PDA

View Full Version : Anybody tried WoW or Doom 3 on a MacBook?


BurtonCCC
May 26, 2006, 11:13 AM
If so, what were the game settings that you used to achieve the best performance without skipping or lagging? I'd like to hear from people who have actually tried it. I know there's hundreds of you who can say "Highly unlikely," and I'm telling you that I think it's highly unlikely that it will run well, just the performance of the integrated graphics card is probably the key factor in deciding whether I get a fully-pimped MacBook or fully-pimped 17" MBP.

Daniel.

risc
May 26, 2006, 06:47 PM
BareFeats just did some gaming benchmarks on the MacBook: http://barefeats.com/mbcd3.html including Doom 3.

http://barefeats.com/image06/mb3-doo.png

GRAPH LEGEND:
MacBook Pro 17" -- Apple Intel MacBook Pro 17" with 2.16GHz Core Duo, 2GB of 667MHz memory and Radeon X1600 Mobility GPU with 256MB VRAM
MacBook Pro 15" -- Apple Intel MacBook Pro 15" with 2.0GHz Core Duo, 2GB of 667MHz memory and Radeon X1600 Mobility GPU with 256MB VRAM
MacBook 13" -- Apple Intel MacBook 13" with 2.0GHz Core Duo, 2GB of 667MHz memory and Intel GMA950 integrated graphics processor that uses up to 80MB of system memory (although Doom 3 was convinced it was using 256MB)
PowerBook 15" -- Apple PowerBook 15" with 1.67GHz G4, 2GB of memory and Radeon Mobility 9700 GPU with 128MB VRAM
iBook 14" -- Apple iBook 14" with 1.42GHz G4, 1.5GB of memory and Radeon 9550 GPU with 32MB VRAM

I think that says it all really. ;)

unfaded
May 26, 2006, 10:07 PM
...wow. I know it has more pixels than the iBook it replaced, but I was definitely hoping for more than that.

aaron.lee2006
May 26, 2006, 10:16 PM
Remember those benchmarks are 1204x768. Run it in 800x600, it's a good mix between qaulity and performance, I played ut2k4 on windows with an older integrated card and ran it fine (PC). If you run the games in 800x600 it should play alot better than 1204x768.

eXan
May 27, 2006, 12:09 AM
Remember those benchmarks are 1204x768. Run it in 800x600, it's a good mix between qaulity and performance, I played ut2k4 on windows with an older integrated card and ran it fine (PC). If you run the games in 800x600 it should play alot better than 1204x768.

No, I dont think he will play the above mentioned games at these resolutions. MB has a wide screen, so prefferable resolutions are 800x500 through 1280x800

blueflame
May 27, 2006, 12:20 AM
why is it that with the same video card, the 17 incher is so much faster?
andreas
BareFeats just did some gaming benchmarks on the MacBook: http://barefeats.com/mbcd3.html including Doom 3.

http://barefeats.com/image06/mb3-doo.png

GRAPH LEGEND:
MacBook Pro 17" -- Apple Intel MacBook Pro 17" with 2.16GHz Core Duo, 2GB of 667MHz memory and Radeon X1600 Mobility GPU with 256MB VRAM
MacBook Pro 15" -- Apple Intel MacBook Pro 15" with 2.0GHz Core Duo, 2GB of 667MHz memory and Radeon X1600 Mobility GPU with 256MB VRAM
MacBook 13" -- Apple Intel MacBook 13" with 2.0GHz Core Duo, 2GB of 667MHz memory and Intel GMA950 integrated graphics processor that uses up to 80MB of system memory (although Doom 3 was convinced it was using 256MB)
PowerBook 15" -- Apple PowerBook 15" with 1.67GHz G4, 2GB of memory and Radeon Mobility 9700 GPU with 128MB VRAM
iBook 14" -- Apple iBook 14" with 1.42GHz G4, 1.5GB of memory and Radeon 9550 GPU with 32MB VRAM

I think that says it all really. ;)

Littleodie914
May 27, 2006, 01:11 AM
why is it that with the same video card, the 17 incher is so much faster?
andreasI was wondering the same thing... I noticed the 17" MBP has a slightly faster processor than the 15" (2.0GHz -> 2.16GHz), but that certainly shouldn't be enough to increase the FPS that dramatically. Anyone have an explanation?

