Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New Macbook Pros running Diablo 3

W

Windgrace

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Apr 2, 2012
29
0
Ok, question:

Do you think the performance upgrade in the new Macbook Pro with the Intel HD4000 in the 13" macbook pro will run a game like Diablo 3? Or am I still going to have to purchase a 15" machine? Might try to snag an old 15" macbook pro discounted in that case. I just prefer the 13" size.
 
I guarantee it will. I have a intel graphics 3000HD chip running diablo 3 at a mix of mostly high settings and a reduced resolution.
 
Fireball926 said:
I guarantee it will. I have a intel graphics 3000HD chip running diablo 3 at a mix of mostly high settings and a reduced resolution.
Click to expand...

Really, now? Interesting. My mom's older 15" with the Nvidia card, duo core set-up has the settings on low and sometimes I still get lag problems. Hence my worry about going with a 13" Pro.

Edit- I'm also talking about the basic 2.5 ghz processor in the new MBP. Do I need to do the upgrades to the 2.9 (I think that's what it was)?
 
Last edited:
Windgrace said:
Really, now? Interesting. My mom's older 15" with the Nvidia card, duo core set-up has the settings on low and sometimes I still get lag problems. Hence my worry about going with a 13" Pro.

Edit- I'm also talking about the basic 2.5 ghz processor in the new MBP. Do I need to do the upgrades to the 2.9 (I think that's what it was)?
Click to expand...
what nvidia card? the Intel HD 3000 is faster than some of the nvidia cards Apple has used, and the 4000 is even much faster than that.

the 2.5ghz is way more than fast enough for any game out there now and in the foreseeable future. Most performance when it comes to games is on the GPU not the CPU.
 
If possible, I'd like to expand this to ultimately hear from new owners of these systems through first-hand experiences. I say first-hand, because Act 1 is probably the easiest act to run in Diablo 3, and I would like to hear how the game runs in Acts 2-4, and what settings are used.

Also, simply running around with no fights won't do. Fighting elites is preferable.

For those that actually play Diablo 3, this is the most important information anyway.

I am planning on picking up a 13" pro at some point, so if what I'm looking for doesn't surface by then, I'll share my own experiences.
 
I've been trying to figure out the same thing. I really like the 13" MBP's, and I think the 15's are just too big.

We'll have to wait for the new machines to be delivered and hope for some YouTube test videos. It should only be a few weeks.

However, if you extrapolate the specs on similar Windows hardware, at native resolution - with some detail and shadows turned off, my feeling is the game would be playable.

But, for a game like this I prefer an external monitor. I'd shoot for 1680x1050 with the prettier bells and whistles turned ON. No way the HD 4000 could handle it.

I think Apple has realized that if they stuck a half-decent GPU into the 13" MBP then too many people would buy them. There'd be no reason to spend $2000+ on a 15" laptop!
 
InlawBiker said:
However, if you extrapolate the specs on similar Windows hardware, at native resolution - with some detail and shadows turned off, my feeling is the game would be playable.

But, for a game like this I prefer an external monitor. I'd shoot for 1680x1050 with the prettier bells and whistles turned ON. No way the HD 4000 could handle it.

I think Apple has realized that if they stuck a half-decent GPU into the 13" MBP then too many people would buy them. There'd be no reason to spend $2000+ on a 15" laptop!
Click to expand...

I've seen videos of it running on the desktop class Ivy Bridge processor, but those were under non-stressful situations against small mobs (and some elites, but in Act 1 normal, this is negligible). I agree though that it probably is "playable".

I also agree that it probably can't maintain a consistent frame rate at that resolution in the later acts.

I agree with your last point as well, but it may also have something to do with keeping the current thermal systems in place without having to redesign it (as they had to do with the new retina models), and thus increasing costs.

In the worst case, I'll post my thoughts on it after I pick one up, probably within a week or so if nothing else surfaces.
 
