New Macbook Pros running Diablo 3

[Windgrace]

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.

[Fireball926]

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.

[Windgrace]

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.

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)?

[doh123]

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)?
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.

[definitive]

here are a few benchmarks on windows systems, and as you know, windows usually runs games faster compared to macs. also, keep in mind that the systems that are running these tests aren't same as what the macbooks are equipped with.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/05/28/intel-hd-4000-investigation/5
http://www.techspot.com/review/532-diablo-3-performance/page2.html
http://pcper.com/reviews/Mobile/Intel-Ivy-Bridge-Low-Voltage-Review-Making-Slower-Faster/Performance-Synthetic-3D-Gam

[hkim1983]

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.

[InlawBiker]

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!

[hkim1983]

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!

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.

[doh123]

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.

[applegigs]

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.

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.

[Windgrace]

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.

[Windgrace]

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.

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.

[marcolino]

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...

[doh123]

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...
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.

[hkim1983]

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.

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.

[Windgrace]

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.

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.

[mintflex]

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.

[malman89]

Thoughts?

Sounds like a typical MBP performance when gaming or doing anything intensive. Mediocre heat dissipation and 95C isn't too alarming.

[hkim1983]

Thoughts?


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...

[mintflex]

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...


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...

[SuperMatt]

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...

[hkim1983]

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...

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.

[peleincubus]

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?

[hkim1983]

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?

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.

[doh123]

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?

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.

[malman89]

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.

There's no work taking care of Windows 7. MSE is all you need (or install Avast if you really care to) and Software Update as necessary - just like OS X.

You can put as little or as much HD space to the partition that you want. 40GB, 400 GB, or whatever you need to do what you want - just know how much space you're going to need depending on what you need when setting it up.

The vast majority of anyone that games on a Mac has Windows and OS X due to games either being only for Windows or running significantly better in Windows. Then plenty of people need virtual installations for work.

Also rebooting is a slight downside, but also a positive - it can limit how much you play when you have to reboot. I guess if you have no self control it would be the opposite. Probably most mid req games can probably be run via Parallels or VMWare, but those really intensive games need to be run natively to ensure optimal performance.

[Windgrace]

Got a 2012 Macbook Pro 13" yesterday with 8 gb memory.

Installed D3, the game runs fine on low settings. I could probably up a few to medium if I wanted. No lag problems whatsoever, and the computer didn't set off fans or get ridiculously hot after an hour of play in Act 1 Inferno.

[mintflex]

Got a 2012 Macbook Pro 13" yesterday with 8 gb memory.

Installed D3, the game runs fine on low settings. I could probably up a few to medium if I wanted. No lag problems whatsoever, and the computer didn't set off fans or get ridiculously hot after an hour of play in Act 1 Inferno.

so you are saying you didnt hear the fans (with no game volume obviously)? if this is true then maybe i got a lemon, because mine ramp up to 6000 rpm within the first 5 minutes.

unless you are in a very cold room.

Do you have temperature readings?

[Windgrace]

so you are saying you didnt hear the fans (with no game volume obviously)? if this is true then maybe i got a lemon, because mine ramp up to 6000 rpm within the first 5 minutes.

unless you are in a very cold room.

Do you have temperature readings?

Do you have the 8 gb upgrade?

I don't have temperature readings. Is there a program I can run to do so? It seems to run just fine.

[doh123]

There's no work taking care of Windows 7. MSE is all you need (or install Avast if you really care to) and Software Update as necessary - just like OS X.

You can put as little or as much HD space to the partition that you want. 40GB, 400 GB, or whatever you need to do what you want - just know how much space you're going to need depending on what you need when setting it up.

The vast majority of anyone that games on a Mac has Windows and OS X due to games either being only for Windows or running significantly better in Windows. Then plenty of people need virtual installations for work.

Also rebooting is a slight downside, but also a positive - it can limit how much you play when you have to reboot. I guess if you have no self control it would be the opposite. Probably most mid req games can probably be run via Parallels or VMWare, but those really intensive games need to be run natively to ensure optimal performance.

thats all subjective. If thats all acceptable to you, thats great... install Windows, but those things are NOT acceptable to everyone.

[mintflex]

Do you have the 8 gb upgrade?

I don't have temperature readings. Is there a program I can run to do so? It seems to run just fine.


13 inch 2.9 ghz model. comes with 8gb.


ya i got temperature monitor from app store for 5$ ( potentially a waste as it is probabaly not 100% accurate) but seeing as how i lost my last computer to heat from gaming i wanted to make sure i was one step ahead this time.

the back near the hinge gets hot to the touch, i put ice packs on the table which is ~1inch below it becuase its on a foam stand.

