Windows gamer considering a macbook pro

[Deleted]

Also like convenience and the quality.

Yeah its a couple hundred quid more than better specced windows notebook, but feels a lot more solid.

For serious gaming mbp is rubbish but for world quests and even dungeons its surprisingly good.

Screen is really nice, touch pad is a joy to use.

[Vash The Stampede]

Also like convenience and the quality.

Yeah its a couple hundred quid more than better specced windows notebook, but feels a lot more solid.

For serious gaming mbp is rubbish but for world quests and even dungeons its surprisingly good.

Screen is really nice, touch pad is a joy to use.

Quality wouldn't be the first thing that comes to mind about Macs. I've repaired a number of them, and junk is what I've seen. Just recently a friend came to me with a Macbook Pro that won't turn on. The fan spins a little and just stops, and this repeats until I unplug the charger wire. This could mean the MacBook has a bad charging circuit. Normally I just swap out the motherboard in most laptops and call it a day, but this isn't a cheap logic board. I've replaced SMD components on boards before but it isn't a fun thing to do.

There are Macbooks with issues from Nvidia GPU's that lose connection from cheap solder as well. These are problems I expect from HP or some other junk laptop maker, but not Apple. Except Apple laptops do have these problems, and then some.

[Slicer299]

Reasons a gamer show get a MBP = None

The only reason to ever get a Mac is because you need to use a Mac specific program for some professional purpose. Even then, pretty much every such program has a Windows equivalent that is equal or better. The "professional" excuse simply doesn't hold much weight these days with GPU rendering/processing/etc beating out CPU bound programs the majority of the time. Even then, many CPU bound professional programs will benefit more from fewer, but faster, cores. Something PC excels at at and for a lower price point.

As others have stated, a new Razer Blade would be a much better choice. It can handle professional, gaming and other recreational tasks better than any Macbook could ever dream of. So unless there is some Mac specific program you have to use no matter what, don't waste your money on a MBP. There are also several other options out there if you don't want to go with Razer, like a XPS 13.

[Kagthul]

Reasons a gamer show get a MBP = None

For gaming, yes. Dont buy a Mac if that is your primary use of the computer.

The only reason to ever get a Mac is because you need to use a Mac specific program for some professional purpose. Even then, pretty much every such program has a Windows equivalent that is equal or better.

Uhh.. no. There are a lot of professional content creation apps where the Windows alternatives are absolute drek. If you ever had to use any of them, you'd know that.

The "professional" excuse simply doesn't hold much weight these days with GPU rendering/processing/etc beating out CPU bound programs the majority of the time.

The kind of people that use a MBP "professionally" on the go aren't using pro apps that use the GPU. Those professionals are using workstations. (And a lot of times, not even MacPros anymore, but Unix-based workstations).

Even then, many CPU bound professional programs will benefit more from fewer, but faster, cores. Something PC excels at at and for a lower price point.

Seeing as Apple uses the exact same CPUs as PC manufacturers, your basis for this piece of nonsense is.... ?

As others have stated, a new Razer Blade would be a much better choice.

If you intend to seriously game on it, i agree.

It can handle professional,

No.

gaming

Yes. That GTX 1060 is a major bonus.

and other recreational tasks better than any Macbook could ever dream of.

No. "About as well as". The Core i7 equipped MBP actually has a slightly better CPU (3.3 Base, 3.7 Turbo, vs 2.6/3.5 edit - this is wrong; i was looking at the 13" MBP accidentally, and that is a dual-core chip. The base chip in the quad-core MBP is the exact same CPU - 6700HQ).

So unless there is some Mac specific program you have to use no matter what, don't waste your money on a MBP. There are also several other options out there if you don't want to go with Razer, like a XPS 13.

The problem with comparisons like this is that you're not comparing a spec-equivalent PC to a Mac. You're comparing 3 specs and ignoring the rest. (Relating to the XPS 13; the Blade is a much better comparison).

The XPS 13 is a fugly brick and is lacking a lot of features of the MBP; a lot of professionals on the go want those features. There's a reason Apple, while having only ~13-15% of the non-server computer market world-wide, has about 35-40% of the laptop market.

If you want to buy a PC laptop that has the same features as a MBP, you end up spending nearly as much as the MBP. (The Blade, for instance, is spec'ed similarly and costs just a few hundred less at best).

Now, we'll all agree that if your primary use of your computer is gaming - dont buy a Mac. As a Mac owner, ill 100% agree with th at. I dont game on my MBP unless im on the road, and then its usually old-school stuff/emulators and low-end games... Maybe WoW to do my Emissary quests on low settings.