(And wow, the 14" G4 iBook beats the new spiffy MacBook... Ouch :p)

risc
May 27, 2006, 03:04 AM
Once again Barefeats has the answer: http://barefeats.com/quick.html

May 19th, 2006 -- 17" MacBook Pro has variable speed GPU!

We were pleased with but puzzled by the dramatic speed jump in 3D gaming compared to the 15" MacBook Pro. But after receiving a tip from Michael Bean of AMUG, we rechecked the 17" MacBook Pro's X1600 GPU's core and memory speeds before, during and after running 3D Games using Graphiccelerator's "Show ATI Frequencies" function. Before starting a series of runs, the core measured 311MHz frequency. When we ran 3D games, it jumped to 423MHz. After sitting idle a few minutes, it fell back to 311MHz. We measured a similar jump in the GPU's memory clock from 297MHz to 450MHz. Now we know why the 17" MacBook Pro performed as well as the Intel iMac on the 3D Game tests.

Dont Hurt Me
May 27, 2006, 06:31 AM
Seems like those benches tell the story, looking very forward in hearing from all those intel integratedgraphic pushers we have here ? Integrated graphics arent for modern gaming........... Dont try to fool yourself or others. Integrated graphics are what holds down any machine now that cpu's are so fast., Apple should have some kind of option for a real GPU. Doom3 has been out now, working on 2 years. 9 frames in a new machine at lower resolution running a older game.

Scarlet Fever
May 27, 2006, 08:44 AM
9 fps... ouch... my macbook is on crouches...

AP_piano295
May 27, 2006, 09:43 AM
ouch loses to the ibook.

vouder17
May 27, 2006, 10:04 AM
I really wish someone could give a detailed review of how WoW plays on the Macbook. So basically a review with sufficient RAM, the performance in raids and what the settings are at. I have done searches and the closest review i got was the one on xlr8yourmac and that was also a little flaky IMO. So please someone who has a Macbook do some tests.

BurtonCCC
May 27, 2006, 11:55 AM
I really wish someone could give a detailed review of how WoW plays on the Macbook. So basically a review with sufficient RAM, the performance in raids and what the settings are at. I have done searches and the closest review i got was the one on xlr8yourmac and that was also a little flaky IMO. So please someone who has a Macbook do some tests.
Yeah, we've got Doom 3 covered and I thank you all very much, I now know that I'll be getting a 17" MBP. I would like to see some WoW stats as well though.

Daniel.

Dont Hurt Me
May 27, 2006, 12:02 PM
New Pro books will be released in the next couple of months would be my guess. If i was in the market i would wait for the next update. They will be sweet.

eXan
May 27, 2006, 07:36 PM
New Pro books will be released in the next couple of months would be my guess. If i was in the market i would wait for the next update. They will be sweet.

Dont bother waiting "a couple of months". Nobody knows when Apple is going to release stuff

dmw007
May 27, 2006, 08:00 PM
Dont bother waiting "a couple of months". Nobody knows when Apple is going to release stuff


True, one could play the waiting game forever. Being a owner of a MacBook Pro, I must say that they are awesome machines. Very, very fast- this thing rivals my Power Mac G5 for many tasks- gotta love the Intel Core Duo. :) So for those looking to buy a laptop, I would have no qualms about buying a current revision of the MBP.


I must say, I am rather disappointed to see the performance of the MacBook on gaming.....glad that I went for a machine with a "real" video card. :)

ReanimationLP
May 27, 2006, 08:23 PM
You can probably get 20-30 FPS running Doom 3 under Windows via Bootcamp.

dmw007
May 27, 2006, 08:42 PM
You can probably get 20-30 FPS running Doom 3 under Windows via Bootcamp.


That seems a bit optimistic in my opinion.

tristan
May 27, 2006, 11:18 PM
Dont bother waiting "a couple of months". Nobody knows when Apple is going to release stuff

Well, Intel's processor release schedule is widely known, and you can assume that Apple will usually use the newest Intel chips in order to be competitive. Meron is supposed to come out in August.

tristan
May 27, 2006, 11:19 PM
That seems a bit optimistic in my opinion.

