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.
OS X How does the iris handle Skyrim?
- Thread starter TechGod
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you mean Iris 5100 on the 13" Mbp then I doubt you could achieve 60fps, the best you could do is probably around 40-50fps, which is actually quite okay. However, if you mean the Iris 5200(Pro) that could handle 70fps easily as that is a really powerful integrated graphics processor. 
Notebookcheck.net did test the Asus UX301LA with Iris 5100:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Asus-Zenbook-Infinity-UX301LA-Ultrabook.103027.0.html
Skyrim on medium 19.1 fps.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Asus-Zenbook-Infinity-UX301LA-Ultrabook.103027.0.html
Skyrim on medium 19.1 fps.
Are people seriously suggesting that integrated graphics could play something like Skyrim at 50-60 fps on anything else than the lowest possible settings? Iris is an improvement over 4000 but still it's not a huge jump. Iris Pro on the other hand seems decent, but it is still only comparable to low end graphics cards...
What? Iris is amazing. I'm surprised it performs as well as it does with the games I play, which I could not on the HD3000 in my 2011 mbp it plays Skyrim smoothly for me with low mid and runs minecraft amazing with the sonic ethers unbelievable shaders mod. Stop thinking the iris is a Pos.
I wouldn't say Iris is a POS, but if a modern $150 dGPU is prime rib, Iris is a two day old roast beef sandwich whose mayonnaise smells like it may have turned.
The 5100 is more than sufficient for my needs. A dGPU while nice, wouldnt make me ditch this and go for the 15".
Well, at the end of the day, that's all that matters, right? As long as you're happy with it, enjoy! I'm just holding out for a PC that can ensure top frame rates in Skyrim, modded to hell. Looking forward to revisiting Tamriel once I finally land myself a proper rig.
You mean the 750m is louder (fan noise wise) compared to the iris pro 5200 ? Or reverse... meaning that because the intel must perform gpu + cpu tasks, it needs even more cooling therefore louder fans?
1920x1080? That's quite high. I actually don't understand why people use this ratio, if the default screen resolution is 2880x1800.
I consider 1440x900 the best resolution for the MBP, since it's downscaled by an even factor of 2, not a factor of 1.66667 or 1.98 or 1.57. Any resolutions in between should result in more blurry screens.
As the iris pro is not made for huge resolutions, but still capable for high end graphics, it could run Crysis on "Ultra" settings on 1440x900 while with 1920x1080 only displaying it at "Medium" settings.
However - this is all just speculation and guesswork, but I'm a bit annoyed that most notebook review sites do not take this case into account. They always think people want to play at native resolution (which was correct, before the display madness started) but now it seems half the resolution is the best option for playing.
I consider 1440x900 the best resolution for the MBP, since it's downscaled by an even factor of 2, not a factor of 1.66667 or 1.98 or 1.57. Any resolutions in between should result in more blurry screens.
As the iris pro is not made for huge resolutions, but still capable for high end graphics, it could run Crysis on "Ultra" settings on 1440x900 while with 1920x1080 only displaying it at "Medium" settings.
However - this is all just speculation and guesswork, but I'm a bit annoyed that most notebook review sites do not take this case into account. They always think people want to play at native resolution (which was correct, before the display madness started) but now it seems half the resolution is the best option for playing.