PDA

View Full Version : Gaming.




imHappy
Aug 7, 2011, 06:11 AM
Hey guys,

I have an ultimate 2010 which im not changing it =(

The only thing that makes me still love this machine is some gaming because i don't use photoshop or cad programs that requires processor muscle.

So basically is the 2010 superior at gaming than the new mba?
Also, will apple release new drivers that may make the hd3000 better at gaming in some time in the future making the 2010 actually garbage?


Thx in advance.



miles01110
Aug 7, 2011, 06:21 AM
So basically is the 2010 superior at gaming than the new mba?

No, but that's not really the point. They're both underpowered.

NutsNGum
Aug 7, 2011, 07:10 AM
They're both underpowered.

Underpowered is such a nonsense word sometimes.

It is underpowered for say, space flight, but it handles Photoshop quite nicely.

What you have said doesn't really make any sense.

Dark Void
Aug 7, 2011, 07:17 AM
No, but that's not really the point. They're both underpowered.

You don't need a hexacore CPU and say a recent GTX card to play games. It doesn't have to be anyone's point of using the machine to game. What's the problem with using it to handle your gaming if it can do so? OP is not suggesting that he purchased a MacBook Air in order to game and furthermore run high-end, intensive, or even recent games.

OP, the HD 3000 was proven to preform better under OS X only. If you are looking to do some gaming in Windows via Boot Camp, the 320M preforms much better than the HD 3000 does.

Also, Photoshop really isn't that CPU intensive. :/ Nor is it necessary to have anything more than a dual-core CPU to run it, low clock speed or not.

KnightWRX
Aug 7, 2011, 07:23 AM
It is underpowered for say, space flight, but it handles Photoshop quite nicely.


Underpowered for space flight ? What exactly do you think is the CPU used in the space shuttle ? ;)

No, but that's not really the point. They're both underpowered.

Underpowered for what exactly ? I play Worms Armageddon and Civ IV at 2048x1152 smooth as butter on my 2010 MBA.

miles01110
Aug 7, 2011, 07:24 AM
It is underpowered for say, space flight, but it handles Photoshop quite nicely.

Read the thread title. Or, provide a link to the game called "Photoshop."

So, "gaming" in the normal context will lag on a Macbook Air- or you'll be turning down the settings significantly. Unless it's Angry Birds.

KnightWRX
Aug 7, 2011, 07:27 AM
So, "gaming" in the normal context will lag on a Macbook Air- or you'll be turning down the settings significantly. Unless it's Angry Birds.

Explain how Civ IV and Worms Armageddon don't "lag" on my MBA 2010 at even my external monitor's 2048x1152 native resolution then.

Am I doing something wrong ? Gaming doesn't mean "only playing the latest graphics blockbuster at full settings!" you know. Heck, gaming isn't even about graphics, it's about games.

And the MBA 2010 can run plenty of titles flawlessly. Heck, most of those blockbuster graphics! titles are just pure garbage eye candy with no actual gameplay.

Dark Void
Aug 7, 2011, 07:34 AM
So, "gaming" in the normal context will lag on a Macbook Air- or you'll be turning down the settings significantly. Unless it's Angry Birds.

There are great games that don't require much of anything to run that still have great player bases and can be ran on the hardware in question with consistency. Try to be less ignorant.

Hyper-X
Aug 7, 2011, 08:01 AM
It depends on the game and what the OP's expectations are. You could have a video card that can output 200FPS, however if you run into a situation that drops the frame rates to 160 all of the sudden, you will notice it.

OP, don't expect drivers to make the Intel HD3000 better than the Geforce 320/330M chipsets. If anything drivers may help address existing issues with certain game titles which may also include features you may not have had access to before.

Oppressed
Aug 7, 2011, 08:19 AM
Where the hell are people getting the information that the HD 3000 is still better then the 320m? Every review says that the CPU is roughly double in power, but the GPU is still behind in many ways.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4528/the-2011-macbook-air-11-13inch-review/11


http://www.macworld.com/article/161362/2011/07/macbookairbenchmarks.html#lsrc=twt_jsnell


OP: The 2010 is still superior if your main purpose, or at least the most that you tax your computer with, is gaming.

mgs4
Aug 7, 2011, 10:05 AM
why are you gaming on a MBA? i dont mean any offense, but for gaming you need a decent PC, not a macbook air which is for a totally different purpose..