But if you need a high-end pro laptop that isn't a massive plastic brick, its hard to beat a MBP without spending nearly as much (which you CAN find, mind you. Lenovo, HP, ASUS, and Razer all have good, high-end pro laptops with feature-parity with the MBP - and all of them are around the same PRICE as a MBP, too).

[Shahad]

The XPS 13 is a fugly brick and is lacking a lot of features of the MBP; a lot of professionals on the go want those features.

Wat. I can understand the XPS 13/15 isn't made with an aluminum unibody, but fugly? Really? Feature-wise it's pretty comparable if you check the 15 (which is in the same category as the MBP, while the 13 competes more with the Air).

If you want to buy a PC laptop that has the same features as a MBP, you end up spending nearly as much as the MBP. (The Blade, for instance, is spec'ed similarly and costs just a few hundred less at best).

What features are you talking about, exactly? Because specs-wise it is much cheaper to go with a PC. Or a 2015 MBP for that matter. Also, the Blade is not specced similarly, it has a 1060 inside. And it is also overpriced as far as 1060-equipped laptops go, so that makes the MBP look even worse.

But if you need a high-end pro laptop that isn't a massive plastic brick, its hard to beat a MBP without spending nearly as much (which you CAN find, mind you. Lenovo, HP, ASUS, and Razer all have good, high-end pro laptops with feature-parity with the MBP - and all of them are around the same PRICE as a MBP, too).

I have to ask how you define a high-end laptop. If we're talking performance (not even gaming performance), a lot things will outperform a MBP for less money.

[Gilgemesh]

You'll get more bang for your buck from a windows machine. For me, at least, that sells the product.

[Kagthul]

To start, ill state that the brand-new MBP is..... i dunno what Apple is thinking. The prices went up for basically no reason.

Wat. I can understand the XPS 13/15 isn't made with an aluminum unibody, but fugly? Really? Feature-wise it's pretty comparable if you check the 15 (which is in the same category as the MBP, while the 13 competes more with the Air).

Personal taste, i guess, but i think that XPS looks like shit. I dont really have a hard-on for the aluminum unibody, either, but that XPS looks cheap as hell. Feels that way, too. (ive handled them at Best Buy).

What features are you talking about, exactly? Because specs-wise it is much cheaper to go with a PC.

Because you're focusing on two or three specs and ignoring a lot of the things people actually make decisions around. CPU/Speed and GPU are not the only factors or specifications. Though, as you point out, the 2015 MBP is a better comparison because im not sure where the hell Apple is going with this new line (though i will say, the Touch Bar, if developed further/better, is a whole fuckload better than a fucking touchscreen on a laptop, which are about as user-unfriendly as its possible to be. (Convertibles like the Surface Book, i get it, but on a plain-old laptop? You want me to pick up my arm, hang it in mid-air, and touch the screen? Thats about the worst possible UX design i can think of).

Or a 2015 MBP for that matter.

This is basically correct. The new MBP is.... weird. If the prices were in line with the 2015 lineup, i wouldnt say that, but with the inexplicable ~350$ price jump, yeah. Dunno where Apple's going on that one. Same place they took the Mini (formerly a pretty damn good non-gaming computer, if you bought the (oddly affordable) "server" versions that had full-up i7s in them), i guess.

Also, the Blade is not specced similarly, it has a 1060 inside. And it is also overpriced as far as 1060-equipped laptops go, so that makes the MBP look even worse.

Can i get a 1 1/2" plastic brick of a "gaming laptop" with a 1060 in it for less than a Blade? Sure. Its also an ugly, heavy plastic brick. You apparently dont grasp how much people will pay not to have a giant plastic brick. The MacBook Air took off l ike it did (it eclipsed the MBP by 2-3x even among Pro users for a few years) precisely BECAUSE people who are on the road a lot want the lightest, most compact laptop that will still do what they need. Theyll pay a LOT for that convenience.

I have to ask how you define a high-end laptop. If we're talking performance (not even gaming performance), a lot things will outperform a MBP for less money.

High quality, durable build, with an industry-leading warranty. Excellent, forward-looking/high end ports (though the new MBP suffers from Adapter Syndrome here, the 2015 did not), high-quality, energy efficient screen; unique force touch trackpad, etc.

There are a lot of specs and features that the MBP has (even the 2016 model) that the competition simply does not, or does not have until you get into MBP-like price ranges (or at least, formerly MBP price ranges, ~2k).

