iMac/Mac Mini/Hackintosh for WoW Ultra Settings?

Hello all,

I recently bought a powerspec 358 from microcenter with a ultrawide monitor and I have to say it’s a major upgrade from my 2013 MacBook pro. No more 20 fps on a graphics setting of 2. However I have been going back and forth about the purchase. The computer has been great, but as a dedicated Mac user for 10+ years, it almost feels like I just dropped 2k just to play WoW and only play WoW. (I could have bought a new iMac for that same price) I use my Macbook for everything from light room to logic pro x to just general browsing, etc. I don’t love the windows operating experience outside of gaming tbh.

I’m wondering how the newer macs (27" iMac, Mac Mini, etc) handle WoW? I’m currently getting 100 fps, on 10/10 graphics settings on an 1440p monitor with this computer that I bought. Is that possible with a Mac? Either an iMac or a Mac mini with an eGPU?

I also discovered the concept of a “hackintosh” which sounds alluring. Is that more difficult compared to building a windows pc? Is there a downside to that?

If I could get a comparable gaming experience on a Mac without spending $10,000 than I would not hesitate to do that. I’ll admit that I’m an apple fan boy and I feel weird with the amount of money I just spent solely for WoW.

iMac seems to cap out at RX 560X or Vega 20, both of which are around GTX 1050 ti level, which the 5700xt is about 3-4x faster.
Mac Mini has integrated graphics, so that’s out completely.
Mac Pro can get Vega 64 which is still about 10-20% slower than the 5700 XT, but that itself is already prohibitively expensive being the pro model.

All have terrible thermally constricted intel chips that will throttle often.

Honestly you’d be better off getting a new Mac Mini for work and then just get a cheaper windows gaming PC (you can get away with around $800 for a decent gamer) and you’ll have the best of both worlds without as much of a compromise.

I don’t know about their entire product line up, but i know their 16" Macbook Pro comes with a 40 cu “rx 5600m” with 8gb of HBM2. It’s pretty impressive and should be able to game just fine. I still don’t know why they called it an rx 5600m when it has the same shader count as the rx 5700xt.

I think Sal’s advice is good advice. I personally won’t build/buy a PC just for gaming - work is more important to me. I got my Ryzen 5 3600/RTX 2070 with a 27" curved 1440p/144hz monitor for under $1000 from MicroCenter during their black friday sale last year. Great for work and more than adequate for WoW (the only game I play). That was my compromise.

Sal’s advice to scratch your Mac itch with a Mini and go for a cheaper gaming PC maybe indeed be the best of both worlds!

Last time I was on the MicroCenter site, I believe they had a couple of $650 gaming PCs and a bunch under $1000 (even better deals if you can wait until black friday sales) … also if you come up with a budget, someone here will probably post a build for you. :slight_smile:

prob power budget - the CU’s don’t matter if it gets power and thermal throttled

Doesn’t stop Nvidia from marketing rtx 2070 mobile as an rtx 2070. It felt kind of weird when I realized Apple was under selling their specs.

prob. with laptops is CPU and GPU share the power budget, and as a result, either one or both throttle

so no matter how it’s marketed, it’s just not as good :confused: :frowning_face:

The macOS version of WoW actually runs pretty well. Its Metal graphics engine is probably one of the best among Mac games out there, which means that typically performance compared to Windows is very similar on the same hardware.

I used to run a hackintosh running macOS Catalina with a 4Ghz i7 6700k CPU, 5700 XT Nitro+ GPU, 1TB Samsung 850 EVO SATA SSD, and 32GB of RAM. It handled WoW beautifully and pushed 2560x1440 @ 60 FPS at near-max settings with no issue whatsoever.

However, because my line of work (mobile development) needs a high powered Mac and developing iOS apps on a EULA-breaking hackintosh is sketchy, I ended up buying a discounted, refurbished base spec iMac Pro with a 3.2Ghz 8-core Xeon W, Vega 56 GPU, 1TB NVMe SSD, and 32GB RAM and repurposing the hackintosh as a Windows-only living room gaming box.

The iMac doesn’t handle WoW quite as well as the hackintosh tower did, but it still performs admirably, pushing 2560x1440 60Hhz just fine in most cases. Its screen is massively better than the monitor I was using before, with 500 nits brightness, P3 color, 1044:1 contrast ratio, and 5120x2880 resolution, so in some ways the game looks better on the iMac than it did on the hackintosh tower.

The latest 27" iMacs actually top out at a 16GB variant of the 5700XT, which is significantly more powerful than the 560X or Vega 20 and isn’t a slouch. It’ll handle 2560x1440 (50% render scale on its 5k screen) at max settings without breaking a sweat in most cases, and for less demanding play (leveling, world questing, etc) it’ll do 100% render scale (5120x2880) with a few settings turned down.

Thermal management is meh on regular iMacs, but it’s pretty respectable on the iMac Pro and Mac Pro. The iMac Pro gets warm, but in most situations won’t throttle even when pushing both the CPU and GPU. The Mac Pro’s cooling is quite good, with a tower cooler that’s on par with something like an NH-D15, which means it never throttles and has pretty good thermals.

The Mac mini is indeed a beast for what it is. I particularly like how it integrates its PSU into the machine itself so it doesn’t have a cumbersome wall wart like most NUCs and the like do. Just be aware that it uses a mobile CPU which will impact performance (27" iMacs and iMac Pros use socketed desktop Intel i-series and Xeons).

