- Mac mini graphics card game pro#
- Mac mini graphics card game software#
- Mac mini graphics card game Pc#
Anandtech notes that mobile systems use FP16, while PCs are using FP32, meaning the mobile systems have an effective 2x Flop advantage. Interim summary: 1050 Max-Q is 10-50% faster than Xe G7 in GFXBench, but 2.5-3x as fast in games In games the top Xe G7 system, the Acer Swift is 50% faster. I will also mention the only Xe G7 result for GFXBench is using the Asus Zenbook Flip S UX371, which is the poorest performing Xe G7. In games however, the Geforce 1050 Max-Q is 2.5-3x the performance of the same Xe G7 According to Notebookcheck, the Geforce 1050 Max-Q is only 10% faster in Aztec Ruins High and 50% faster in Normal compared to the Xe G7, the GPU in Tigerlake It's a fantastic result but trusting GFXBench and applying that to actual gaming is misleading at best. Only thing in the low power segment mobile space that can come close to this is TigerLake U, but looks like this it's a bit faster in every single way, and lower power to boot.
Mac mini graphics card game Pc#
However, if the in-house SoC lives up to the hype, casual gaming could be a reality on the upcoming M1-powered devices.What kind of games are going to be able to run natively on this hardware? Angry Birds? It might be great at running ports of smartphone games, but something tells me that support for ports of PC and console games is going to get significantly worse on Macs than it already is, at least in the short-term. If they didn't even have a 1650 submission, a card that's now been on the market for 19 months, then it's a bit hard to take this benchmark seriously.
Mac mini graphics card game software#
Or what sort of hardware and software environment the 1050 Ti submission was operating in. Perhaps they can get these numbers in a synthetic benchmark like this when the CPU cores are sitting mostly idle, but what happens when those cores are active and fighting for the available 10 watts of TDP headroom? And we don't even know if these numbers were achieved at that TDP, or in some device working with higher TDP limits. These benchmarks don't necessarily tell the whole story. However, if the in-house SoC lives up to the hype, casual gaming could be a reality on the upcoming M1-powered devices. Nobody really buys an Apple device to game.
Mac mini graphics card game pro#
The M1 will debut in three new Apple products: the 13-inch MacBook Pro starting $1,299, the Macbook Air at $999, and the Mac Mini at $699. Admittedly, the two discrete gaming graphics cards are pretty old by today's standards, but that shouldn't overshadow the fact that M1's integrated graphics outperformed both 75W desktop graphics cards, but within a pretty tight TDP range of its own. The Radeon RX 560 didn't stand a chance, either. In a clear victory, the Apple M1 bested the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti by a good margin. Luckily, there is a submission for the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti, so the Pascal-powered graphics card will have to serve as the baseline for now. At the time of writing, no one has submitted a Metal run with the GeForce GTX 1650. The anonymous user tested the M1 under Apple's Metal API, making it hard to find apples-to-apples non-Apple comparisons.
0 kommentar(er)
