Macbook graphics card powerful enough for new games?

[trip1ex]

The Macbook barely plays WoW which is a 3+ yr old game.

But hey performance is in the eye of the beholder. Some people get a Macbook and suddenly their framerates go up 100% to 25 fps and they think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread.

 

[0098386]

Theres no way the EEE would be able to run those games.

Huh?
A friend has an EEE 901 (or is that 910? Probably thinking Tom Tom there) which runs HL2 with settings set to low. Even previous EEE machines can run HL2. For a machine so tiny I'm really impressed by what it can do. GTA SA ran very well, obviously with settings on low but it was native res.

And why would you recommend a games console when it's quite clear, by way of wanting an EEE, that I'm after something portable ah well. Already have a Wii for console games and a big PC for the bigger games.

 

[Lord Zedd]

Vampire Graphics. Nuff said.

 

[fojo]

Newbie needs clarification

Theres no way the EEE would be able to run those games.

The MacBook can on the absolute lowest settings.

If you're going to spend that much money, just get a PC with dedicated graphics. Or an Xbox360.

If your PowerBook has the Radeon 9700 in it, it is more powerful than any of the MacBooks and EEE PCs out there. It just can't run the games because of the G4.



Heh, no, I'm pointing out the fact that PCs have all of those features I mentioned standard above $600.

802.11n is generally a $15 upgrade on custom built PCs that don't include it. But it is still "draft N" on all hardware. I'd prefer finalized hardware.

So instead of that $800 HP with dedicated graphics, HDMI, fingerprint reader, webcam, mic, expresscard, memory card reader, etc. costing $800, it costs $815 with 802.11n.



Uh.. what? I've mentioned Dell, HP/Compaq, and Gateway. Theres nothing "cheapie" about Gateway. Compaq is to HP as the MacBook is to the MacBook Pro, and built by HP.

You do realize that Apple, HP, Gateway, Acer, just about every major player contracts out the building to the exact same chinese manufacturers, right? The case design and logo might be different, but they're all using the same parts and being built by the same hands.

Don't try to say that "Acer" is a cheapie brand either. They might not be Dell or HP in the US, but outside of the US (particularly in Asia) they're a huge player. Gateway's systems are also every bit as "quality" as HP and Dell.



Good way to deliberately misinterpret what I was saying.

I was comparing systems from the same time-frame/generation and my own experience with Apple and another PC manufacturer. My HP was around $900. My MacBook was $1406 after taxes. The MacBook came in in September. The HP a couple of weeks later.

Its no different now, just the specs have changed. Now you're still getting awful Intel integrated graphics and 2GB of RAM. Now HP and others are offering 3GB of RAM and integrated GPUs that outperform Intel's future IGPs as well as the previous generation of dedicated graphics.

Apple is still charging $1299 and HP and others are still charging less than $1,000 for more hardware.



Cheap Gateway? Theres nothing cheap about it except for the price.

Anyway, there is no value in OS X over Windows. Let's look at things realistically for a minute here. One thing the Apple fanboys LOVE to make fun of Vista for is the UAC prompts. But you know, in all of the time I've had Vista, I have only seen UAC prompts as often as I've seen password prompts in OS X.

There has also been reports/studies/whatever done that show that UAC captures all malware that might infect the system and stops it.

On top of that, IE7 and Firefox 2/3 don't anything to download and install without the users specific permission and action.

In fact, the last major security risk for Windows was caused by Safari!

When it comes to other things, Windows is better than OS X. Again, system wide hardware acceleration for video. If you've been a Mac user all your life or haven't used Windows in the last 3 generations of GPUs, you cannot even begin to understand how important this is and just how much it improves the image quality of video playback and how it cuts down on CPU use, system heat, etc.

Thanks to that, a $599 HP with the Radeon 3200 IGP can and will play blu-ray video (with the drive of course). Something no Mac can currently do.



You have to try very hard to make a Mac look overpriced? HAH!

Not at all. Again, go to Gateway. $1049 gets you a 2.4GHz C2D, 3GB of RAM, 160GB 7200 RPM! (missed that before) HDD, DVD writer, Radeon HD 2600 512MB, fingerprint reader, bluetooth, memory card reader, full size ExpressCard, HDMI, VGA, S-Video, draft-n, and a FULL 1 year warranty. No $60 phone calls to resolve software issues after 90 days. Their 3 year AT HOME SERVICE warranty is $40 less than AppleCare. For an extra $99 you get accidental damage coverage.