[InlawBiker]

This sound encouraging. I'd love to know how it runs on the 13" MBP on an external monitor at high rez.

I have a 23" HD monitor now. If it runs reasonably well @ 1440x900 then this could be my next computer.

I'm a little spoiled running it maxed at full HD but, I would not miss Windows too much.

[SirShavesALot]

I don't think this is off topic, just asking about a different model MBP. I'm looking at the new 15" MBP (not the Retina display as I honestly wasn't that impressed with it) and I was wondering if anyone has any experience or insight as to how D3 would run using the NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 1GB of GDDR5 memory that comes on the new MBP. Also, in terms of gaming and an overall better experience, is it worth it to upgrade to the higher res display or is the 1440 x 990 more than enough? Would the 1680 x 1050 res prove too much to run Diablo 3 at with most settings at high? What I mainly use my computer for is music (listening and editing), word processing, spread sheets, web browsing, the occasional Adobe Suite, and of course Diablo 3. Any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

[doh123]

13 inch 2.9 ghz model. comes with 8gb.


ya i got temperature monitor from app store for 5$ ( potentially a waste as it is probabaly not 100% accurate) but seeing as how i lost my last computer to heat from gaming i wanted to make sure i was one step ahead this time.

the back near the hinge gets hot to the touch, i put ice packs on the table which is ~1inch below it becuase its on a foam stand.

there is a temp app for $5 ??? Wow.. I need to do that.. write some apps that already have free apps that do the same exact thing, but charge for them and make some money.

[InlawBiker]

Following up here because the anecdotal evidence is starting to trickle in. Macbooks with HD4000 should be able to play Diablo 3 acceptably well.

I really wanted the new fictional 2012 iMac, but the lower cost and bonus mobility of the 13" MBP got me thinking. My feeling is the MBP 15's are just too big. I really prefer desktop mode but of course a laptop is handy.

But MBP 13's hit the sweet spot in price and size. I think the Dual Core i7 is fast enough for serious Photoshop work. And it's good enough to jack into an HD monitor (which I already own) and use two screens and get some real work done. USB 3.0 is a must-have which is turning me off the 2011 iMacs.

The last question is casual gaming.

1. Here's a YouTube video of the 2012 Air playing Diablo 3 pretty well. Same HD4000 video as the MBP 13", they should perform equally. Note that he left shadows enabled. Turning them off is the #1 way to speed up the game. This is at 1280x800. I would really like to see 1680x1050 but I doubt that's going to fly. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gc5FXiPUcFk

2. This is a good post from somebody who seems to understand how the settings affect game play. https://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/5870127100

3. The rMBP at full resolution Diablo 3 if you're into that. The reviewer didn't bother to lower the performance settings, what a pity. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQx43mJJwBI

It still remains to be seen if bootcamping to Win7 will improve the game at all. That would be a last resort and not preferred but, I'd still like to see the numbers.

[lilsoccakid74]

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)?

All about the resolution change. One of, if not the biggest factor in how much graphic power is needed.

[Fandongo]

It doesn't matter.
They destroyed any remnants of fun in the Diablo franchise by destroying attack speed today.

It's literally unbearable.
Buy Diablo II or Hellfire.

[InlawBiker]

It doesn't matter.
They destroyed any remnants of fun in the Diablo franchise by destroying attack speed today.

It's literally unbearable.
Buy Diablo II or Hellfire.

This cracks me up for some reason.

I played Diablo 2 back in the day and I played it again in 2012 to get warmed up for Diablo 3.

I have to agree, Diablo 2 was a much better game. It was infinitely more complex in how you could build up your character. It's a shame it was dumbed down so much for 3. I haven't tried the attack speed 1.03 patch yet but I'll check it out tonight.

[doh123]

Following up here because the anecdotal evidence is starting to trickle in. Macbooks with HD4000 should be able to play Diablo 3 acceptably well.

I really wanted the new fictional 2012 iMac, but the lower cost and bonus mobility of the 13" MBP got me thinking. My feeling is the MBP 15's are just too big. I really prefer desktop mode but of course a laptop is handy.

But MBP 13's hit the sweet spot in price and size. I think the Dual Core i7 is fast enough for serious Photoshop work. And it's good enough to jack into an HD monitor (which I already own) and use two screens and get some real work done. USB 3.0 is a must-have which is turning me off the 2011 iMacs.

The last question is casual gaming.

1. Here's a YouTube video of the 2012 Air playing Diablo 3 pretty well. Same HD4000 video as the MBP 13", they should perform equally. Note that he left shadows enabled. Turning them off is the #1 way to speed up the game. This is at 1280x800. I would really like to see 1680x1050 but I doubt that's going to fly. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gc5FXiPUcFk

2. This is a good post from somebody who seems to understand how the settings affect game play. https://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/5870127100

3. The rMBP at full resolution Diablo 3 if you're into that. The reviewer didn't bother to lower the performance settings, what a pity. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQx43mJJwBI

It still remains to be seen if bootcamping to Win7 will improve the game at all. That would be a last resort and not preferred but, I'd still like to see the numbers.