They need to update their product page

https://www.apple.com/imac/specs/

https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/imac/27-inch

shows 5500 XT (RX 580 level performance) …for $2300 is not really worth it. Better to buy the mini+ gaming PC

The 5700XT option is visible if you switch to the 27" tab. The 21.5" tab is selected by default, and its specs don’t go too high because it’s more like the machine you’d have your aunt buy than to get anything done.

Yeah the 5700XT is a custom order option, you have to configure it.

For gaming alone yeah it’s not worth it, but if you can use the graphical muscle for your work it’s not too bad.

if the 5500xt is $2300, how much is the 5700 XT option?

jesus h christ, lol

i suppose the cost is in the custom memory. you’d have to need it for work purposes or else $2800 is ridic

OP though, this falls under $10,000. So go for it!

i suppose if you think the display is worth it

Yeah. I really really wish the displays on these things were more generally available so you could buy them for self built rigs, the only standalone monitor that uses this panel currently is an LG model that costs $1300 with bad build quality and QC. All the monitors currently out there are shooter junky high FPS stuff.

1 Like

The gaming computer + Mac mini could work although I already have a MacBook that suits me well. I could use my monitor with my laptop for general use.

It sounds like the upgraded iMac with the +$500 graphics card could do okay with WoW (I would hope so) although it may have issues with heat management? What does that look like in terms of performance at 1440p? Like at ultra graphics what kind of fps would I be looking at for cities/raids/etc?

Is there a downside to a hackintosh? It seems like the best of both worlds to me. I could build a high powered computer and run windows for gaming, while using mac OS for everything else.

Why are the memory speeds so slow on the imac? I know they have faster sodimm kits

i priced one out with the features i’d choose and it’s $4,000

I can’t give you exact numbers on thermals for the newest iMac revision, only general guidance based on my own experience. There should be a few sites online that have that info if you go digging, though — just make sure you’re looking at the newest revision with the config you’re interested in, as supposedly cooling is a bit better for this generation compared to the last.

The main downsides to hackintoshing are:

  1. Component compatibility
  2. Initial setup
  3. Maintenance and updates

For the first, most Intel CPUs + motherboards work fine. AMD CPUs + mobos technically work, but with a big asterisk… because real Macs are Intel only, you have to trick macOS into thinking it’s running on a circa-2011 Intel CPU for it to work, but this causes some things to break because the CPU is missing features that the OS/apps are expecting to be there (for example Docker and VMWare, which need VT-d).

Nvidia cards don’t work under macOS at all unless you’re willing to use an old version of macOS, because Apple wants access to driver source code so it can apply its own optimizations to GPU drivers, but Nvidia is incredibly secretive and wants total control. So if your tower has an Nvidia GPU, you’ll need to swap that out for an equivalent AMD card, unless you’re OK with not having much graphics horsepower under macOS, in which case you can switch the Nvidia card off and use integrated graphics when booted into macOS.

Wifi compatibility can also be a challenge. By default, macOS supports the Atheros and Broadcom chips that Apple ships in real Macs, but not the Intel wifi that a lot of motherboards come with. The community is developing its own Intel wifi drivers, but they’re still very much beta quality.

Initial setup varies depending on your hardware. There’s a general process that works most of the time, but each system has its own unique quirks that you’ll have to fix or work around. It can range from being as easy as installing Linux (pretty easy) all the way to quite involved.

Maintenance/updates can be a challenge, once again depending on your hardware. Generally the easier the machine was to get up and running with macOS, the more pain-free updates will be. The more third party drivers, etc you need to use, the more likely it is that something will break when you update. Because of this, it’s standard practice to snapshot the system before updating so you can roll back if something breaks.

All that aside, they’re quite stable and are as good or better than a real Mac. It’s definitely more suited for someone with a tinkerer’s mindset, though… not at all your set it and forget it experience of a real Mac or Windows.

The benefits of higher RAM speeds aren’t particularly visible for most tasks people buy iMacs for, even on the high end. Even the Mac Pro, which is a true workstation machine (top end config uses a 28 core 64 thread Xeon), tops out at 2933Mhz RAM. Intel CPUs also aren’t all that sensitive to RAM speeds (contrasted to Ryzen, where it’s critical).

Thankfully, RAM is user upgradable in the 27" iMac and Mac Pro, so there’s no reason you have to buy your RAM from Apple. It’s pretty standard practice to configure the minimum and upgrade it with your own aftermarket RAM.

I’ve nothing against the OS/platform, but I just can’t get behind how proprietary everything generally is and the premiums you pay for that.

I’ll likely never be a Mac user despite preferring their phones over android.

1 Like

That’s totally legit. For me it’s worth it because Windows drives me up a wall, and any attempt at using desktop Linux gets me caught in a black hole of tweaking.

Apple is able to do some interesting things from not having to follow standards to the letter though, and I’d like to see more of it in regular PC part vendors. For example the Mac Pro has an extended PCI-E slot that delivers up to 300W extra power through the slot, no cables needed, and still works with standard PCI-E cards. It also has a card locking system that miles better than the infernal plastic tabs on standard PCI-E slots.

All that kind of thing has stagnated entirely among standard part vendors. “Don’t fix what isn’t broken” sure, but at some point things need to move forward.

1 Like