# Releasedate for Doom 3 announced



## Damrod (Nov 3, 2004)

I fished that from a mac-news page, and thought I'd share. 

(Translated, the source is www.macnews.de)

Aspyr announced that Doom 3 will be released and shipped next February. It will be one of the first titles that will only run on G5 macs. The port is done by ID software themselfs. The Game only runs on the yet to be released OS X 10.3.6, at least 52 MB RAM, Radeon 8500/Geforce 3 with at least 32 MB, and a G5 CPU of 1.6 GHz and more. The game is shipped on a DVD. THe price will be around 50 US-$


----------



## HateEternal (Nov 3, 2004)

Damrod said:
			
		

> I fished that from a mac-news page, and thought I'd share.
> 
> (Translated, the source is www.macnews.de)
> 
> Aspyr announced that Doom 3 will be released and shipped next February. It will be one of the first titles that will only run on G5 macs. The port is done by ID software themselfs. The Game only runs on the yet to be released OS X 10.3.6, at least 52 MB RAM, Radeon 8500/Geforce 3 with at least 32 MB, and a G5 CPU of 1.6 GHz and more. The game is shipped on a DVD. THe price will be around 50 US-$



Do they not plan on selling many copies or what? I don't understand why they would go G5 only..


----------



## JetwingX (Nov 3, 2004)

do you have any idea how graphically intense the game is?

The PC world has a big of a cut off as we do


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Nov 4, 2004)

A G5 1.6ghz won't be so much faster (if at all) than a Dual G4 1.42ghz (if dual processing is used). And I don't think Doom3 is going 64bit. So, why only G5 compatible? Our powerbooks have much stronger hardware than the requirement..


----------



## Damrod (Nov 4, 2004)

Well, if it really gets G5 only, I'm already out of the game with my G4 MDD... 

It's really sad that they bring it only  to the highest ranked machines. But, with some adjustments, it may also run on slower machines. (Heard it from a friend who owns a 'slow' PC) Let's see what it eventually brings in February.


----------



## Viro (Nov 4, 2004)

The G5's have much better FPUs than the current G4s. That's probably the reason for the requirement since the G4s are only competitive with hte G5 when Altivec is used. Without Altivec, the G4s are not brilliant number crunchers.


----------



## TWRayer (Nov 8, 2004)

I wonder if they are going to force a G5, or if that is simply a recommendation.   If you have a fast G4 (or two) with a good graphics card, I think they should allow you to run Doom3.


----------



## Flanjoo (Nov 23, 2004)

Bear in mind that this is id we're talking about here, folks. Normally, you can run their games on machines slower than the recommended specs after an update or two. I wouldn't be surprised if they managed to update it to support 64-bit and dual processors. _Then_ it would fly....


----------



## Viro (Nov 23, 2004)

Knowing id, Doom 3 probably already is multithreaded and thus supports dual processors. This is based on what Quake 3 was like and how an additional processor provided a visible improvement in framerates.


----------



## Stridder44 (Nov 23, 2004)

Only 52 megs of Ram? That doesnt seem right..


----------



## HateEternal (Nov 24, 2004)

> do you have any idea how graphically intense the game is?
> 
> The PC world has a big of a cut off as we do



The game runs pretty damn good on my 4 year old Athlon XP 1800 machine with 512 mb of ram. The only upgrade I have done is video card and i have a Radeon 9800 pro in there. One of the key things is to change the default shader, it was realeased with a shader that nVidia supports fully and ATi supports part way or not at all, which killed performance on ATi cards. By using a different shader the ATi cards play the game the same or better.

What kind of Macs were out in 2001? If lowendmac was up I could tell you exaclty but a quick google search turned up a review of a 533mhz G4 in january of 2001(Ok my pc is from the fall but still, it gives a ball park figure). PC's DO NOT have the same cut of as Macs.


----------



## Viro (Nov 25, 2004)

A 533 G4 isn't going to be able to compete with an Athlon XP 1800. A G4 1.33 GHz is pretty much about the same speed as an Athlon XP 1800 when not doing anything requiring Altivec.


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Feb 14, 2005)

So, where is doom3?


----------



## Randman (Feb 14, 2005)

I never understood the thread anyway. My PowerBook has at least as good of a video card as an iMac G5.


----------



## Viro (Feb 14, 2005)

Randman said:
			
		

> I never understood the thread anyway. My PowerBook has at least as good of a video card as an iMac G5.



Video cards aren't the only factor in games. The CPU is too. If you look at the Barefeat's website that benchmarks the Powerbook and the iMac G5(here), you will see that the Powerbook holds it's own when competing against the iMac G5 with prerecorded time demos. This is where the graphics card plays a major role since there is very little AI/physics going on as everything is prerecorded.

Things change when you run a bot match (see UT2K4). The iMac G5 mops the floor with the Powerbook, simply because the processor on the iMac G5 is much better at floating point operations compared to the G4. If Altivec were used, the G4 would fare better but the sad state of the Mac game industry is that most games don't support Altivec and rely on pure floating-point power. This puts the G4 at a distinct disadvantage and I'm guessing this is why Doom 3 recommends/requires a G5.


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Feb 14, 2005)

Rand, you drowned my question. 
When can I buy doom 3 for mac? I thought it will be released this month.


----------



## Randman (Feb 14, 2005)

reported that DOOM 3 was to be demonstrated @ last month's Macworld expo. Now, it was announced that an other one will be taking place at Apple's Barton Creek retail store in Austin, Texas on February 18th.