I have to agree... the Intel HD 4000 is very impressive. I have a Macbook Pro Retina, and I forced the Intel HD 4000 to stay on for some testing, and I can even get Skyrim to run at 1280x800 at ultra settings and remain fluid... and thats not even in Windows, but with Wineskin. Most games at low settings shouldn't even be a question if they'll work or not, but... yes they will.

[hkim1983]

I ran through most of Act 1 with some friends on an alt character today, I also briefly tested Acts 2-4.

I am running stock ram (4 GBs) and HD (5400 rpm). I do not know if this will make a difference.

My goal was to be able to play the game at native res (1280x800) with at least high textures even if I had to turn everything off or on low. Well, unfortunately, there's still some choppiness and jerky gameplay with those settings (this includes low fx enabled). The game still runs smooth for the most part, but you'll still encounter areas of choppiness, and this was most apparent in the 3 man party I was in today (none of which were Witch Doctors, which would make things worse).

Could this run smooth with low textures? Maybe, I guess I'll try that later, but I would be a bit disappointed if I had to do that. Either way, it runs well enough that it's not worth getting the slightly higher settings through boot camp. For the guy concerned about heat, my fans did rev up audibly, and my macbook did get a bit warm, but nowhere near as loud or hot as my old macbook playing D3.

[Fandongo]

This cracks me up for some reason.

I played Diablo 2 back in the day and I played it again in 2012 to get warmed up for Diablo 3.

I have to agree, Diablo 2 was a much better game. It was infinitely more complex in how you could build up your character. It's a shame it was dumbed down so much for 3. I haven't tried the attack speed 1.03 patch yet but I'll check it out tonight.

Obviously, people complaining about the demon hunter being overpowered got through. Ignoring that they easily get 1hit killed in inferno, they took away the fun behind hungering arrow, skills like rapid fire are less effected.
Monk still attacks fairly fast, so long as you double fist.
Barb, even at max frenzy - feels slow.

I don't understand, ruin the damage from super fast attacks - fine. Ruin the speed of all attacks, all classes become less fun. Life on hit bonuses are now completely useless, as is any hope to stun.

If you've been to inferno, you know everything is retarded fast.
To keep you from living...they made sure to implement (a while ago) a 25% movement speed cap.
Now attack speed is nothing.
What's next?
Vitality?
It makes the game too easy if you can just...survive a hit.

D2 made massive renovations with most patches too.
But it wasn't every day.
And it wasn't monetarily motivated.
And the only class they ever totally screwed was the sorceress.
Which happens to be the only class not totally boned by the 1.03 patch.

It was fun while it lasted.
At least I can still play the old 1.02 single player....
oh, wait.

[InlawBiker]

This page has some good suggestions on tuning your Mac for Diablo 3.

http://osxdaily.com/2012/06/01/improve-diablo-3-performance-in-mac-os-x/

I'd still like to see some bootcamp frame rates, and how it plays at 1680x1050 on an LCD monitor. Hopefully some vids will appear on YouTube soon.

G.

[InlawBiker]

I have not been to inferno yet. I have two chars in Nightmare, a Barbarian and Witch Doctor. I played the Barbarian for a couple hours.

He does feel a lot slower. Two-hand weapon is almost useless now it's so slow. My speed-up stuff is now cut in half so, I guess it's time to focus on some other stat.

[Marrakas]

Diablo3 runs really really good after the latest patch. No more stuttering at all.

[fchang]

so you are saying you didnt hear the fans (with no game volume obviously)? if this is true then maybe i got a lemon, because mine ramp up to 6000 rpm within the first 5 minutes.

unless you are in a very cold room.

Do you have temperature readings?

Hey guys i just want to help you guys out cause i feel your pain. I got a mbp 13" early 2011 and did a lot of research about d3 running on it. running at 6000 rpm while d3 is running is totally normal.. fan is suppose to kick in and your temperature low 90s to high 80s is normal (depending on the tempature of the room).

In my personal experience I was at 91-92c fans on constantly. To help reduce heat in the laptop and not messing up the expensive battery it came with I have removed the battery out of the mbp. By doing that it will prolong the laptop and my mbp been running around 70s. My fans do not even turn on whats so ever cause most of the heat is coming from the battery itself. How ever you do need a special screw driver to remove the battery if you are considering to remove it. the screw driver that is needed is the "Tri Wing Y1 screwdriver"

For me it was worth while removing it because i play a few hours a day and my laptop usually just sits on my desk. If I ever do need it to be portable it just a few screws to put that battery back in.. takes only 5 minutes.