I work in IT (freelance); My wife works in IT for hospitals. Despite the environment being almost entirely Windows (because most EMR software runs only on Windows or Unix), almost everyone in her department (about ~200 people) uses a MBP or MBA. They virtualize Windows or dual boot, because they dont want to carry around big, thick, unwieldy machines all day. The guys that dont use Macs... use similarly equipped or high end Windows machines by Lenovo - or a few who use Surface or Surface Books.

I freelance often for the Doctors offices she supports on the hardware end. All of the Doctors use MBPs or MBAs. All of the PAs and Nurse Practitioners in the offices use Macs or Surface tablets. Only the nurses aides, MAs, and young low-on-the-totem-pole Nurses are carrying windows machines (because thats all the Doctor will supply; those PAs and NPs are buying their own machines, just like the Doctors).

I freelance for my Aunt, as well, who runs her own accounting firm, and sits on the Board of two local banks, a credit union, and a few local mid-size corporations in Detroit. Through her, i've picked up freelance work for many of the people she knows at these companies. Theyre all carrying MBPs, MBAs, or other ultralight, expensive laptops from companies like Lenovo, HP, Dell (has a few ultraportable convertibles i see), and yes, even Razer. The Blade Stealth is actually picking up steam.

I also do a lot of work (not for, but more 'with') pro photographers because i work a lot of geek/sci-fi/fantasy/genre conventions. Almost all of them are using similarly ultraportable machines (most use Mac just because of the software; Aperature is still far better than the alternatives).

So yeah, can i get a laptop with a Core i7 HQ, GTX 1070, and lots of features cheaper than a MBP?

Yes, of course. Significantly so in some cases.

Can i get all of that packed into a similarly well constructed, lightweight form-factor with similar features, for a lot cheaper?

No. Even WITH the recent ~400$ price hike with the debut of the 2016 models, a true MBP competitor (not just in CPU and GPU, but in all areas) is still going to run you ~1800-2200. Cheaper than the Mac? Sure. But not massively so, and for a lot of people, the better customer service, warranty, OS, and versatility are worth the few extra bucks. Particularly when they are working professionals who can write off the cost (and, a lot of times, get it paid for by their employer).

Edit: I will say, though, that Microsoft is doing some pretty great things with the Surface Book and Surface Pro. Those things are extremely well built and powerful for their size and weight, and if they can keep undercutting Apple the way they are, theyll have a big hit on their hands. I REALLY wish Apple made a pro tablet more like the Surface Pro. The kickstand alone is nearly worth it.

[Sorshen]

Surface Book i7 models are $400 cheaper for the holidays, just saying.

[Slicer299]

Snipped

Oh FFS...you're one of those people who can't just quote someone and reply. You have to break it up every other word.

Anyways. I stated the word "gamer" in my first sentence, you replying with a comment on gaming is unnecessary and borderline trollish. I clearly noted the caveat that I was making that statement strictly about gaming. You continue to argue points for the sake of argument with my post about platform specific professional programs. I, again, clearly noted what I was talking about and the exceptions. Unless you need a program that you can only get/use on Mac, there is no reason to get a Mac. Because, and this is a fact that can not be disputed, hence being a fact, that nearly, not all, not every, but nearly every professional editing or content creation program that exists on Mac has an equivalent available on PC that is nearly as good, as good or better.

You then actually make my point for me by trying to argue about rendering programs that use the GPU. Those programs would be the very programs I was talking about that exist on Windows that do an as good or even better job than programs strictly for Mac. Yes, people who rely mainly only those programs will use a Workstation, and no not Linux ones in most cases as you falsely claim, but a Razer Blade is actually capable of using those programs effectively, while a Macbook is not. A single 1080, and you can get a Razer Blade with a 1080, can make excellent use of those programs.

You continue making false statements by claiming the MBP uses the same CPU as the laptops mentioned. Top of the line MBP uses a dual core m5 with a 1.2GHz (2.7GHz boost) CPU. Top of the line Razer Blade Pro 2016 uses an i7 6700HQ with a 2.2GHz (3.5GHz boost) clock speed. Which directly supports what I said, that many/most CPU bound professional rendering or editing programs benefit from faster CPU cores. For the few that benefit from more cores, the Razer Blade has more of those too.

You then go on to try and argue that a Razer is only better for gaming, when its literally better than a MBP for absolutely everything except the use of Mac specific programs, like I already stated. You also continue to ignore that the OP makes a point of saying they are a gamer, it's the second word in the OP title. That would indicate that gaming really does matter in this situation.

Ball is in your court, nothing you have said is true. You say a Razer Blade can't do professional work, prove it. Name what it can't do, I won't hold my breath because I know it can and you won't be able to actually be able to show an example of something it can't do. Not being able to use a Mac specific program, again, doesn't count, since anything a Mac program can do, there exists a Windows program that can do it. Not always 100% as good, but the fact that the OP hasn't owned a Mac up to this point tells me he's not using any of those programs anyways.