HP is similar. Trading off for a SLIGHTLY slower processor (not even 5%) you get a MUCH better GLASS screen and graphics that will put the $2,499 and $2,799 MBPs to shame, as well as blu-ray.



rofl, uh.. excuse me? The GMA 950, X3100, and X4500? Yeah they're all at the bottom of the barrel. They're so low end that they're below the bottom of their class. The MacBook, Mac mini, and MacBook Air are all prime examples of "mixing high end and low end hardware". You get a high end CPU but the GPU is so low end that its still generations behind others in its class.

The AMD Turion Ultra processors keep pace with the Core 2 Duos without a sweat. That $1,000 HP dv5z with the 1680x1050 glass screen and dedicated graphics will put any of the MacBook Pros to shame when it comes to 3D apps, gaming, and video performance. Another $200 and you get blu-ray. That $1049 Gateway will be equal to any of the MacBook Pros for roughly half the cost of the entry level MacBook Pro.

You want to talk about cutting corners then you need to look no further than Apple. Look at the Matsushita drives in the Macs that tend to live up to the last few letters of the name. They drop dead like flies. Look at the build quality of the units. MacBook Pros are known to warp from heat, bend under regular use, dent, scratch and in very rare cases, rust. The MacBooks are known to crack on the top case and on the bottom/back due to heat. The MagSafe adapters are known fire hazards. Any other manufacturer would have recalled them by now. The MacBook Air can rarely operate at full speed due to heat and design issues. The Mac mini has been intentionally gimped and sold at lower speeds and features than the original G4 minis for years now. The first batch of iPod touches had bad screens due to Apple using lower cost screens and now they all use them just with firmware to correct the issues. Even the first batch of iPhones had better screens than all current ones. The 3G iPod nano has tilted screen issues that Apple has neither resolved nor admits to.



The $599 Mac mini has a combo drive, a GMA 950, and a 1.8GHz C2D. That is low end.

The $1099 MacBook is also low end.

The GPU in all MacBooks, the MacBook Air, and Mac mini are all the lowest of low end.

So yes, Macs are essentially low end computers. Processor speed isn't everything. In fact, a fast processor doesn't mean jack when the GPU can't even keep up with it and allow the system to be used in real world situations.



If you're used to Windows, then OS X isn't good enough. If you're used to OS X, you'll be overwhelmed by the choices, options, and features of Windows, as well as all of the things Windows can do that OS X can't (like system wide hardware acceleration for video).



Basically.

And why should Blizzard optimize their NEW games for Intel GPUs? What self respecting PC gamer doesn't have dedicated graphics? And other IGPs, like those from nvidia and ATI/AMD are capable of playing games. Theres no reason for Blizzard or anyone to even think about Intel's GPUs. Especially not when nVidia and especially AMDs new IGPs outperform the last generation of low end dedicated graphics. Where even Intel's new GPU's cant even keep up with generations old dedicated graphics...

After reading a few of your posts, I must say that I am confused. Granted I am new to these forums, but I thought these posts were for mac enthusiasts either posting new info or requesting advice or help. While you may own a mac, or even two, you seem a fervent supporter of PC's which is fine. However, I keep asking myself, why would you waste so much time and energy rebutting every quote and post with why PC's are so much better when this is a mac forum? If you love your PC, graphics card, et al, then fantastic, join the millions of others who feel the same way. In fact, maybe start pcrumors.com. So, if you could please refrain from clogging these otherwise helpful forums with your PC spirited diatribes, those of us looking for real answers would all appreciate it. Thanks.

 

[0098386]

^ Welcome to the internet

 

[mosx]

A friend has an EEE 901 (or is that 910? Probably thinking Tom Tom there) which runs HL2 with settings set to low. Even previous EEE machines can run HL2. For a machine so tiny I'm really impressed by what it can do. GTA SA ran very well, obviously with settings on low but it was native res.

Low settings? Whats the point?

GTA:SA has a lot of onscreen activity at many points. If you have to run it at the lowest settings JUST to get it to run at all, theres going to be many spots during the game where it simply becomes unplayable.

And Half-Life 2? Same thing. Also, half of Half-Life 2 is the atmosphere created by the world. Seeing how the world has been ravaged by the Combine creates the atmosphere that helps draw the player into the game. If it looks like crap then you're missing out on a very large part of the experience.

However, I keep asking myself, why would you waste so much time and energy rebutting every quote and post with why PC's are so much better when this is a mac forum?p/quote]

So much time and energy? The most time I've spent replying to a post was about... 10 minutes maybe.

And I came here because I originally liked my MacBook. Then the problems started and I realized I could have gotten much more hardware for the money.