It looks like we will be flooded by official releases in March -- the Mac port of DOOM 3 is also slated for release that month. Coincidence?

    Quote:Eagle-eyed readers may notice a slight change in the preliminary system requirements now projected for the game: When Aspyr originally announced its Mac conversion of Doom 3, it specified a G5 processor. Now the company says a G4 or G5 processor will work. Full system requirements call for a G4 or G5/1.5GHz or faster, 512MB RAM, 2.0GB hard disk space, ATI Radeon 9600 or Nvidia GeForceFX 5200 or better 3D graphics with at least 64MB VRAM and DVD drive. Doom 3 is rated M for Mature by the ESRB.

Found that on the web. So maybe March.

And my PB should be able to ace it.  ::angel::


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Feb 14, 2005)

Thanks, Rand. Hmmm radeon 9000 but 64mb vram. Do you think that will make it?


----------



## Randman (Feb 14, 2005)

With the game's eye candy pared to a minimum. I wouldn't render video at the same time.   Be rough.


----------



## Lycander (Feb 14, 2005)

Just FYI: Nvidia's GeForce 6800 was MADE specifically for Doom3. If there was any blatant a** kissing in the computing industry this is it. A hardware company making a piece of hardware specifically for this game to run well and look great.

IIRC, the G4 towers can't handle the 6800 cards, is that correct? I have Doom3 and run it on a moddest PC, the CPU and RAM matter as much as any other game out there. The video card is where it REALLY matters most. So my assumption for the G5 min. requirement (if it really is the minimum) is solely for the support of the hotter graphics cards. Nothing to do with whether a G4 can handle it or not.


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Feb 14, 2005)

Well, the game also provides a much higher number of polygones, which is the job of the cpu. So, I think the cpu performance also plays an important role but probably not as much as the graphic unit does. However, nvidia is not that desperate and stupid to produce a gpu only for one application / game. They probably optimized it for the doom 3 engine guessing it will become the No. 1 benchmark tool for 3d hardware as it was with quake3. But "MADE specifically for Doom3" doesn't make much sense to me. I am really curious how the port will be. I mean, Carmack proved he has a big heart for macs if you think of the quake3 performance on macs..


----------



## brianleahy (Feb 14, 2005)

FYI - you can pre-order it at Amazon.  Here is Amazon's specs page for it:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...ames/B0006A5IWE/tech-data/104-6606493-7647128


----------



## Viro (Feb 14, 2005)

Don't know if anyone has posted this link to the news article that says the demo will be coming to the Austin store on Feb 18. http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/02/04/doom3/index.php


----------



## Lycander (Feb 14, 2005)

Zammy-Sam said:
			
		

> Well, the game also provides a much higher number of polygones, which is the job of the cpu. So, I think the cpu performance also plays an important role but probably not as much as the graphic unit does. However, nvidia is not that desperate and stupid to produce a gpu only for one application / game. They probably optimized it for the doom 3 engine guessing it will become the No. 1 benchmark tool for 3d hardware as it was with quake3. But "MADE specifically for Doom3" doesn't make much sense to me. I am really curious how the port will be. I mean, Carmack proved he has a big heart for macs if you think of the quake3 performance on macs..


Heh, I wish I can dig up the link, maybe later. Nvidia _has_ admitted that they made the 6800 specially for John Carmack. That was their whole marketing strategy. It's not some secret propoganda, they're actually proud to champion Doom3, the same way ATI is the brand of choice for Half-Life 2.

Polygon crunching is more GPU bound, unless the programmers are stupid (which they aren't) and made the CPU do all the work when the GPU could do it much faster.


----------



## brianleahy (Feb 14, 2005)

> unless the programmers are stupid (which they aren't)



Well, Doom 3's programmers may not be, but I know a few that are.   

I've worked with em...


----------



## Lycander (Feb 14, 2005)

brianleahy said:
			
		

> Well, Doom 3's programmers may not be, but I know a few that are.
> 
> I've worked with em...


Oh, so you worked at Microsoft?


----------



## brianleahy (Feb 14, 2005)

> Oh, so you worked at Microsoft?



No, they weren't THAT stupid....


----------



## mkwan (Mar 5, 2005)

MacCentral just released the first benchmarks of DOOM 3 on a Power Mac dual 2.5 GHz

http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/03/02/doom3/index.php

it seems like the performance was a little disappointing than expected when compared to the PCs


----------



## Qion (Mar 7, 2005)

mkwan said:
			
		

> MacCentral just released the first benchmarks of DOOM 3 on a Power Mac dual 2.5 GHz
> 
> http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/03/02/doom3/index.php
> 
> it seems like the performance was a little disappointing than expected when compared to the PCs



Anybody else see this? 

-Higher-end penalty

Doom 3 has very demanding system requirements -- the highest we've seen on a Mac game to date. *A 1.5GHz G4 is the minimum*, along with an ATI Radeon 9600 or Nvidia GeForce FX 5200 graphics system with at least 64MB VRAM. These specs aren't wildly out of sync with Doom 3's PC counterpart, either -- this game really asks a lot of hardware regardless of platform.-

So, I guess it will run on G4's after all.


----------



## brianleahy (Mar 7, 2005)

Well, unless you seriously max the graphics, it'll still be better than (say) the xbox version.

A TV can only do 30 fps, regardless what the unit is cranking out.


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Mar 8, 2005)

I saw benchmarks of doom 3 on 3 different mac systems. It looks quite disenchanting and makes me feel disappointed on Carmacks port.


----------



## Lycander (Mar 8, 2005)

Carmack didn't port it, Aspyr did.


----------

