What is Digg?Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate
Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.181 Comments
- dongiaconia, on 10/12/2007, -6/+39Hmm, try running windows for 3 months, then test it again.
- noseeme, on 10/12/2007, -3/+33OpenGL sucks?
No, it doesn't. :|
WoW's original codebase is DirectX, so the version that runs on OpenGL is slower essentially because it is a port. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+29Actually the more funamental issue is that WoW was written for windows, and the OSX version is a port... It's inevitably slower - it will have had far, far less development time.
- Koopa, on 10/12/2007, -5/+33Wow, talk about a misleading title--this reveals that WOW runs slower on OSX than windows, not that OSX is slower than Windows.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+28I wouldn't say "ignore it" but I'd say "take it with a grain of salt." This is ONE game. That's not an accurate benchmark by any means. Would you buy a graphics card based solely on its numbers for a single resolution in Doom 3?
I think you've got to have a much more holistic approach if you're going to make blanket statements like Windows is faster than OSX. No Digg - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22Exactly. Comparing a DirectX implementation to an OpenGL implementation doesn't gauge OS performance. That's not to say OpenGL is slower than DirectX. The developer's may have choosen an older more generic code path, omitting newish OpenGL additions such as vertex buffer objects and glsl for per pixel lighting.
- vikvaughn, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18this is a pointless test. VIDEO DRIVERS also have a lot to do with performance.
we run UT2004 as a benchmark in our tests at work with linux and windows. the windows UT consistently outperforms the linux version. does that mean windows is faster than linux? NO.
no digg. - Graun, on 10/12/2007, -10/+24What a fine piece of "journalism". (Help.) Seriously, don't they have more important issues to report on?
As for gaming performance: DirectX/Direct3D is made for gaming, and basically gaming alone. OpenGL (on both XP and OSX) kind of sucks, but we know that, don't we. ;)
Try to run WoW on OpenGL under XP and tell me how it stacks up against WoW on Direct3D under XP. That'd be a better comparison.
That being said: I, too, would be happier if WoW would show XP-like performance on OSX. - cblalock, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14@ Farkle
They meant a Mac version of photoshop that didn't have to run through rosetta. A mac version that was native on intel to stack up against the windows version that, as you so cleverly and astutely pointed out, has been native on intel for many, many years.
Do us all a favor and try to follow along ok? - rbarris, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Hi - I work on the Mac WoW client.
It uses VBO, pbuffer, ARB vertex and pixel shaders, all the same stuff we use on PC GL mode. It runs native on Intel processor Macs as of v1.9.3 which shipped in Feb.
There are some specific hot-spots in API and driver that we are working on with Apple, to tighten up the performance gap that some users have seen. Interestingly there is a good chance that these changes will yield benefit on PowerPC machines too. So, we hope to revisit these benchmarks soon and with better results. - rosebot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Yes, because once you boot into XP, it overclocks your card for you. =/
- ahsteele, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Uh, this test is so inherently flawed I don't know how you can say that. For God's sake man I am a loyal PC user, but knock it off with the religious persecution.
- blakespot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Using a game running under OpenGL on one system (OS X) and Direct3D (Win) on another is most definitely not a route to determining which OS is faster. I can't tell if this digg is so "lame" as to be "inaccurate." Oy.
- KissTheRing, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10H.264 and Xvid encoding has been faster in OS X for me
- hexix, on 10/12/2007, -20/+28so since we already know that games are faster in windows, it's not a fair benchmark? Lay off the apple kool aid a little bit.
I'd like to know more about this if it's true. It could just be the mac port of WoW isn't as polished as the windows port. Or it could be a fundamental problem with 3D games on mac. Maybe the fact that the 3D hardware is being used for the GUI makes them have to do some weird stuff to get 3D games to work. (obviously I have no technical knowledge in this area)
Could be a lot of things. Hopefully we hear more about this and get more details. Of course we could just totally ignore it as jer2eydevil88 suggests and have crappy game performance forever. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Apple has embarassingly bad OpenGL drivers for games.
Always have, always will. The only area Apple's GL drivers don't suck is in texture downloading since they need that optimized for their desktop acceleration.