I stick around becasue I both own a Mac and I want people to make informed decisions regarding Macs and PCs.

Plus I also like to make sure the truth is known and that fanboys don't spread too many lies

So, if you could please refrain from clogging these otherwise helpful forums with your PC spirited diatribes, those of us looking for real answers would all appreciate it. Thanks.

It's not like I'm spreading lies or flaming. I'm simply speaking the truth. If you don't like it you can always choose not to read my posts.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

If you decided to wait around for the next generation of MacBook, there might be a chance of them including the newer GMA X4500 which is supposed to offer 3x the performance of the current GMA X3100. Still, not sure if the newer card would support all your games, but at least it is an improvement.
It will supposedly support Direct X 10 (for gaming in Windows) and "Shader Model 4.0 Features".

Let's hope.

So you're saying it will do 9fps instead of 3fps with Madden? Yee-haw.

 

[Jak3]

Not everyone is a graphix whore and as a portable device, it would be nice to play a game on a long plane trip. In those situations, do you really care if it's max-rez, super high settings? Hell no! You just want a way to ignore that annoying old lady who wants to set you up on a date with her grand-daughter! (Okay, that might not be so bad...unless she talks as much as the old lady...)

Laptops are about compromise. You want to play Crysis on a 1600x1200 resolution with max settings, you're gonna need the power of a proper PC, not a laptop. And even then...most computers can't pull that off

Look, it's pointless to bash the guy because he wants to play Halo on low settings on his EEE, personally, the fact that the thing CAN play games should be enough to shut you up.

If you want to crucify him for thinking differently, go ahead, but it's that sort of thinking that started WWII, so be warned.

 

[0098386]

I for one play games for gameplay, not graphics playing HL2: DM is brilliant on an EEE, sure I can't marvel at the environment but I'm playing a fast multiplayer game so... well I don't really need to marvel at environments.

SA is also very playable on the EEE. My friend throws the settings down to get an FPS over 40, I'd be happy with it on 30 with higher settings (for whatever reason). Doesn't stop the game being brilliant.

Why would I want to have this deep and meaningful visual experience when I'm playing on an 8" screen on a plane or library somewhere?

 

[MRU]

I keep asking myself, why would you waste so much time and energy rebutting every quote and post with why PC's are so much better when this is a mac forum?

He likes to stroll around both the Apple Games and Console Games sections and cause as much disharmony as possible.

 

[Aegelward]

So, enough about trolling. Think that the new X4500 will produce more acceptable gaming results? it's supposed to be more or less on par with an Geforce 8400.. so i guess it'll benchmark quite similar to the iMac's 2400XT

 

[eXan]

So, enough about trolling. Think that the new X4500 will produce more acceptable gaming results? it's supposed to be more or less on par with an Geforce 8400.. so i guess it'll benchmark quite similar to the iMac's 2400XT

Don't hold your breath. They said many, many good things about X3100 and how much better it was compared to GMA950... and look at what it's now? The current X3100 can't even beat Radeon 9600! Pathetic...

 

[morrisman1]

im not a gaming freak

i used to be interested in games and played a lot of first person shooters. i havnt done that for a while untill the other day.

never really was bothered by the lack of GPU power in the macbook and i still arent because that isnt what i bought it for. i have a 2.2 C2D with 2gb ram and x3100.

a mate brought around the orange box the other day and wanted to multiplayer. so i booted into xp pro and installed it. with settings on low to medium i found the performance to be quite playable in all but the most demanding parts.

over the last 2 days i have gone through half life 2 eposides one and two and portal. there have been moments when the frame rate has dropped to around 5fps when there is a lot happening in an outside environment but most of the time it hovered around 20fps which is fine by me for what i expected. hell, i didnt expect to even be able to run them at all!

the macbook isnt designed with gaming in mind and its not likely to be playable with many new games where there is a lot of 3D rendering. if you want to play intense games then just go and build your own computer with vista on it and save yourself the hassle.

and as far as macs and blu-ray goes, you just told everyone that a mac pro with 8 xeon cores at 3.2ghz with 32gb of ram and a quadro graphics card wouldnt be able to play a blu-ray video. lets forget the video rendering capability that they have for the professional market. you are digging yourself a hole here, it sounds like you are making up facts to suit your arguement like those regarding people who use firewire, optical, illuminated keyboards, and appreciate the lack of ports on every side of their laptop. some new pc laptops still have printer ports!!! those phased out like 3 years ago. its not all about slapping features into a generic case and selling it cheap, its about designing a package to suit the target consumers.