Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Can MacBook 2.2 run rainbow six vegas?
- Thread starter JackSwing
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Doubtful. Even if it could, it would be VERY slow. R6: Vegas runs on the Unreal 3 engine, and that requires a decently high end video card to run well. The integrated graphics on the Macbook would run the game very poorly, if at all.
The minumum specs for the game require a 3GHz processor and 128MB of VRAM, and those are the minimums. Recommended are 3.5GHz and 256MB.
Even though your Macbook is one of the newer versions with the X3100, I'd be surprised if the game even started up, let alone ran at playable speed.
Even though your Macbook is one of the newer versions with the X3100, I'd be surprised if the game even started up, let alone ran at playable speed.
The minumum specs for the game require a 3GHz processor and 128MB of VRAM, and those are the minimums. Recommended are 3.5GHz and 256MB.
Even though your Macbook is one of the newer versions with the X3100, I'd be surprised if the game even started up, let alone ran at playable speed.
3 ghz minimum? 3.5 recommended? Those figures have to be aimed at pentiums. Don't tell me that a 2.8 Ghz core 2 duo isn't going to run the game exceptionally well (with a good graphics card).
Not true, Rainbow Six Vegas is playable on iMac with HD 2400 XT, graphic, when turn graphic setting to between low to medium.
It's still mobile chipset, HD 2600 Pro from iMac is still mobile chipset too, Mac Pro is only one model that can run this game at max setting (HD 2600 XT and GeForce 8800 GT).
well, sorry but you need to rethink what you said.
I'm an all around gamer, pc/mac/linux, tested through tnt, 9200se/pro, x800xl/xt, 6600GS/GT, 7900GS, 8800GTX/SLI and last year R6Vegas was my FPS of choice and tested it in a 7900GS, 8800GTX single and SLI, and with the 7900GS was barely playable being the fps between 20/40 depending on the situation at native 1680x1050 and medium/low. The 7900GS is a lot more powerful than the 2600XT which struggles to play at 1680x1050 almost all at low.
So, if you call gaming at a 10-15fps slideshow, no problem.
Max settings with the 2600XT in a bad Xbox port using Unreal Engine 3?? Sure you don't know what max settings are...
well, sorry but you need to rethink what you said.
I'm an all around gamer, pc/mac/linux, tested through tnt, 9200se/pro, x800xl/xt, 6600GS/GT, 7900GS, 8800GTX/SLI and last year R6Vegas was my FPS of choice and tested it in a 7900GS, 8800GTX single and SLI, and with the 7900GS was barely playable being the fps between 20/40 depending on the situation at native 1680x1050 and medium/low. The 7900GS is a lot more powerful than the 2600XT which struggles to play at 1680x1050 almost all at low.
So, if you call gaming at a 10-15fps slideshow, no problem.
Max settings with the 2600XT in a bad Xbox port using Unreal Engine 3?? Sure you don't know what max settings are...
Excuse me, I'm gamer too, I own 2 Mac (1 iMac with HD 2400 XT and MacBook Pro with 8600 GT), Xbox 360 and Wii.
Don't get me wrong, I had played Rainbow Six Vegas (before sold out) on Vista via bootcamp on my iMac and turned graphic to low to medium with nearly low resolution then I got around 20-30 fps or so, that's playable, plus it does met minimum requirement system.
2600 XT from Mac Pro is desktop version of graphic card then it does able to max on setting on some games when resolution was down to low or medium than native resolution and use in Directx 9 instead of Directx 10, that's kind of tricky but AMD is usually have bad drivers for ATI and some gamers are using modded driver to improve the game preference.
Remember, I don't included resolution in my previous post as max setting.
I prefer to play Rainbow Six Vegas on Xbox 360 version because of alot of deaf people, I'm deaf member, of course.
Edit, I'm not argue or big debate with you, I was just not agree with you about iMac with HD 2400 XT but just agree about MacBook with GMA X3100 wouldn't run at all time or just very recidiously slower.
I found out from other forum and some people said this game is work on GMA X3100 with some issues on graphic, such as green spot on wall but they don't state if it's playable or not.
In theory it will run in the x3100 since it has SM3 but no driver is optimized for it.
Sometimes i forget that some people actually play at 800x600, but for me that's not playing by any means. I loved it for the gaming experience but I have to agree that the visual port is crappy at native resolution or at 800x600 and scales very badly in any kind of hardware.
Here you have some analysis: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2895&p=2
Don't bite that info how the HD2600XT is much better because of more 200Mhz on the core. Those Apple stupid guys fitted the ddr3 version instead the ddr4 one. Both still sh/tty though
Sometimes i forget that some people actually play at 800x600, but for me that's not playing by any means. I loved it for the gaming experience but I have to agree that the visual port is crappy at native resolution or at 800x600 and scales very badly in any kind of hardware.
Here you have some analysis: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2895&p=2
Don't bite that info how the HD2600XT is much better because of more 200Mhz on the core. Those Apple stupid guys fitted the ddr3 version instead the ddr4 one. Both still sh/tty though
In theory it will run in the x3100 since it has SM3 but no driver is optimized for it.
Sometimes i forget that some people actually play at 800x600, but for me that's not playing by any means. I loved it for the gaming experience but I have to agree that the visual port is crappy at native resolution or at 800x600 and scales very badly in any kind of hardware.
Here you have some analysis: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2895&p=2
Don't bite that info how the HD2600XT is much better because of more 200Mhz on the core. Those Apple stupid guys fitted the ddr3 version instead the ddr4 one. Both still sh/tty though
Oh, I don't pay attention about DDR3, thanks for mention.
I'm not surprised that Apple picked DDR3 over DDR4 for HD 2600 XT, it supposed to be in DDR4.
This gaming technology is growing so rapidly and cause some video card to be no good after 1 year or so, it's bother me to replace it every years to keep future games to be updated.
I'm concern about The Sims 3, upcoming game and would expected to come out in 2008 or 2009 then would probably drop the PPC support and HD 2400 XT from iMac wouldn't be very good preference for The Sims 3, even I just wait and see.
Fairly certain the PC version required a Shader Model 3 compliant video card, which none of the Intel onboard chipsets are. Sorry!
