If you have a Mac with Nivida 9400m

[PurpleCliff]

Can you tell me how it goes with games? What games have you played and how have they run? And how much memory do you have?
Thanks! :D

[Consultant]

You might want to search next time:

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=9400m+games+site:forums.macrumors.com

[PurpleCliff]

You might want to search next time:

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=9400m+games+site:forums.macrumors.com

There is only one result there than is similar to my post ... but okay I guess that'll have to do. :)

[VPrime]

Seems pretty decent to me.
I can play Counter strike source(through CrossOver) with decent settings and a steady FPS.

[PurpleCliff]

Seems pretty decent to me.
I can play Counter strike source(through CrossOver) with decent settings and a steady FPS.

Cool, thanks.

[Dagless]

I don't bother with Parallels or anything that will cost me performance, but under Bootcamp it's a really stellar little graphics card.

In native res I can run L4D with everything on med-high and it never slows down.
TF2; everything on full.
Fallout3; everything on med-high.
HL2 and episodes; everything on full.
Bioshock; is strange, everything is smooth at max except around certain slow down spots (mostly when theres a pool of water on the ground, reflections likely the cause).
GTA: San Andreas; everything on full.

That's all I play.

(all these are just to have it running smoothly. I like 25-30fps)

[waiwai]

In native res I can run L4D with everything on med-high and it never slows down.
TF2; everything on full.
HL2 and episodes; everything on full.

That's all I play.

(all these are just to have it running smoothly. I like 25-30fps)

L4D does not run smoothly @ med-high, native res on a Aluminum 2.4 4GB Macbook 7200 RPM HD with bootcamp XP. Especially online you will notice massive fps spikes. When you're facing a horde and several player controlled zombies bosses, you'll be lucky to get a stable 15 fps running at those setting, it gets real choppy. I currently run L4D at the lowest settings/lowest resolution and get 40-100 fps (depending on the # of mobs in my screen) - I've tweaked my config to pump out as much fps as it can (cuz lets face it, i'd rather be able to kill a zombie than to care what little wrinkles and scratches are on its face). Personally I prefer fps over quality, higher frame rate makes all the difference in performance and reaction time in online first person shooters. So thats something to consider, u aren't going to get killer graphics and frame rate combined in the Aluminum Macbook even when it is all decked out. If you are really competitive... 25-30 FPS just don't cut it and would be considered as unplayable. But to each their own... Just something to consider.

Same applies for TF2. You're not going to be having a pleasant online experience running at med-high quality at native res. Gets even worse as you get to higher populated servers.

I've read a lot about people running HL2 games at med/max settings @ native res and claiming it to be "playable". This is very subjective and I found it to be very misleading. Perhaps it is playable offline when you're fighting bots... But when you're up against online players, its completely different and you'll find that you die more than you're accustomed to not because u suck... but because you just aren't seeing everything due to the low fps.

[Dagless]

Well that's odd. My 2ghz Unibody MB runs L4D very well and I'm not even overclocking the GPU. I don't have AA or Vsync on though and they make a huge performance difference. TF2 runs exceptionally well, it never drops to a stutter even facing down during a scouts double jump or firing Sasha at a wall.

And I think you're getting confused between online lag and low FPS. Playing online will not affect the frame rate at all, the players and positional objects will 'teleport' around if the server can't handle the connections. Have a read about tickrate. It doesn't relay the output video from the server, that would be a tremendous waste of connection speed - just positional objects.

[waiwai]

Well that's odd. My 2ghz Unibody MB runs L4D very well and I'm not even overclocking the GPU. I don't have AA or Vsync on though and they make a huge performance difference. TF2 runs exceptionally well, it never drops to a stutter even facing down during a scouts double jump or firing Sasha at a wall.

And I think you're getting confused between online lag and low FPS. Playing online will not affect the frame rate at all, the players and positional objects will 'teleport' around if the server can't handle the connections. Have a read about tickrate.