If you played a Mac game over the past five years that was slower than on Windows, it was due to Apple unwillingness to put in the effort to make competitive drivers. - lukas88, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8You have a point, but twice as fast is a pretty big difference.
It would be nice to see the benchmark done on a non-gaming application though, just to find out. - Xopl, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10you put the "oh SNAP" in the "Snap, Crackle, Pop"
- Hellion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Yo Skin, just a heads-up; in the very next web post, Gabe talks about the underclocking, saying that it's something he hasn't tried yet. I'm inclined to think that it's the fact that he's running WoW in Windows, and DirectX 9 that are giving him this vast improvement.
I have to say though, the title of this article is really horrible. I'm running OSX on my MacBook Pro right now, and I also have Windows installed. While I'll definitely use Windows for gaming, OSX seems a lot slicker when it comes to multitasking and doing day-today computing. - kyriakos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7ok lets go back to command line that was faster too
- jer2eydevil88, on 10/12/2007, -24/+31Most people already know that games are faster on Windows...
Wait for Photoshop to be native on Intel before you can really see a fair benchmark. - Redofrac, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7We're talking about two different rendering engines: directx on windows, and opengl on OSX.
Given relative player bases, it seems rather obvious that they would work more on optimizing WoW under directx.
Really, this doesn't say a thing about the relative operating systems. - sulestis, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8The story itself isn't inaccurate, I totally believe Gabe's testing. But the title of the story is inaccurate. This really doesn't say that OS X is slower. It says one thing, World of Warcraft runs better in windows...that is all. Big ***** surprise.
- alex.bw, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8This is a little ridiculous, the game is optimized differently for the different systems. Windows has DirectX, Mac OS does not. You might interpret this as meaning that OS X is worse for gaming (which it kind of is), but extrapolating that into saying that OS X is slower than windows on the whole... a little much.
Besides, this is based on impressions, not lab testing! It's a guy saying, "Hey, look at this."
The entire article is based on a casual observation by Penny Arcade! Come on! - milkfilk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6If they would just use the -opengl switch on Windows WoW, then you'd see both running the same graphics API. Launch WoW like this (with a shortcut)
Right click on WoW shortcut, select properties
Change Target to:
"c:world of warcraftwow.exe -opengl"
Mind the quotes. You need them. Hit OK. Launch WoW in Windows and level the playing field. - joeyjojo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6The quality of tech reporting these days is just a tad lower than the quality of political reporting.
- alobos, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7This is stupid. I bet (story doesn't tell, already flamed the author) WoW is running under rosetta.. Same crap as when someone told Photoshop was faster on windows than in rosetta.. DUH!
- Xopl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5That would be the problem with the title of this post. Because it implies that. However, the Penny Arcade post refers to ONE GAME. Just one.
- systemtrash, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5keviarian is right, let's get a beer (or soda) and call it a day. This bulge of comments on this article is a waste of time .
- aeiou, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5no- if you are going to say that one operating system is faster than the other, you have to eliminate all variables execpt for one. That means the same hardware and the same software execpt for the os. neither directx or opengl are part of the os, so you need to run both on the same one for it to be called fair. This is called the scientific meathod.
- CalgaryTechGuy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6 @elnerdo - "Mac lost"
I couldn't agree with you more...for World of Warcraft.
The thing I take issue with is the title of this digg "Boot Camp Reveals That OSX Is Slower Than Windows". I guess Tysonhy forgot to put "for WOW". - craigtheguru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Actually, the ATI card's over/underclocking is a software thing. You can overclock your card using ATIccelerator II:
http://mapage.noos.fr/campahunta/index.html - milkfilk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Can someone please comment on OSX's default behavior of double buffering everything that is full screen? I agree that Windows is quick for gaming. But OSX might do some things smarter. For example, everything in OSX goes through some smarter layers (Quartz and core image), like it's OpenGL on OpenGL not a 3d window on the Windows shell. I think this is why when you hit the plus sign in Mac WoW, it scales quickly without recreating the window (user wait). On Windows WoW, you have to go into Video Settings->resolution and it blips out, blips back in when it recreates the windows.