Oppressed
Aug 7, 2011, 10:17 AM
why are you gaming on a MBA? i dont mean any offense, but for gaming you need a decent PC, not a macbook air which is for a totally different purpose..

Don't be so concerned with the reason why people made their purchases. Try and get past that and keep on topic, because to be honest that question has been done to death on this forum and if you really care go check other gaming threads.

gman901
Aug 7, 2011, 10:40 AM
I use my 2010 11" Air for everything which includes gaming. It plays most games at reasonable frame rates (30+) unless you get into more complex games such as Crysis2. You probably won't be able to run games like the Witcher 2 at any resolution and get any sort of playable framerate; however I was told you couldn't use emulators like Dolphin, yet I am playing some games at 70-100% speed on my underpowered dual core processor! I will say this - I agree with most people stating that you should not game on the 2011 MacBook Air and that you should get a Windows PC for gaming. Even Apple removed it's marketing about the Air being able to game according to the Air website. All it states now is that you will get "power efficient graphics.". Yet if you check out the refurb site for the MacBook Air, it still promotes the graphics and talks about gaming with the 2010 Air. So be happy with the 2010 Air for gaming if you Bootcamp to Windows 7.

Oppressed
Aug 7, 2011, 11:02 AM
I use my 2010 11" Air for everything which includes gaming. It plays most games at reasonable frame rates (30+) unless you get into more complex games such as Crysis2. You probably won't be able to run games like the Witcher 2 at any resolution and get any sort of playable framerate; however I was told you couldn't use emulators like Dolphin, yet I am playing some games at 70-100% speed on my underpowered dual core processor! I will say this - I agree with most people stating that you should not game on the 2011 MacBook Air and that you should get a Windows PC for gaming. Even Apple removed it's marketing about the Air being able to game according to the Air website. All it states now is that you will get "power efficient graphics.". Yet if you check out the refurb site for the MacBook Air, it still promotes the graphics and talks about gaming with the 2010 Air. So be happy with the 2010 Air for gaming if you Bootcamp to Windows 7.

The reason they removed gaming performance off the Macbook Air's page was not because it couldn't game, but that it was not better then the previous generation. If you look at previous Macbook Air performance pages for the 2010 model it showed how the graphics and gaming performance was up to 2.8x that of the previous model and showed EVE onine and Warcraft.

KnightWRX
Aug 7, 2011, 11:03 AM
why are you gaming on a MBA? i dont mean any offense, but for gaming you need a decent PC, not a macbook air which is for a totally different purpose..

Why not game on a MBA ? The games run, are smooth, why should we have to waste an extra 500-600$ on a PC ? :rolleyes:

Lord Appleseed
Aug 7, 2011, 11:04 AM
Read the thread title. Or, provide a link to the game called "Photoshop."

So, "gaming" in the normal context will lag on a Macbook Air- or you'll be turning down the settings significantly. Unless it's Angry Birds.

I believe he brought up photoshop because you called the MBA underpowered even though it can handle most heavy tasks quite well, also it was named in OP as a program that needs a lot power.

NutsNGum
Aug 7, 2011, 11:04 AM
Read the thread title. Or, provide a link to the game called "Photoshop."

So, "gaming" in the normal context will lag on a Macbook Air- or you'll be turning down the settings significantly. Unless it's Angry Birds.

You didn't explicitly state that your "underpowered" comment related to gaming, and even if it does, your conclusion is garbage. Plenty of games work just fine on the Air, though I can't say I'd ever buy one specifically for that purpose.

gman901
Aug 7, 2011, 11:10 AM
The reason they removed gaming performance off the Macbook Air's page was not because it couldn't game, but that it was not better then the previous generation. If you look at previous Macbook Air performance pages for the 2010 model it showed how the graphics and gaming performance was up to 2.8x that of the previous model and showed EVE onine and Warcraft.

Okay, that makes sense. But you would think Apple would at least promote the fact that performance with some games like LFD 2 and Portal 2 actually run faster in OSX than the previous model. Apple is obviously the king of marketing, but you would figure they would highlight areas that makes the newest model look much better in every category. Which leads me to my original point is that it appears to me that Apple is agreeing with a lot of folks on these MBA forums that the newest models are not intended for gaming, but for more professional applications.

2IS
Aug 7, 2011, 11:55 AM
Underpowered is such a nonsense word sometimes.