Yeah, seriously.

ReanimationLP
May 27, 2006, 11:30 PM
Optimistic? I'm being quite downright honest.

Doom 3's Windows version is a TON better than the Mac version.

eXan
May 28, 2006, 01:34 AM
Optimistic? I'm being quite downright honest.

Doom 3's Windows version is a TON better than the Mac version.

True, but not THAT much. On BareFeats:

http://barefeats.com/image06/boo-doo.gif

Link (http://barefeats.com/bootcamp.html)

iHeartTheApple
May 28, 2006, 01:49 AM
Just posted my findings on WoW gameplay on my stock MB...here's the link (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=204543) to the thread, if you're interested. Simply put...it plays great! :)

dmw007
May 28, 2006, 07:32 AM
Just posted my findings on WoW gameplay on my stock MB...here's the link (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=204543) to the thread, if you're interested. Simply put...it plays great! :)

Looks like WoW plays fine on the MacBook- but not Doom 3. :cool:

MacRumorUser
May 28, 2006, 07:41 AM
Looks like WoW plays fine on the MacBook- but not Doom 3. :cool:

I dont know why people are fretting. Doom 3 is a pretty looking - but ultimatly very poor, boring game. It's more of a chore than a game.

ID have lost the plot with recent releases, even Quake 4 is only average.

Yes look we have the doom 3, which makes everything nice and dark and all our monsters like shiny bits of plastic - graphics engine, all we need now is someone to make a good game because ID dont seem to be able lately.

Dont Hurt Me
May 28, 2006, 07:50 AM
I dont know why people are fretting. Doom 3 is a pretty looking - but ultimatly very poor, boring game. It's more of a chore than a game.

ID have lost the plot with recent releases, even Quake 4 is only average.

Yes look we have the doom 3, which makes everything nice and dark and all our monsters like shiny bits of plastic - graphics engine, all we need now is someone to make a good game because ID dont seem to be able lately.How about F.E.A.R. or FarCry, also Crysis is coming and is suppose to be awesome.

MacRumorUser
May 28, 2006, 09:31 AM
How about F.E.A.R. or FarCry, also Crysis is coming and is suppose to be awesome.

Yeah but come on Crysis, yes it looks un belieavbly good, BUT...
The demos they were showing that on were powered by quad sli graphics cards. That's four (4) monstrous horsepower guzzling beasts retailing at $599 each.... Yes they claim as they get further along development it will get optimised for general performance, but even then to run at anything like those screenshots were talking dual sli minimum...

That's the one thing we might look forward to in the new 'mac pro' line - replacement powermac, is dual graphic card slots. Then we can look forward to crysis, but if your looking to run a game like that, you were never likely to run it on a macbook or even a macbook pro / imac's x1600...

F.E.A.R was ok game, though the ending was very dissapointing and multiplayer is a bit poo.

Abulia
May 30, 2006, 01:38 PM
I've been doing a series of benchmarks on my 2.0 Ghz MacBook with the following configurations:

512 MB
1 GB
1.25 GB
2 GB

With both the stock 5400 rpm drive and a 7200 rpm drive. Unfortunately my 7200 rpm drive shipped to me bad, so I'm waiting on a replacement.

In any event, my suite includes real benchmarks and I plan to include whatever game downloads I can get my hands on. Doom3? UT? WoW? In any event I'll provide my WoW impressions and hopefully a test suite that people can reproduce.

tristan
May 30, 2006, 10:02 PM
I dont know why people are fretting. Doom 3 is a pretty looking - but ultimatly very poor, boring game. It's more of a chore than a game.

ID have lost the plot with recent releases, even Quake 4 is only average.

Yes look we have the doom 3, which makes everything nice and dark and all our monsters like shiny bits of plastic - graphics engine, all we need now is someone to make a good game because ID dont seem to be able lately.

Doom & Quake have a plot? :D

I understand the issue though - if the MacBook can't play today's games, what hope does it have for tomorrow's?