Only comparing to cards available from Apple... you can search for benchmarks, but from what I've seen the Intel HD 4000 is faster than the Geforce 320m and nearing the speed of the Geforce 330m used in the Pro a couple of generations ago.... and is faster than the older Geforce 9600GT they used to use several generations ago. no you won't be running all your graphics options maxed out, but you can set the graphics where it'll look adequate and be perfectly playable.
 
doh123 said:
Only comparing to cards available from Apple... you can search for benchmarks, but from what I've seen the Intel HD 4000 is faster than the Geforce 320m and nearing the speed of the Geforce 330m used in the Pro a couple of generations ago.... and is faster than the older Geforce 9600GT they used to use several generations ago. no you won't be running all your graphics options maxed out, but you can set the graphics where it'll look adequate and be perfectly playable.
Click to expand...

Diablo runs like a charm on MBP 2.66 mid 2010 8 gigs ram SSD with the 330M 512 gfx maxed out 1440x900 seems to get lag in 4 people game and a lot of creeps around.
 
I'm considering a 13" air now, too. I dunno if the small amount of extra processing power in the pro outweighs the SSD and nicer screen of the Air. Unless I need the bigger SSD card on the Air ($1499) because I'd rather get the base 15" pro at that point. I think the Air with the HD4000 would be able to run D3 on low settings.
 
hkim1983 said:
I've seen videos of it running on the desktop class Ivy Bridge processor, but those were under non-stressful situations against small mobs (and some elites, but in Act 1 normal, this is negligible). I agree though that it probably is "playable".

I also agree that it probably can't maintain a consistent frame rate at that resolution in the later acts.

I agree with your last point as well, but it may also have something to do with keeping the current thermal systems in place without having to redesign it (as they had to do with the new retina models), and thus increasing costs.

In the worst case, I'll post my thoughts on it after I pick one up, probably within a week or so if nothing else surfaces.
Click to expand...

Which machine are you picking up? 13" air or pro? Please let me know what you decide on and your results. I'm thinking the upgradeability of the 13" pro might outweigh the standard SSD and display of the 13" air. It seems that if I was to get the 256 SSD with the 13" Air like I was recommended in the gaming forum I'd be better off getting the base 15" pro. The RAM/SSD upgrades are just bringing up the prices from already expensive to pretty astronomical for a college student wanting to use word and play 1-2 games.
 
diablo with retina

is anybody already able to figure out how diablo III will be running on the new retina mbp with maxed out settings since it supports the new high resolution display?? and since it has a HDMI port it would be really awesome to get a blutooth keyboard and mouse with it to play it on my hd tv...
 
marcolino said:
is anybody already able to figure out how diablo III will be running on the new retina mbp with maxed out settings since it supports the new high resolution display?? and since it has a HDMI port it would be really awesome to get a blutooth keyboard and mouse with it to play it on my hd tv...
Click to expand...
it runs really bad at 2880x1800, you'll want to play it at a lower res to max it out. 1440x900 is the best gaming res for clarity since its exactly half the X and half the Y.

There were already miniDP to HDMI adapters for previous and other models of Macs so you could already hook it up to a HDTV. You can still with this as well, which means you could run it at 1920x1080 or 1280x720 (the main HD resolutions) on your TV. I think both of which would probably run decently on this machine with D3.
 
Windgrace said:
Which machine are you picking up? 13" air or pro? Please let me know what you decide on and your results. I'm thinking the upgradeability of the 13" pro might outweigh the standard SSD and display of the 13" air. It seems that if I was to get the 256 SSD with the 13" Air like I was recommended in the gaming forum I'd be better off getting the base 15" pro. The RAM/SSD upgrades are just bringing up the prices from already expensive to pretty astronomical for a college student wanting to use word and play 1-2 games.
Click to expand...

I am planning on picking up the 13" pro. I can order it right now, but I'm waiting a week or so to hear of any major technical defects in the machine (which shouldn't be the case since it's pretty much the same machine).