It is underpowered for say, space flight, but it handles Photoshop quite nicely.

What you have said doesn't really make any sense.

I'm not sure why it's so hard for you to figure out... The OP is tailing about gaming and the reply is correct, they are both underpowered for gaming. He probably didn't specify that because most people would have been able to figure it out pretty easily

Why not game on a MBA ? The games run, are smooth, why should we have to waste an extra 500-600$ on a PC ? :rolleyes:

Because if gaming is a priority, they do it a whole hell of a lot better. This is fact, not fiction.

NutsNGum
Aug 7, 2011, 12:25 PM
I'm not sure why it's so hard for you to figure out... The OP is tailing about gaming and the reply is correct, they are both underpowered for gaming. He probably didn't specify that because most people would have been able to figure it out pretty easily

Good for you. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBBdyVQchWQ&feature=related)

2IS
Aug 7, 2011, 12:40 PM
It actually has nothing to do with me. But yeah, try to analyze replies in the context of the topic next time. Don't let the fact that someone suggested your beloved MBA isn't good at some tasks cloud your thinking.

Fluffy402
Aug 7, 2011, 01:19 PM
http://www.villageinstruments.com/tiki-index.php?page=ViDock

If I used a laptop for gaming and couldn't get a decent dedicated card, I'd roll out this thing. I'd just stuff my 6870 in there and be fine.

NutsNGum
Aug 7, 2011, 01:31 PM
It actually has nothing to do with me. But yeah, try to analyze replies in the context of the topic next time. Don't let the fact that someone suggested your beloved MBA isn't good at some tasks cloud your thinking.

Dear Lord, you are humourless aren't you?

Computer for work. Xbox for games.

Oppressed
Aug 7, 2011, 01:50 PM
Okay, that makes sense. But you would think Apple would at least promote the fact that performance with some games like LFD 2 and Portal 2 actually run faster in OSX than the previous model.

Where are people getting this information?

2IS
Aug 7, 2011, 01:55 PM
Dear Lord, you are humourless aren't you?

Computer for work. Xbox for games.

So what you're saying is there was no reason for you to post here at all sicne this thread isn't about work or xbox. Way to prove your point. :rolleyes:

NutsNGum
Aug 7, 2011, 01:59 PM
So what you're saying is there was no reason for you to post here at all sicne this thread isn't about work or xbox. Way to prove your point. :rolleyes:

http://www.mmocrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/picard-sigh1.jpg

gman901
Aug 7, 2011, 02:07 PM
Where are people getting this information?

Here's one example of the HD3000 outperforming the 320M:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-3000.37948.0.html

Secondly, is that chart benchmarking on Windows 7 or OSX? This "person" is only pointing out some games do perform better under the Mac. I am not comparing Windows because obviously the 2010 Air smokes the 2011 in gaming performance.

Oppressed
Aug 7, 2011, 02:34 PM
Here's one example of the HD3000 outperforming the 320M:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-3000.37948.0.html

Secondly, is that chart benchmarking on Windows 7 or OSX? This "person" is only pointing out some games do perform better under the Mac. I am not comparing Windows because obviously the 2010 Air smokes the 2011 in gaming performance.

Ah you're right. For some reason in L4D2 it trails behind which is unusual compared to other games. But there are many cases in which the 2011 performs poorly to the 2010 even when both are under OSX.

misterneums
Aug 7, 2011, 02:45 PM
TL;DR: In most cases, the m320 is > Intel 3000.

gman901
Aug 7, 2011, 03:09 PM
No problem! I think the Intel chip is better optimized under OSX for newer games. I am hoping the next version of the 11" Air improves the gpu above the 320M specs.

Esquire1
Aug 7, 2011, 03:28 PM
I want to buy a shovel to hammer down these nails. The shorter one would be better than the longer one, right?

Oppressed
Aug 7, 2011, 03:56 PM
I want to buy a shovel to hammer down these nails. The shorter one would be better than the longer one, right?

I generally find some shovels to be more light weight then most hammers. Also some shovels can fold up making them much easier to carry. Not only that a shovel has other uses such as digging a hole, but in a pinch it could hammer those nails fine. Granted not as good as a hammer, but enough to suit my needs and wants.

To answer your question, the longer one will give you more force to hammer down the nails, but the shorter one is much more portable.