[Aleksej89]

I would first ask you to rethink WHY you want a macbook?
It is generally much more expensive while providing significantly less performance and compatibility with windows games/programs.

If you have some professional reason to NEED a macbook, due to some specific software that is MAC only, then you should know your gaming is going to be significantly hindered.
Most game companies do not make their games compatible with MAC and those that supposedly do only follow some bare-bone minimum requirements while the gameplay/performance itself is garbage.

Some companies like (i think) Valve do put some extra effort in so their games can be played on MAC but even that is noticeably worse than its windows counterpart.
If you MUST have a macbook because of your job then you got no choice either way, but if you do not need a macbook then i highly recommend against buying it.

[Arbiter]

Oh FFS...you're one of those people who can't just quote someone and reply. You have to break it up every other word.

One of "those" people? You mean one of "those" people that format responses neatly so that the reader can easily see what exactly he is replying to rather than a big wall of text to get lost in? I guess nothing is better than reading a huge wall of text only to not know what he's even referring to and then having to waste time asking for a confirmation or even worse responding back only to realize you misunderstood what he was even talking about because you thought he was referring to something else.

I don't completely agree with his last few responses in this thread, but there's nothing wrong with him formatting in that manner. It's more time consuming for him to do so while making it easier on others.

[Deleted]

Surface Book i7 models are $400 cheaper for the holidays, just saying.

I ruled out the surface pro. The gap between screen and keyboard near the hinge makes it seem prone to breaking in my laptop bag. It seemed a nice peice of kit otherwise.

Im pretty surprised at how well the mbp runs wow.

- - - Updated - - -

I would first ask you to rethink WHY you want a macbook?
It is generally much more expensive while providing significantly less performance and compatibility with windows games/programs.

If you have some professional reason to NEED a macbook, due to some specific software that is MAC only, then you should know your gaming is going to be significantly hindered.
Most game companies do not make their games compatible with MAC and those that supposedly do only follow some bare-bone minimum requirements while the gameplay/performance itself is garbage.

Some companies like (i think) Valve do put some extra effort in so their games can be played on MAC but even that is noticeably worse than its windows counterpart.
If you MUST have a macbook because of your job then you got no choice either way, but if you do not need a macbook then i highly recommend against buying it.

Most of the games on my steam library are compatible. Probably run like crap though.

[Frood]

Hi, haven't read through the entire thread but just wanted to point this out. I use the 2015 model running Sierra. A lot of Mac users have been experiencing very low frame rates after the Legion patch (I played at 70-90 FPS during WoD, on a retina screen mind you). This has been somewhat fixed, but particular things still cause the frame rate to drop dramatically. These things include fog effects (making Emerald Nightmare or some areas of Val'sharah difficult to play), the hunter artifact ability Windburst (can drop from 60 to 10 fps instantly), transmogrification window, amongst other things. You can find lots of threads about it on the Mac technical forums.

It has been established that this is an oversight on Blizzard's side, but they are yet to address the issue. I hope they will fix it eventually. Just so you are aware!

[Deleted]

Thanks for the info velios, very nice of you (and all other contributors on ths thread).

I have a new desktop for proper gaming, im not intending to raid on my mbp during commutes on the train

Worst thing is/was making a new keybind system that works on both platforms. Time to bin my PC's knackered old merc stealth keyboard i guess

[Vash The Stampede]

Someone needs to lock this thread before this continues. He got the MacBook, end of story.

[Shahad]

Personal taste, i guess, but i think that XPS looks like shit. I dont really have a hard-on for the aluminum unibody, either, but that XPS looks cheap as hell. Feels that way, too. (ive handled them at Best Buy).

Agree to disagree there, I guess :/ I think it's quite lovely.

Can i get a 1 1/2" plastic brick of a "gaming laptop" with a 1060 in it for less than a Blade? Sure. Its also an ugly, heavy plastic brick. You apparently dont grasp how much people will pay not to have a giant plastic brick. The MacBook Air took off l ike it did (it eclipsed the MBP by 2-3x even among Pro users for a few years) precisely BECAUSE people who are on the road a lot want the lightest, most compact laptop that will still do what they need. Theyll pay a LOT for that convenience.

