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.
How does Portal 2 run with the 9400M?
- Thread starter Clafouti
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If I get the chance and the GF is cool with it, I might try to install Portal 2 on her 9400m and test it. She has the white unibody 2009 MB with a 2.26 C2D. But yeah no promises.
Wait another 3 hours and I can tell you how it runs on a 9400m (256mb) and 9600m (512mb)
Model Identifier: MacBookPro5,3
Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo
Processor Speed: 2.8 GHz
Number Of Processors: 1
Total Number Of Cores: 2
L2 Cache: 6 MB
Memory: 8 GB DDR3
Bus Speed: 1.07 GHz
Harddisk: 7200rpm
Model Identifier: MacBookPro5,3
Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo
Processor Speed: 2.8 GHz
Number Of Processors: 1
Total Number Of Cores: 2
L2 Cache: 6 MB
Memory: 8 GB DDR3
Bus Speed: 1.07 GHz
Harddisk: 7200rpm
Last edited:
I'm playing it on the 9600 on my Macbook 5,1 
have everything on high/very high, native res (1440x900, screeny attached; hopefully it's not a spoiler!) and I can even throw on 4x MSAA with virtually no framerate hit. It does certainly chug in a few areas, but it looks amazing and is very playable! some blocky shadows every now and then, though!
have everything on high/very high, native res (1440x900, screeny attached; hopefully it's not a spoiler!) and I can even throw on 4x MSAA with virtually no framerate hit. It does certainly chug in a few areas, but it looks amazing and is very playable! some blocky shadows every now and then, though!Attachments
As far as I can tell Portal 2 runs very smooth on the 9600m
I've an average of 40fps which is ok.
Unfortunately the 9400m is not supported. Maybe it's to old because if I start Portal 2, it barely initiates and in the menu you are not able to start a new campaign or anything else. it just says no steam and quit. Sry. It seems like you have to a get a new Macbook Pro. One of the high end Macbook Pros has got a ATI Radeon HD 6750m which will run Portal 2 perfectly at approximately 60fps with maxed out settings as seen on a previous thread.
I've an average of 40fps which is ok.
Unfortunately the 9400m is not supported. Maybe it's to old because if I start Portal 2, it barely initiates and in the menu you are not able to start a new campaign or anything else. it just says no steam and quit. Sry. It seems like you have to a get a new Macbook Pro. One of the high end Macbook Pros has got a ATI Radeon HD 6750m which will run Portal 2 perfectly at approximately 60fps with maxed out settings as seen on a previous thread.
That sounds weird
Some people got this "error" (no steam, only "quit" option). Like in this thread (https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1139337/) which is a Steam/files error, not a "hardware error."
Are your tests on Mac OS X or on Win 7 (bootcamp)?
Anyway, thanks for posting your results
Some people got this "error" (no steam, only "quit" option). Like in this thread (https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1139337/) which is a Steam/files error, not a "hardware error."
Are your tests on Mac OS X or on Win 7 (bootcamp)?
Anyway, thanks for posting your results
It's definitely officially supported, as are all GPUs since the GF 8600. So it should at least start properly, maybe your error is caused by something else. I'm getting my copy tomorrow, maybe I'll try it out on my Macbook these days (I usually game on my iMac).
Snow Leopard with all the latest updates, runs like a champ, I'm very impressed
This ol' Mac is an iHouse, it has...
no Windows (sorry, that was terrible!)Yeah I've tried it under Mac OS 10.6.7. I don't have Windows on my Macbook Pro. Seems a bit weird.
@Shattentor I think it's not supported because the 9400M only has got 256MB VRAM and the 8600M has got 512MB which is a huge difference in terms of performance. I think Valve hasn't specified the system requirements adequately. I'm pretty sure that's the reason!
@Shattentor I think it's not supported because the 9400M only has got 256MB VRAM and the 8600M has got 512MB which is a huge difference in terms of performance. I think Valve hasn't specified the system requirements adequately. I'm pretty sure that's the reason!
Okay people, good news. I hijacked my GF's MacBook, and restored Portal 2 from my backup from Steam and loaded it up.
Late 09 Unibody White MacBook
Intel Core2Duo 2.26Ghz
nVidia 9400m
2GB RAM
Mac OSX 10.6.7
First, it works! No issues loading it up. I played in OSX 10.6.7 as listed. I cannot and will not be doing BootCamp for the 9400m. My GF doesn't use Windows and there's no way I'm installing Windows just to test this... sorry but just gonna throw that out there.
Second, you'll want to play on all lows, low everything, shaders, details, textures, texture filtering all that jazz, no AA.
Now, for resolution, I tested it on all four possible 16:10 resolutions, ranging form 800x500 up to native 1280x800. Basically at native resolution you'll average around 24-26FPS. I "tested" I say that because it was simply ONE ROOM I ran around in, didn't bother with much else. Start of Chapter 2, I had access to the portal gun with both orange/blue. Anyway, when you look into a portal, like go up to it, I noticed this is where FPS usually dips. It drops to about 16-17FPS when you just stare through. Still not choppy but not close to 30FPS.
So I tested the lowest res 800x500, FPS of course goes up, 30-35 but still dips into 20's. Problem is, 800x500 looks a bit, pixelated. Kind of nasty looking, playable but meh.
So the next resolution up, I forget was like 1024x640 or something? This looks a LOT better visually. Text isn't distorted, things are more smoothed out. Avg high 20's into 30's and dips into low 20's when looking into a portal. Not bad. Game still looks good.
One more res up wasn't bad either, right below native resolution. Got slight worse frame rates than lower resolution and looked just as good.