About lag and graphics issue:

No matter what mbp you planning to get you will experience lag due to the integrated graphics card to the board. Mac is simply not made for gaming.. running win7 on your mac will dramatically increase the fps give or take double in mac os. But personally I bought a mac for the mac os and i tried to find alternative to make it run smooth with out win7.

Here is what i recommend you do from variety of sources I collected,in diablo 3 change the settings to this:

-Display full screen
-resolution 800 x 600
-letterbox uncheck
-vertical sync check or uncheck (test it out for yourself.. some people say its better with it and some people think likewise)
-max foreground fps 15
-max background fps 1
-texture low
-shadow quality low
-physics low
-clutter density off
-anti aliasing off
-low fx on

another way to boost ur fps:

go to spotlight type in "D3prefs" and open it
make the following changes:

Disabletrilinearfiltering "1"
Hardwareclass "1"

let me know if you guys got any questions. Hope this will help you guys

[mintflex]

...

What do you use for temperature reading

[draughn101]

Does anyone happen to have a Diablo 3 guest pass that they'd be willing to give? I'll looking to try it out on my rMBP and would be willing to give detailed impressions in exchange.

[DragonJade]

I'm looking at the new 15" MBP (not the Retina display as I honestly wasn't that impressed with it) and I was wondering if anyone has any experience or insight as to how D3 would run using the NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 1GB of GDDR5 memory that comes on the new MBP.

I'd like to know how Diablo 3 runs on the 15" 512Meg version.

[InlawBiker]

I'd like to know how Diablo 3 runs on the 15" 512Meg version.

It runs great, fully maxed at 1440x900. I play it at 1680x1050 (external monitor) at all High settings except I disabled shadows and it's fine. I might be able to turn on the shadows, but I haven't tried it yet.

There's a bug in this version of Diablo 3 so that I can't see the FPS, it always says 0. I expect they'll fix that eventually.

[DragonJade]

It runs great, fully maxed at 1440x900. I play it at 1680x1050 (external monitor) at all High settings except I disabled shadows and it's fine. I might be able to turn on the shadows, but I haven't tried it yet.

There's a bug in this version of Diablo 3 so that I can't see the FPS, it always says 0. I expect they'll fix that eventually.

That's good to know. Thanks. I don't spend too much time on games, just fits and starts, but it's good to know that it'll handle Diablo 3 when I get around to it.

[outsidethebox]

Would anyone have a Guest Pass from a boxed D3 that they could send my way? I just picked up my base rMBP a few days ago, and really want to try how it runs before I make the purchase.

[cullenl87]

Hi, I have the rMBP 2.6 ghz i7 with 16 gb of ram. I have my computer off of the battery saving preferences when I play games, so it is instantly using 650M. I've been playing and the game is a steady 30 FPS but I thought it'd be higher. What is the issue here? My default settings are put on high and I have V-Sync on because the screen tearing was terrible. Other than that, shouldn't my computer be killing this thing at atleast 50 FPS? Help, thanks.

[Sambo110]

Hi, I have the rMBP 2.6 ghz i7 with 16 gb of ram. I have my computer off of the battery saving preferences when I play games, so it is instantly using 650M. I've been playing and the game is a steady 30 FPS but I thought it'd be higher. What is the issue here? My default settings are put on high and I have V-Sync on because the screen tearing was terrible. Other than that, shouldn't my computer be killing this thing at atleast 50 FPS? Help, thanks.

What resolution?

[cullenl87]

What resolution?

1660 x 1040

[Sambo110]

1660 x 1040

I was getting a constant 60 FPS maxed out at 1200P, so that is odd.

[cullenl87]

I was getting a constant 60 FPS maxed out at 1200P, so that is odd.

Honestly it is odd, I'm thinking maybe the FRAPs counter is messed up...locked at 30 or something. Because I'm a gamer and the game looks to be running at 60 FPS. Unless my eyes deceive me. Oh, well. I'm just neurotic about this stuff.

[Sambo110]

Honestly it is odd, I'm thinking maybe the FRAPs counter is messed up...locked at 30 or something. Because I'm a gamer and the game looks to be running at 60 FPS. Unless my eyes deceive me. Oh, well. I'm just neurotic about this stuff.

Why run it under Windows? Works perfect under OS X.

[taedouni]

Inte's HD 4000 has a large increase in performance relative to older integrated graphics. If I were you I would youtube videos of people showing off the HD 4000. You should be able to play most games with the exception of really demanding games such as BF3 (unless you want to play at graphics that are worse than consoles).