I also debated between the Pro and the Air this generation, but the increased performance that you get for sustained max usage of the cpu/gpu in the Pros is what pushed me over to the Pro. For games (including Diablo 3), this can make a difference, especially in extended playing sessions, and the additional boost in gpu performance I get will also make future expansion(s) of Diablo 3 more feasible.

I carry my current Macbook with me to work, but honestly, the actual traveling I do outside of my car with it is so minimal that the weight difference is negligible (I also thankfully, have a healthy lower back). The higher resolution is VERY tempting, but in the grand scheme of things, I would prefer the increased performance. If I really want that additional resolution, I can always buy an external monitor.

I can't blame those who pick the Air though, it really is the better choice for the majority of consumers out there. I personally think the 15" is overkill unless you need it for work, certain classes, certain hobbies, or you're a more serious gamer though (in which case, you really shouldn't be on a mac at all...). That is, as a college student.
 
hkim1983 said:
I am planning on picking up the 13" pro. I can order it right now, but I'm waiting a week or so to hear of any major technical defects in the machine (which shouldn't be the case since it's pretty much the same machine).

I also debated between the Pro and the Air this generation, but the increased performance that you get for sustained max usage of the cpu/gpu in the Pros is what pushed me over to the Pro. For games (including Diablo 3), this can make a difference, especially in extended playing sessions, and the additional boost in gpu performance I get will also make future expansion(s) of Diablo 3 more feasible.

I carry my current Macbook with me to work, but honestly, the actual traveling I do outside of my car with it is so minimal that the weight difference is negligible (I also thankfully, have a healthy lower back). The higher resolution is VERY tempting, but in the grand scheme of things, I would prefer the increased performance. If I really want that additional resolution, I can always buy an external monitor.

I can't blame those who pick the Air though, it really is the better choice for the majority of consumers out there. I personally think the 15" is overkill unless you need it for work, certain classes, certain hobbies, or you're a more serious gamer though (in which case, you really shouldn't be on a mac at all...). That is, as a college student.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I totally agree. I'm like 99% sure that I'm going to get the 13" Pro with the 8 gb RAM upgrade. I'd love an SSD, but that upgrade is really quite expensive (for either the Pro or Air). The display on the Air is nice, but I'm concerned the base 13" air won't have quite enough processing power as the 13" pro. The size/weight of the 13" pro is fine with me, as it's still one of the sleekest and nicest laptop designs out there.
 
Just got my 13' MPB 2.9ghz version no extra upgrades.


Played D3 trial version finshed it in around 3h


With everything on low, in fullscreen it still looks very nice, runs well no lag no spikes nothing. very good quality. so yes, this will run D3.


the only problem..and its somewhat of a big problem i think....is that the fans spin up to max (6000RPM) within 5minutes of starting the game and the temperatures i am getting with Temperature Gauge app is around 95C average (between CPUx2 and GPU). Although third party apps may not be 100% accurate, it is still slightly unnerving to see such high numbers. It certainly does feel hot and i have it up on a elevated stand with nothing blocking the vents.


I dont think i will be playing for much longer, do not want to risk shortening the lifespan, until i atleast get an accurate temp reading but even still i cant see it being ~10C less, which is were it would be OK to say the least in my opinion.



Thoughts?


PS- SMC does not work- shows only fan RPM, temp is 0
Istatpro i have not been able to use i am at work but i can update if anyone wants.
 
mintflex said:
Thoughts?
Click to expand...

malman89 is right, that sounds like typical MBP performance when playing games. It's nothing to get alarmed by, well, maybe it could be problematic if you do nothing but game all day, every day...

Still, what you're saying is a little discouraging. You're telling me that these machines can only run D3 with all low settings (at least on the mac side)? I wasn't expecting shadows or AA, but I was expecting at least high textures at native res, and not having to click low fx. To make matters worse, this is in Act 1? Ugh. Either the mac client is heavily unoptimized, the intel drivers on the mac side are terrible, or a combination of both.

