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

WoW and other games on new 9400M Macbook

Hi there,

Thank you bluemouse. This is realy great news :)

But i just read this article: http://gizmodo.com/5063492/macbook-and-macbook-pro-dual-review

IF the difference is truely THIS huge. Jeez. I guess i will go with the MBP. I mean de difference is just 200$. I was planning to get the MB with backlight keyboard.

Can you state your opinion on this matter bluemouse? Is the view angle really this bad?

Thanks againe for your testing. I wonder... with the new patch now its possible to activate better shadows. It cost pretty much more performance, so I heard....
I guess you didnt test this, did you?

TOD
 
bluemouse said:
EDIT: As for the fan, I've been running WoW for some time now, and the noise is not noticeable. If I turn off the game sounds, it's a lower-pitched whooshing as compared to the high drone of the other Macbook. According to iStat Nano, I'm running at 38 degrees and 5415 RPM on the fan.
Click to expand...

These are wonderful news! Thanks a lot for your insight. Can I bother you a bit more? *begs* :)

Could you report the iStat RPM fan value at idle, then play with

/console maxfps N

until you find the N value which makes RPM = RPM idle? (i.e. the maximun FPS for the system to remain at low load).

As I said, I play in a very quiet enviroment and that means quite a lot for me :)

/bow
/farewell
 
adding my experiences: (standard 2.0Ghz macbook)

WoW BC 3.0.2

detail set to "good".

consistent 35-40 FPS outdoors, 50+ indoors. lowest it drops is 25 FPS for me.

very good performance.

i hear no noise whatsoever, so if anyone is concerned about that, don't be (in my experiences).

9400M= in every way superior. it definitely destroys my old 7300GT i had in my desktop.
 
Shivetya said:
$200 difference? I thought the difference was $400 from top end MB to bottom end MBP
Click to expand...

Ah ok. Yes its 400 bucks. My bad ;-)

Still. 400 for a much better display quality...
The question I am asking myself is: Lets say u use the MBP with the 9400M does that mean that the 9600Gt will be completely deactivated, so that the battery wont be affected by the life duration. Also it would mean that it doesnt get hot, and because of that the fans will not go on like they would with the 9600gt on active mode.

You get what i mean right? :)

TOD
 
New MB's graphics are supposed to be 4-5 times faster, but you might
be better off with a MBP if games are your thing.
 
Over at Massively.com they have a couple videos of Warhammer Online running on High Quality on the 2.4 MacBook and it was running great. Probably would stil need to lowe rsettings if you do any PvP but it showed how well the new MBs are for gaming. Don't have the direct link as it is blocked here at work, but it is on the first page at www.massively.com.
 
Anyone drive an external monitor with the 9400GM yet? Like at 1920x1200 :p

I am looking to replace my iMac (7600gt series) with a laptop/external lcd setup.
 
TerrorOFdeath said:
Can you state your opinion on this matter bluemouse? Is the view angle really this bad?

Thanks againe for your testing. I wonder... with the new patch now its possible to activate better shadows. It cost pretty much more performance, so I heard....
I guess you didnt test this, did you?

TOD
Click to expand...

I can report that my experience does not in any way resemble that of the Gizmodo reviewer. Quite the opposite, actually; I have noted improved viewing angles compared to my Macbook. I don' t know what would cause such a difference, but my screen looks a lot better than that. I'll get some pictures of a DVD playing later tonight, and we'll see how they come out. I did test the new WoW shadows; they were included in any test where I said the graphics were set to max.
 
Shivetya said:
Anyone drive an external monitor with the 9400GM yet? Like at 1920x1200 :p

I am looking to replace my iMac (7600gt series) with a laptop/external lcd setup.
Click to expand...

Is it possible for a Macbook (not pro) to do video out to a monitor and do over 1280x800? I thought it was impossible and 1280x800 was maximum supported resolution.
 
Resolutions?

Thanks for all your hard work Bluemouse

You never mentioned the resolutions you were running your tests at. I assume native res, but could you post exactly what res. Thanks a bunch.
 
eifer said:
Is it possible for a Macbook (not pro) to do video out to a monitor and do over 1280x800? I thought it was impossible and 1280x800 was maximum supported resolution.
Click to expand...


From their site

Extended desktop and video mirroring: Simultaneously supports full native resolution on the built-in display and up to 2560 by 1600 pixels on an external display, both at millions of colors
 
Shivetya said:
From their site

Extended desktop and video mirroring: Simultaneously supports full native resolution on the built-in display and up to 2560 by 1600 pixels on an external display, both at millions of colors
Click to expand...

oh wow.. this is excellent. So I can hook a macbook up to my 19" screen at 1440x900? if it could play world of warcraft at that resolution with a decent framerate, that'd seal the deal for me
 
zroe said:
Thanks for all your hard work Bluemouse

You never mentioned the resolutions you were running your tests at. I assume native res, but could you post exactly what res. Thanks a bunch.
Click to expand...

I apologize for the oversight; yes, everything was run at native resolution.
 
Yay! Edit: Boo!

Greatly encouraged by your framerates, I've finally taken the plunge! I'm going to be a Mac owner in just a few short days when my shiny new Macbook arrives. Thanks a ton for the info, Bluemouse :D

Update - CRAP. Just got news that iMacs will be updated a month sooner than I expected. Canceled my order, I'll be waiting for a little while longer, I guess.
 
Ok. I got my 2.4 MacBook last night. Today as an ultimate test I setup Boot Camp with XP then installed the Vanguard Saga of Heroes trial. At 1280x800, Render Quality on High and Textures it ran pretty smooth. I even had Volumetric clouds on which is a hog. But the fan did kick in full speed as it started to get pretty hot.

Vanguard is a notorious resource hog so I hope this is a good test of how well the new 9400m actually is.
 
well well. My macbook is arriving on tuesday according to fedex. i couldn't wait so I went and bought one at the apple store. Play WOW all the time in Burning Steeps would get 15-20 FPS with all settings on Low. Now with all settings on Med or high I get 40-45 YAY I AM IN LOVE:eek:
 
motoxpress said:
Very interesting indeed. Even with my MBP I get slow performance in Shatt. so this is encouraging. Really want to know what it would do with the source games.

-mx
Click to expand...

With WoW please remember that it came out in 2004 .. it is a very CPU dependant game also. Vid card helps, but even with the 4870 X2 in windows, **** is mid 40s for me... meaning dont judge it by ****. Go to a secluded but dense area and judge that way.

Im wondering if this beats the gateway I have with the mobility 2400HD pro!
 
The new 3.02 patch KILLED my performance with a first generation macbook pro with a x1600. Before I was getting 45-50 in shatt and now I'm hitting 18 fps......

Before I could do medium settings and now I have to set everything to low at 1440x900.......the new gfx engine they put in with the shadows is crippling my macbook pro.

I'm jealous to hear you guys are getting 40ish fps on the new macbook with the same patch.
 
I just ordered my 2.4 Macbook. I have quite a few games I can test out once I get it. I have:

WoW
Warhammer Online
The Witcher
Final Fantasy XI


I have a few other MMO's, but I doubt I'll pay the $15 monthly fee to test them out.

Are all of you who are playing WoW on the new Macbook still happy with its performance?
 
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