No problem! I think the Intel chip is better optimized under OSX for newer games. I am hoping the next version of the 11" Air improves the gpu above the 320M specs.

I'm hoping the 15 inch Macbook Pro Slim version has a dedicated GPU. Also it is highly likely that the 2012 MBA refresh with Ivy Bridge will beat out both the 320m and HD 3000.

imHappy
Aug 7, 2011, 03:59 PM
ahhh guys, i just woke up and 30 replies, thats pretty nice.


Well, i read the whole post and yes, i know the mba air 10/11' are not gaming machines, but then again, it's always nice if you can play some decent games in low to mid atleast (thats enough for me actually).

Yet again, I sometimes feel like i should sell this mba since in peru, the new ones are arriving in atleast 2 months. And thats because i actually think i may need autocad in a future, lets say 2 years maybe?

maril1111
Aug 7, 2011, 04:04 PM
For serious gaming neither Mac is really an option and you are much better of with say a gaming desktop an alienware or an asus gaming laptop, and light gaming both are about the same while they are on par in some games, the 320 beats the 3000 in others and than the 3000 is different games like L4D

Oppressed
Aug 7, 2011, 04:06 PM
Think about the way you currently use your MBA. Where do you feel the bottleneck is? Do you use programs to tax the CPU to the max or are you using the GPU to the max? If the answer is latter then the 2011 model might not be for you. You will see next to no beneficial advantage after upgrading if all you do is web surf, email, stream videos, and office products. You might see a downgrade if you play games in addition to these uses. If you see yourself using AutoCAD in 2 years, then why upgrade now and not wait 2 years for the 2013 MBA which is sure to destroy the 2011 upgrade in all aspects?

imHappy
Aug 7, 2011, 04:39 PM
pretty much, i guess i will get in 2 years a mba and imac for autocad, hope that by that time the mba may be more powerfull than a mbp because, damn, portability! haha

sloan47
Aug 7, 2011, 04:51 PM
I'm actually excited for the new Thunderbolt ViDock external gpu enclosures they just announced. I have a GTX 580 I'd love to attach to the Air. Granted it's not entirely a portable solution but it certainly allows me to use the Air as a desktop replacement at my desk.

mfr1340
Aug 7, 2011, 05:19 PM
I just bought the MBA 13 4/256, and I was wondering if anyone has tried to play this game on the new air's? Before I go and pay $50.00

h00ligan
Aug 7, 2011, 05:37 PM
Depends on the game

2IS
Aug 7, 2011, 05:44 PM
COD4 isn't $50 and should run adequatly on the 2011 Air

mfr1340
Aug 7, 2011, 05:50 PM
COD4 isn't $50 and should run adequatly on the 2011 Air
its in the app store for $49.95. am I missing something

2IS
Aug 7, 2011, 05:57 PM
its in the app store for $49.95. am I missing something

I guess Apple is a bit behind the PC pricing structure. It's $20 on Steam

Formul
Aug 7, 2011, 07:09 PM
I guess Apple is a bit behind the PC pricing structure. It's $20 on Steam

the COD4 on Steam is not a mac version

LeakedDave
Aug 7, 2011, 07:12 PM
Where the hell are people getting the information that the HD 3000 is still better then the 320m? Every review says that the CPU is roughly double in power, but the GPU is still behind in many ways.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4528/the-2011-macbook-air-11-13inch-review/11


http://www.macworld.com/article/161362/2011/07/macbookairbenchmarks.html#lsrc=twt_jsnell


OP: The 2010 is still superior if your main purpose, or at least the most that you tax your computer with, is gaming.

You're confused.

You're comparing the Pro's 320m scores to the Airs HD 3000 scores.

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph4528/39943.png

HD 3000 Airs look better here.

Oppressed
Aug 7, 2011, 07:25 PM
What? Read all the charts.

The HD 3000 is also a bit slower than the GeForce 320M used in last year's MacBook Air, at least in games that aren't largely CPU bound (basically anything but Starcraft 2):

LeakedDave
Aug 7, 2011, 07:25 PM
What? Read all the charts.

Ok so they perform about the same with gaming. That's what I conclude. The 2010 is better by 1-5 fps if that, in certain situations, which is unnoticeable.

However the new Air gives you rapejob CPU performance for everything else.

Same gaming experience, much better CPU performance.

If you're getting an Air solely to play games on, then it doesn't matter which you get.