You'll notice a substantial drop in fps when in a server with 32 players compared to 16 even if you have a good connection. YOU WILL constantly notice unstable framerates, even with vsync and aa and client side rate tweaks to config. net_graph 3 to see details in-game. It is extremely rare for game servers these days not to be able to support the # of players it has been enabled to handle... If you buy a server to support 32 players... it will handle 32 players. Ping has nothing to do with the # of fps you get, it has everything to do with your systems capability not the server, if you have a good connection - the only thing different from you and every other joe in the server is your systems specs. I ping in low 30's whereever I go but I still get huge spikes in fps when I have an army of peepz on my screen (truth be told, I have a decked out 2.4 aluminum mb and the GPU is the only thing that's slowing everything down when it comes to games - i'm not going to lie to myself or anyone into thinking it is an "amazing" mobile gaming solution when it isn't). Can't deny it...

Its very misleading to claim that the Aluminum Macbook performs "very well" in any moderately to highly GPU intensive game such as anything running on the Source Engine. A better description would be "satisfactory".

What do you consider "very well"? Based on player preference... Competitive or just dont care? Im merely providing my competitive observation. With 20-30 fps even with a good connection (we're talking anything under 100), you'd be a walking corpse in most servers. Comp stomping gets old real fast especially in offline mode for L4D and you'll notice spikes even in offline mode when ur facing a horde.

[Dagless]

What do you consider "very well"? Based on player preference... Competitive or just dont care? Im merely providing my competitive observation. With 20-30 fps even with a good connection (we're talking anything under 100), you'd be a walking corpse in most servers. Comp stomping gets old real fast especially in offline mode for L4D and you'll notice spikes even in offline mode when ur facing a horde.

Competative, at least on L4D, TF2 and CS:S servers.
Satisfactory to me would be running games with settings in med at native res. I'm getting a smooth 30fps (even 50fps on some custom TF2 maps) with everything on full, I'd say that's very well. Perfect would be 60fps+ under the same conditions. At least in my book.

[aznguyen316]

I can second that L4D does not run at a steady 30FPS on med/hi settings. I have a 2.0 MB and use FRAPS to show the framerate in the corner. I am running it at native resolution 1200x800, w/ AA off, trilinear, mix of low/med and get about 25FPS.. If I were to go down to x600 I could go mostly meds but certainly not many highs unless I have shaders/shadows low with it to get 30FPS.. The game runs well but you may be overestimating FPS, b/c 20FPS is playable but can be misleading b/c it may not seem that low but it is.

Other games I can play in bootcamp:

Crysis Warhead with all mainstream (mids) settings except shader/shadow to min, resolution at x600 I average 20FPS which is very playable, but 20FPS is not a good target normally.

Fallout 3 I can play lows/med at x600 resolution and get about 25-30FPS but in the open world where there's more rendering I get down to 20, VATS also is about 20FPS. But in games like these I love draw distance so I have that up some.

The Orange Box via Bootcamp runs great, but I play it mostly on Crossover games, I can do HL2, Ep1 at high at x720 windowed with pretty good FPS, I say avg 30+, using "net_graph 1" Haven't tried TF2 or Portal or Ep2. CS:S plays well at same settings as HL2 also.

Guild Wars (Crossover Games) I can play at most nearly high, max draw distance and get 40+ FPS unless I'm in town with a lot of ppl around then ~30.

I played WoW (Mac native) for a little bit and got ~40 with most med except draw distances at max. I would drop to 20-30 in capital cities.

I'll be testing the original Crysis via bootcamp soon as well as Stalker Clear Sky and will post results using FRAPS.

In bootcamp I'm testing using Vista 64bit that's been highly stripped for gaming. Specs are in my sig (7200RPM 4GB RAM)

[waiwai]

I can second that L4D does not run at a steady 30FPS on med/hi settings. I have a 2.0 MB and use FRAPS to show the framerate in the corner. I am running it at native resolution 1200x800, w/ AA off, trilinear, mix of low/med and get about 25FPS.. If I were to go down to x600 I could go mostly meds but certainly not many highs unless I have shaders/shadows low with it to get 30FPS.. The game runs well but you may be overestimating FPS, b/c 20FPS is playable but can be misleading b/c it may not seem that low but it is.