I ordered my 13" Pro earlier today, and I should be getting it in early next week. I'll do a full test with my complete settings and see how it performs in Acts 1-4, against mobs, and in public games (preferably with at least 1 witch doctor in the game). My settings will be geared for consistent frames and little to no frame dropping. I am hoping I don't have to use boot camp to achieve this...
 
hkim1983 said:
malman89 is right, that sounds like typical MBP performance when playing games. It's nothing to get alarmed by, well, maybe it could be problematic if you do nothing but game all day, every day...

Still, what you're saying is a little discouraging. You're telling me that these machines can only run D3 with all low settings (at least on the mac side)? I wasn't expecting shadows or AA, but I was expecting at least high textures at native res, and not having to click low fx. To make matters worse, this is in Act 1? Ugh. Either the mac client is heavily unoptimized, the intel drivers on the mac side are terrible, or a combination of both.

I ordered my 13" Pro earlier today, and I should be getting it in early next week. I'll do a full test with my complete settings and see how it performs in Acts 1-4, against mobs, and in public games (preferably with at least 1 witch doctor in the game). My settings will be geared for consistent frames and little to no frame dropping. I am hoping I don't have to use boot camp to achieve this...
Click to expand...


I put it on Low everything to try and get the temperature to settle down while i play...you can pretty much max out the settings and still get ~30FPS from what i can see. but update us on how it goes, I'm sure your tests will be a little more conclusive then mine.


Only thing I'm worried about is the high temperatures...
 
Not to take the thread too off-topic, but considering the talk of 95 degree celsius temps, what laptop coolers work best with Macbook Pros? Many of the laptop coolers out there seem to work in concert with vents underneath most PC laptops. Without those vents on MBPs, what coolers are best? I've read that the Zalman NC-2000 is one of the best out there, but again, that's from PC gamers with 17" PC laptops...
 
mintflex said:
I put it on Low everything to try and get the temperature to settle down while i play...you can pretty much max out the settings and still get ~30FPS from what i can see. but update us on how it goes, I'm sure your tests will be a little more conclusive then mine.


Only thing I'm worried about is the high temperatures...
Click to expand...

Hm...that sounds a lot more promising. I can't wait to mess around with it then.

I can understand your concern for the heat output, but unless you're doing this frequently, it shouldn't be an issue. If you were putting in multi-hour sessions every single day for years on end, you may run into problems, but I can't imagine anyone who bought a MBP doing that, so yea.
 
im curious (very new to mac) why you would not run diablo 3 in bootcamp besides the obvious fact that windows costs money? is there any other reason why you would not want to use bootcamp?
 
peleincubus said:
im curious (very new to mac) why you would not run diablo 3 in bootcamp besides the obvious fact that windows costs money? is there any other reason why you would not want to use bootcamp?
Click to expand...

I have a copy of Windows 7 professional, so cost is a non-issue.

Is there a reason why I wouldn't want to use boot camp? Yea, it's inconvenient. Rebooting doesn't sound like a big deal, until you're doing it just for the sake of Diablo (or another PC game), and then having to reboot to get back to everything else. I personally find this to be kind of annoying, and if possible, I'll take slightly reduced performance on the mac side for the sake of convenience.

I plan on setting up a boot camp partition regardless (to use with Parallels or whatever virtualization software I want to use) for Windows, but I would prefer if gaming wasn't a large factor in that.

I don't have a problem with Windows 7 otherwise.
 
peleincubus said:
im curious (very new to mac) why you would not run diablo 3 in bootcamp besides the obvious fact that windows costs money? is there any other reason why you would not want to use bootcamp?
Click to expand...

sure it costs money... its also tons of extra work taking care of 2 OSes instead of one. It also takes up tons of space on the drive... plus its Windows. Most people that buy Macs do not want to use Windows. Plus you have to reboot to play a game, making your computer useless to do anything else while playing, unless you want to switch all your software over to Windows, and not just the one game... if that was the case I wouldn't have a Mac in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back