But then again I guess I'm referring to the i7 Airs ;/

Oppressed
Aug 7, 2011, 07:43 PM
I thought that too and decided to run some real world tests. My 2010 11 inch 1.6 GHz 4 Gigs of RAM 128 GB HD vs 2011 11 inch i5 4 Gigs of RAM and 128GB HD. The test is here:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=13014855&postcount=10

But you can see that the difference is a bit more then 1-5 fps. The first being a 2010 and the second being the 2011. Benchmarks in my opinion only give a partial picture.

reputationZed
Aug 7, 2011, 07:57 PM
Underpowered is such a nonsense word sometimes.

It is underpowered for say, space flight.Actually the CPU in your MBA is quite a bit more powerful than what they had on the Space Shuttle

2IS
Aug 7, 2011, 08:23 PM
the COD4 on Steam is not a mac version

Yeah I know. I mistakenly assumed both versions would cost the same.

illutionz
Aug 7, 2011, 08:32 PM
I thought that too and decided to run some real world tests. My 2010 11 inch 1.6 GHz 4 Gigs of RAM 128 GB HD vs 2011 11 inch i5 4 Gigs of RAM and 128GB HD. The test is here:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=13014855&postcount=10

But you can see that the difference is a bit more then 1-5 fps. The first being a 2010 and the second being the 2011. Benchmarks in my opinion only give a partial picture.

Just an observation, the 2nd picture contains a fairly vulgar sentence on that chat box. Looks like a naughty GMOTD by Holykmoly from Elune server =O

Oppressed
Aug 7, 2011, 08:35 PM
Just an observation, the 2nd picture contains a fairly vulgar sentence on that chat box. Looks like a naughty GMOTD from Holykmoly from Elune server =O

Yeah well the internet will be the internet. ;)

imHappy
Aug 7, 2011, 08:49 PM
To clarify something,

Im gaming exclusively in osx and im not installing windows through bootcamp any time soon.

So again i read some post mentioning that hd 3000 is better at gaming(maybe more fps) than 320m in osx conditions.

Can someone clarify whether its true or not?

Omg im really thinking about selling this machine

Oppressed
Aug 7, 2011, 09:00 PM
I'm a little lost as to your confusion. Is your current MBA meeting all your needs or are you experiencing the "greener side of the hill" effect with the 2011 model? You mentioned yourself that you don't use CPU intensive programs, and therefore what benefit would you get from the 2011 MBA?

In any case you can read posts, look up benchmarks, and lust over stats, but what it comes down to is real world uses. For me the pictures below were really telling of the HD 3000, and its something I don't think a few drivers will fix.

The first being a 2010 MBA and the second being a 2011 MBA.

imHappy
Aug 7, 2011, 09:25 PM
thx, ur running wow natively in osx or windows?

Oppressed
Aug 7, 2011, 09:28 PM
Mac OSX. I pondered putting Windows 7 on my MBA but I value the space more as all my needs are met by OSX.

Dark Void
Aug 7, 2011, 09:54 PM
I would run WoW on low graphics. I mean, really, anything more just kills your frames on a machine like this where squeezing frames out would be ideal, as while it is playable, you can make it run a lot more consistently with lower settings. The game doesn't look bad at all with low settings, no AA, etc. It really doesn't look different at all.

Just adjust your view distance. Probably the only really important setting.

Lord Appleseed
Aug 7, 2011, 10:50 PM
I'm not sure why it's so hard for you to figure out... The OP is tailing about gaming and the reply is correct, they are both underpowered for gaming. He probably didn't specify that because most people would have been able to figure it out pretty easily


They are not 'underpowered for gaming' because they aren't even meant for gaming, but in case you want to play some games on them thy do quite well.

johnadams2007
Aug 10, 2011, 03:51 PM
may i just point out that stupid people shouldn't be allowed to post charts from notebookcheck. what they don't understand is that the intel hd3000 benchmarks on notebookcheck are from the i7 2630, 2920, and other processors much more powerful than those available in the 2011 airs. Therefore, its not even an accurate representation of the gaming performance difference in the 2010 and 2011 airs. and before anyone gets ********...read a little deeper into the notebookcheck benchmark scores. now if more people were like our kind wow playing friend above me, and could actually provide real 2010vs2011 results, we would stop having threads like this.

PS...this isn't just my 2 cents thrown in. It's fact.