Other games I can play in bootcamp:

Crysis Warhead with all mainstream (mids) settings except shader/shadow to min, resolution at x600 I average 20FPS which is very playable, but 20FPS is not a good target normally.

Fallout 3 I can play lows/med at x600 resolution and get about 25-30FPS but in the open world where there's more rendering I get down to 20, VATS also is about 20FPS. But in games like these I love draw distance so I have that up some.

The Orange Box via Bootcamp runs great, but I play it mostly on Crossover games, I can do HL2, Ep1 at high at x720 windowed with pretty good FPS, I say avg 30+, using "net_graph 1" Haven't tried TF2 or Portal or Ep2. CS:S plays well at same settings as HL2 also.

Guild Wars (Crossover Games) I can play at most nearly high, max draw distance and get 40+ FPS unless I'm in town with a lot of ppl around then ~30.

I played WoW (Mac native) for a little bit and got ~40 with most med except draw distances at max. I would drop to 20-30 in capital cities.

I'll be testing the original Crysis via bootcamp soon as well as Stalker Clear Sky and will post results using FRAPS.

In bootcamp I'm testing using Vista 64bit that's been highly stripped for gaming. Specs are in my sig (7200RPM 4GB RAM)

Amen...

[Dagless]

Then wtf. I have the video quality set to med, everything else set to high, AA off, Vsync off, native res and I get 27-35 on Fraps (peak being on No Mercy, lowest being in forest areas). Also allocated more page flip using the regedit fix (to fix an old TF2 bug) which really speeds up on loading.

I am using hacked video drivers though, which I was considering rolling back on because I've lost the ability to adjust the backlight via the keyboard. But if they bring this much of a performance boost then I'll stick with what I have :cool:

[jav6454]

CoC: Generals and Generals (Zero Hour also) plays well at ~25-30 fps on everything high.

[aznguyen316]

Then wtf. I have the video quality set to med, everything else set to high, AA off, Vsync off, native res and I get 27-35 on Fraps (peak being on No Mercy, lowest being in forest areas). Also allocated more page flip using the regedit fix (to fix an old TF2 bug) which really speeds up on loading.

I am using hacked video drivers though, which I was considering rolling back on because I've lost the ability to adjust the backlight via the keyboard. But if they bring this much of a performance boost then I'll stick with what I have :cool:

Which drivers are you using? I'm assuming one from laptopvideo2go? I currently have the new supported nVidia mobile drivers in bootcamp. If you're getting good FPS then more power to ya!

[Patriks7]

Here is a mega awesome thread on this subject; http://www.mac-forums.com/forums/os-x-applications-games/127153-unofficial-macbook-gaming-thread-late-2008-models.html
I think it's the best gaming thread for the MacBook!

[cathyy]

You'll notice a substantial drop in fps when in a server with 32 players compared to 16 even if you have a good connection. YOU WILL constantly notice unstable framerates, even with vsync and aa and client side rate tweaks to config. net_graph 3 to see details in-game. It is extremely rare for game servers these days not to be able to support the # of players it has been enabled to handle... If you buy a server to support 32 players... it will handle 32 players. Ping has nothing to do with the # of fps you get, it has everything to do with your systems capability not the server, if you have a good connection - the only thing different from you and every other joe in the server is your systems specs. I ping in low 30's whereever I go but I still get huge spikes in fps when I have an army of peepz on my screen (truth be told, I have a decked out 2.4 aluminum mb and the GPU is the only thing that's slowing everything down when it comes to games - i'm not going to lie to myself or anyone into thinking it is an "amazing" mobile gaming solution when it isn't). Can't deny it...

Its very misleading to claim that the Aluminum Macbook performs "very well" in any moderately to highly GPU intensive game such as anything running on the Source Engine. A better description would be "satisfactory".

