option for most people.
Quote from: Worgarthe on November 19, 2024, 10:49:46Is this a paid/sponsored article? How does it "flexes its muscles" when it gets 50-70 fps with upscaling, when on same graphical detail and upscaling Radeon 890M iGPU reaches those same or higher numbers? What is a 75W 4050m then (besides weak), the most powerful GPU on the planet?
Indeed!
While the 4050 is a fairly capable current generation bottom of the line
dGPU it can run circles around the
iGPU's that Intel, AMD, Qualcomm & Apple offer.
As noted it can/does however use up to 75W to get there.