My recommendation is probably 1024x640 full screened. It looks clean and runs the best. You can definitely play at native resolution, I didn't get a slideshow or anything. If I didn't have the FPS counter up I probably wouldn't have thought too much of it to be honest. Plays well. If this was the only option I had to play Portal 2, I wouldn't hesitate to get it. Now remember BootCamp *should* run this even better as that's always seemed to be the case when it came to OSX vs BootCamp gaming performance.
So basically if the 9400m can run it, anything better than the 9400m SHOULD be able to run Portal 2, given you're fine with lower settings and resolution. This confirms my thoughts that the 320m will be totally FINE when running this game, as well as the HD 3000. I am not too familiar with the x1600 so I cannot comment on that. I doubt the older GMA950 and x3100 will work though lol Guessing the 9400m is the end of the line here folks when it comes to Source gaming.
Anyway, I am uploading a 5min youtube movie I made testing out the various resolutions on the 9400m machine. Like I said it's not much, just in a single level, with a laser going though =D and with the portal gun to get the more intense graphical effects working. I'll link when that's up. My DSL uploads are TERRIBLE, so please give me a couple hours before I report back.
Happy gaming!
*EDIT*
UPLOADED hope this helps some people.
white Macbook late 09 9400m Portal 2
Late 09 Unibody White MacBook
Intel Core2Duo 2.26Ghz
nVidia 9400m
2GB RAM
Mac OSX 10.6.7
First, it works! No issues loading it up. I played in OSX 10.6.7 as listed. I cannot and will not be doing BootCamp for the 9400m. My GF doesn't use Windows and there's no way I'm installing Windows just to test this... sorry but just gonna throw that out there.
Second, you'll want to play on all lows, low everything, shaders, details, textures, texture filtering all that jazz, no AA.
Now, for resolution, I tested it on all four possible 16:10 resolutions, ranging form 800x500 up to native 1280x800. Basically at native resolution you'll average around 24-26FPS. I "tested" I say that because it was simply ONE ROOM I ran around in, didn't bother with much else. Start of Chapter 2, I had access to the portal gun with both orange/blue. Anyway, when you look into a portal, like go up to it, I noticed this is where FPS usually dips. It drops to about 16-17FPS when you just stare through. Still not choppy but not close to 30FPS.
So I tested the lowest res 800x500, FPS of course goes up, 30-35 but still dips into 20's. Problem is, 800x500 looks a bit, pixelated. Kind of nasty looking, playable but meh.
So the next resolution up, I forget was like 1024x640 or something? This looks a LOT better visually. Text isn't distorted, things are more smoothed out. Avg high 20's into 30's and dips into low 20's when looking into a portal. Not bad. Game still looks good.
One more res up wasn't bad either, right below native resolution. Got slight worse frame rates than lower resolution and looked just as good.
My recommendation is probably 1024x640 full screened. It looks clean and runs the best. You can definitely play at native resolution, I didn't get a slideshow or anything. If I didn't have the FPS counter up I probably wouldn't have thought too much of it to be honest. Plays well. If this was the only option I had to play Portal 2, I wouldn't hesitate to get it. Now remember BootCamp *should* run this even better as that's always seemed to be the case when it came to OSX vs BootCamp gaming performance.
So basically if the 9400m can run it, anything better than the 9400m SHOULD be able to run Portal 2, given you're fine with lower settings and resolution. This confirms my thoughts that the 320m will be totally FINE when running this game, as well as the HD 3000. I am not too familiar with the x1600 so I cannot comment on that. I doubt the older GMA950 and x3100 will work though lol Guessing the 9400m is the end of the line here folks when it comes to Source gaming.
Anyway, I am uploading a 5min youtube movie I made testing out the various resolutions on the 9400m machine. Like I said it's not much, just in a single level, with a laser going though =D and with the portal gun to get the more intense graphical effects working. I'll link when that's up. My DSL uploads are TERRIBLE, so please give me a couple hours before I report back.
Happy gaming!
*EDIT*
UPLOADED hope this helps some people.
white Macbook late 09 9400m Portal 2
Last edited:
Thanks for the test mate. Now if someone could test it on bootcamp it would be awesome.
I have noticed that there was big performance improvement on TF2 and Portal 1 in windows so hopefully Portal 2 will be playable there.
I have noticed that there was big performance improvement on TF2 and Portal 1 in windows so hopefully Portal 2 will be playable there.
You think wrong. Memory size has no impact on performance whatsoever. You're that misinformed person who buys 2GB HD4350/GT220 with 64 bit memory bus and thinks that hes got fckload of performance.
Thank you very much for the test! Actually I didn't think it would run that good on the 9400m and still look playable - I'm impressed! Good ol' 9400m
Yeah I've tried it under Mac OS 10.6.7. I don't have Windows on my Macbook Pro. Seems a bit weird.
@Shattentor I think it's not supported because the 9400M only has got 256MB VRAM and the 8600M has got 512MB which is a huge difference in terms of performance. I think Valve hasn't specified the system requirements adequately. I'm pretty sure that's the reason!
8600m was made with 128MB and 256MB on the Santa ROsa models, penryn had 256 and 512 mb.
The 8600m is on the other hand about 50% faster than the 9400m
most of you don't have to worry about it because portal 2 uses still the same old Source engine which dated back 2004. the engine is pretty much older. it only requires little graphic power. just look at system requirement. you only need 128MB graphic card including Intel HD graphic. so if you have any graphic card (shared or dedicated) more than 256MB, you can set it up everything high. I set max everything up. by the way, it's kind of pity that Valve still depends on old engine not to develop or upgrade anything. the game is fun, has some interesting story on. but I am not impressive by graphic at all.