The Alienware 13 is a whopping 0.16 inches thicker than the MBP 2015. The MSI GS63VR is about the same. The Clevo P650RP6 (the least premium of the bunch) is about 0.3 inches thicker. They all have some amount of plastic on them (it's a good material) but overall metal constructions. I wouldn't call any of them particularly ugly, the Alienwares are actually quite striking, I find. They're all significantly cheaper than a Blade or MBP, and user-upgradeable. Plus, the tradeoff with the Blade is that you either thermal/power throttle the components, or have it be as loud as a jet engine because that form factor can't really deal with the heat effectively. I know some Macbooks have had that same issue too due to the fanless design.

High quality, durable build, with an industry-leading warranty. Excellent, forward-looking/high end ports (though the new MBP suffers from Adapter Syndrome here, the 2015 did not), high-quality, energy efficient screen; unique force touch trackpad, etc.

There are a lot of specs and features that the MBP has (even the 2016 model) that the competition simply does not, or does not have until you get into MBP-like price ranges (or at least, formerly MBP price ranges, ~2k).

I work in IT (freelance); My wife works in IT for hospitals. Despite the environment being almost entirely Windows (because most EMR software runs only on Windows or Unix), almost everyone in her department (about ~200 people) uses a MBP or MBA. They virtualize Windows or dual boot, because they dont want to carry around big, thick, unwieldy machines all day. The guys that dont use Macs... use similarly equipped or high end Windows machines by Lenovo - or a few who use Surface or Surface Books.

I freelance often for the Doctors offices she supports on the hardware end. All of the Doctors use MBPs or MBAs. All of the PAs and Nurse Practitioners in the offices use Macs or Surface tablets. Only the nurses aides, MAs, and young low-on-the-totem-pole Nurses are carrying windows machines (because thats all the Doctor will supply; those PAs and NPs are buying their own machines, just like the Doctors).

I freelance for my Aunt, as well, who runs her own accounting firm, and sits on the Board of two local banks, a credit union, and a few local mid-size corporations in Detroit. Through her, i've picked up freelance work for many of the people she knows at these companies. Theyre all carrying MBPs, MBAs, or other ultralight, expensive laptops from companies like Lenovo, HP, Dell (has a few ultraportable convertibles i see), and yes, even Razer. The Blade Stealth is actually picking up steam.

I also do a lot of work (not for, but more 'with') pro photographers because i work a lot of geek/sci-fi/fantasy/genre conventions. Almost all of them are using similarly ultraportable machines (most use Mac just because of the software; Aperature is still far better than the alternatives).

So yeah, can i get a laptop with a Core i7 HQ, GTX 1070, and lots of features cheaper than a MBP?

Yes, of course. Significantly so in some cases.

Can i get all of that packed into a similarly well constructed, lightweight form-factor with similar features, for a lot cheaper?

No. Even WITH the recent ~400$ price hike with the debut of the 2016 models, a true MBP competitor (not just in CPU and GPU, but in all areas) is still going to run you ~1800-2200. Cheaper than the Mac? Sure. But not massively so, and for a lot of people, the better customer service, warranty, OS, and versatility are worth the few extra bucks. Particularly when they are working professionals who can write off the cost (and, a lot of times, get it paid for by their employer).

Edit: I will say, though, that Microsoft is doing some pretty great things with the Surface Book and Surface Pro. Those things are extremely well built and powerful for their size and weight, and if they can keep undercutting Apple the way they are, theyll have a big hit on their hands. I REALLY wish Apple made a pro tablet more like the Surface Pro. The kickstand alone is nearly worth it.

Sounds to me like you're just describing the ultrabook market tbh. Thin, light, well-constructed, long battery life, etc. Which, I get it, there's a market for. And, yeah, in that case the price difference between a MBP 13 and something comparable like an XPS 13 isn't that high.

But if I look at high-end actual laptops, comparing something like the XPS 15 to the new 15" MBP, it's like an 800$ (CAD, I'm a dirty canuck) difference right now. Probably more, since Dell always has deals and coupons going on. Even before the hike, it's a 300-400+$ difference with the 2015 models. I'd have a hard time justifying that, personally, if I didn't absolutely need MacOS, or if I was going to run Windows often, since Windows on Macs can be a bit iffy.

Of course, if I put any sort of focus on computing performance, neither the MBP or the XPS 15 cut it, and that's where stuff like the AW, MSI, Clevo etc come in. It's actually physically impossible to safely cram the kind of performance hardware I'm thinking of in a MBP-style chassis. Razer's trying and not succeeding very well. The best compromise I've seen yet between size and performance is the AW 13 (2L, vs the Blade's 1.5L), though it isn't the lightest machine out there (built like a damn tank though).

[Mythbredor]

The OP has already bought his laptop, gonna go ahead and close this.