I could be wrong though, the windows client might allow resize by dragging. Can anyone test?
Also, please comment on OSX default fullscreen double buffering if you know about that. - jeruvin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The article should read "Boot Camp reveals that World of Warcraft runs slower in OSX than Windows XP"
I use OSX and WindowsXP during my daily computing. One application does not answer the question that will never be answered "Which is the better operating system?"
If I was a WOW player, this would be something useful for me to know. - Stegg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I've been running WoW in OS X exclusively on my intel mac and I get about 20 fps on average, but I had no idea that was "barely playable" (I'm just getting back into games and apparently standards have been raised). I also think this is a port issue. DirectX is also better than openGL from what I hear.
However, the nice thing about running WoW in OS X is the ability to flip from windowed to fullscreen mode almost instantaneously, and then while in windowed mode use expose to spread windows out INCLUDING WoW, with no slowdown which is impressive to say the least.
Watch for future updates to the Universal WoW to speed things up a bit. - websitepro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'm not a Mac owner, I'm a technician. I don't play favorites.
The title of the Digg is inaccurate and does a disservice to the
non-technical computer user.
Of course, the author knows this and is hoping that enough
people will see it and believe it.
Unfortunately, he has probably already accomplished his
objective.
Anyone who says there won't be native mode drivers for
games on the MAC is also misrepresenting the facts.
It's one of the hottest development opportunities available
in software.
The native mode drivers will make games run smoother
and drastically faster. It's a technical fact. - cowjuice13, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5And the OSX86 is a port of that...so essentially it is a terrible frankenstien piece of software.
- milkfilk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Eh, the eye candy is in the OS shell. Unless you are maximizing OSX windows in the background (or if spotlight, dashboard are cranking) then a game should run the same. However, WoW is OpenGL on OSX whereas the default in Windows is DX. You can force the Windows client to run as opengl with the -opengl switch.
Someone should do that -opengl switch right away as a better test of the Windows WoW client. The -opengl switch on Windows is a majorly performance hit. - bebop717, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7When the article starts off by saying "According to Penny Arcade" you should stop reading.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Sweet Jesus, I don't use a Mac but that comparison is so far beyond useless. And beyond that, articles like this point out what I think is a problem with Digg-- unnecessary article teases. The article in this one is simply a summary of another, and could have been rewritten in two or three sentences. There's just no reason to write the blurb as a teaser when the entire article's information content could be right there, unless the goal is to drive traffic to where the article is.
- CornStarch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3One question, why not just link penny arcade?
- deadbaby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Why test OpenGL (OSX) vs. Direct3D (Win) when you can just run WoW.exe -opengl and test OpenGL vs. OpenGL? I suspect this benchmark is highlighting the fact that WoW's OGL render sucks.
- codyph55, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5this is ***** report as inaccurate, directX to openGL is slower becuse it is a port, it has nothing to do woth the OS title missleads
- aeiou, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3That would be more accurate, but its still not a completely accurate/fair comparison
- mooninite, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Why are people downvoting this guy? They think he's lying?
The point is, the WoW OpenGL renderer is hardly the problem. The video card driver is the problem.
ATI's OpenGL implementation is notoriously slow (3 times slower on Linux). Was the laptop in question using an ATI chip? I know nVidia's drivers are almost up to par with their Windows driver (about 5% slower). - bmonet, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The thread that started the 'XP faster than OSX' debate.
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-mac-tech-support&t=22328&p=1&tmp=1#post22328 - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Wrong.
WoW is native to Intel Macs. - tricheco, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5This is about OpenGL:
New version of Cinebench shows that what is told in this article is false. Updated version, which includes support for new OpenGL extensions, ensure great performances, similar or superior to Windows XP.
WoW is simply worse coded on the mac compared to win, just like any other game port for Os X. (Source Hardmac.com). - mecki78, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@hexix: Wait for Windows Vista (or try the current releases you can get online) and test WoW again, with Vista's 3D desktop enabled and then let's compare results.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Wrong.
WoW was a multiplatform title from the very beginning with the Mac version using OpenGL. -
Show 51 - 100 of 181 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is