I;m getting the base model MBP with a 320 HD in it and would like to know how well runescape runs in OSX
ty
ty
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.
Runescape on MBP
- Thread starter thesk1llerz
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
ik ik but i keep seeing threads about it not running so well and it crashing their browsers and foI really like playing runescape, and dont want to use my windows desktop or install windows on my MBP
Hm, maybe it depends on which broswer you are running?
I remember a short stint with runescape. I played it on my girlfriends white macbook (about three years old) for about an hour or two one night when I was bored. Granted that isnt much test time but I saw no problems then. I was using Firefox. Im sure you will be fine, and if for some reason there is a problem you can just give in and boot camp it. And actually since its not a very demanding game you could probably just a virtual machine of windows and play it that way while still being logged into OSX.
But I have a feeling you will be perfectly fine playing it. Since its browser based, maybe open it up on a MBP at the apple store?
Thanks for response
btw with
"And actually since its not a very demanding game you could probably just a virtual machine of windows and play it that way while still being logged into OSX"
so you mean using fusion or what?
btw with
"And actually since its not a very demanding game you could probably just a virtual machine of windows and play it that way while still being logged into OSX"
so you mean using fusion or what?
Yep fusion or parallels. Both have 14 day trials I believe. But make sure you try running the game in differnet browsers in OSX first.
I can't imagine you'd have any problems. But if you did, it's be a result of Flash crashing Safari, so I'd try Chrome or Fire Fox as an alternative if that happens.
Abyssgh0st, please do your research.
Runescape is a browser-based game, yes, but it runs in Java, not Flash. Only ads run in Flash. But with an adblocker (there is an addon in Firefox), there isn't even a possibility to crash because of Flash, because there is no Flash loaded.
OP:
I understand the original poster, because Runescape does -not- run well on my MacBook with a GMAx3100 inside. It's playable on the lowest settings, and since it's not heavily action-based (you don't have to click every second or so), it's also playable on the highest settings. But not without a very annoying drop in framerate. (Say about 5 fps)
Nowadays, Mac computers are of much more capable than the Intel GMA X3100 ones. I always used a scale of 9400m's being 4x higher in fps in games. I use four, since it's probably more. In the worst case, it's 4x, otherwise, it's higher, so no worries.
And then there's the 320M, which Apple advertised as even more powerful than the 9400M one. Say an average of being 50% faster, making it in total 6x as fast as a MacBook from 2 years ago.
I'm not even speaking of RAM upgrades. I use DDR2 RAM, new MacBooks use DDR3 RAM. I use a 2.1 GHz processor, newer MacBooks have, since today, a 2.4 GHz processor. To do not speak of technical details, I'll just say it's faster overall even more. So no worries about your new gaming machine.
Runescape is a browser-based game, yes, but it runs in Java, not Flash. Only ads run in Flash. But with an adblocker (there is an addon in Firefox), there isn't even a possibility to crash because of Flash, because there is no Flash loaded.
OP:
I understand the original poster, because Runescape does -not- run well on my MacBook with a GMAx3100 inside. It's playable on the lowest settings, and since it's not heavily action-based (you don't have to click every second or so), it's also playable on the highest settings. But not without a very annoying drop in framerate. (Say about 5 fps)
Nowadays, Mac computers are of much more capable than the Intel GMA X3100 ones. I always used a scale of 9400m's being 4x higher in fps in games. I use four, since it's probably more. In the worst case, it's 4x, otherwise, it's higher, so no worries.
And then there's the 320M, which Apple advertised as even more powerful than the 9400M one. Say an average of being 50% faster, making it in total 6x as fast as a MacBook from 2 years ago.
I'm not even speaking of RAM upgrades. I use DDR2 RAM, new MacBooks use DDR3 RAM. I use a 2.1 GHz processor, newer MacBooks have, since today, a 2.4 GHz processor. To do not speak of technical details, I'll just say it's faster overall even more. So no worries about your new gaming machine.
Runescape runs fine on my MBP 13", 2.26 Ghz, 2 gigs of RAM, 9400m. In other words, it'll work fine, like many others have said... But I have played RS for a few hours on this machine, and I know it works fine. I use firefox or safari (I think I was using safari when I was playing RS, though).
Thanks for all the input my MBP came yesterday and it runs runescape perfectly. Even though I only played for 2-3 hours. On safari, the only thing that happened to my laptop was really hot.
I have a MBP and it lags if you put the settings any higher than the bare minimum or in HD if lags completly unplayable.