What do you consider "very well"? Based on player preference... Competitive or just dont care? Im merely providing my competitive observation. With 20-30 fps even with a good connection (we're talking anything under 100), you'd be a walking corpse in most servers. Comp stomping gets old real fast especially in offline mode for L4D and you'll notice spikes even in offline mode when ur facing a horde.

Umm, sorry but the main problem with TF2 is that it's very CPU intensive, yet it's only coded to use one core. Hence TF2 usually stresses out the CPU of every system and is the main bottleneck, and not your graphics card.

The iMacs are likely to have better CPUs and hence perform better.

[asphyxiafeeling]

i run COD4 on my alu macbook at 40-60 FPS. normally it struggles to get 20-30, but with some console tweaking (remove shadows) you can get a huge boost, and the game still looks fine.

[eXan]

What runs faster, Crysis or Crysis Warhead?

Not necessarily on 9400, but in general... thx :)

[Prom1]

I can second that L4D does not run at a steady 30FPS on med/hi settings. I have a 2.0 MB and use FRAPS to show the framerate in the corner. I am running it at native resolution 1200x800, w/ AA off, trilinear, mix of low/med and get about 25FPS.. If I were to go down to x600 I could go mostly meds but certainly not many highs unless I have shaders/shadows low with it to get 30FPS.. The game runs well but you may be overestimating FPS, b/c 20FPS is playable but can be misleading b/c it may not seem that low but it is.

Other games I can play in bootcamp:

Crysis Warhead with all mainstream (mids) settings except shader/shadow to min, resolution at x600 I average 20FPS which is very playable, but 20FPS is not a good target normally.

Fallout 3 I can play lows/med at x600 resolution and get about 25-30FPS but in the open world where there's more rendering I get down to 20, VATS also is about 20FPS. But in games like these I love draw distance so I have that up some.

The Orange Box via Bootcamp runs great, but I play it mostly on Crossover games, I can do HL2, Ep1 at high at x720 windowed with pretty good FPS, I say avg 30+, using "net_graph 1" Haven't tried TF2 or Portal or Ep2. CS:S plays well at same settings as HL2 also.

Guild Wars (Crossover Games) I can play at most nearly high, max draw distance and get 40+ FPS unless I'm in town with a lot of ppl around then ~30.

I played WoW (Mac native) for a little bit and got ~40 with most med except draw distances at max. I would drop to 20-30 in capital cities.

I'll be testing the original Crysis via bootcamp soon as well as Stalker Clear Sky and will post results using FRAPS.

In bootcamp I'm testing using Vista 64bit that's been highly stripped for gaming. Specs are in my sig (7200RPM 4GB RAM)

WOAH! WOW! OK I'm set! I'm buying a MB UniBody for myself in May for my birthday; the home iMac can wait till July!

Curious ... a lot of terms I'm not understanding (I don't game myself because my ancient PC is well just too old; 6yrs). CrossOver; what is this? Also "damnTINYvista Gamer's Ed" - is this been stripped down of regular Vista Home/Professional original? I'll bit-it to see how it runs.

Has anyone tried running the official Win7 Beta for the above games mentioned? IF so how is the performance?

[aluminumapple]

il post videos of me playing if you want heres what frames i get playing these games some through crossover and or on mac or on Bootcamp Windows XP


Crossover : CS:S through video stress test i got 56 FPS
TF 2: around over 70 fps but i seem to be not able to go max settings on crossover through windows xp max settings around 40~48

Call of duty 4 Mac : texture settings all set to EXTRA turned off settings such as shadow, bullet impact, and etc but model detail specular map and Glow is On and i get around 34 FPS

Command and conquer 3 mac : Everything Max settings AA and Everything except online unno why that is

On Windows games i get :

Company of heroes : every setting on High except AA and Shadows i get an average 28 FPS

Bioshock : Model detail and texture settings set to High turned off specular shadow detailed shadow and distortion.

Left 4 Dead : Every setting is set to high except shadow which is set to medium and i have 16x Antistrophic , triple buffered Sync High exceleration multi modeler on and 2x AA and i get around 30+ fps around 24 fps during certain moments.

if you want a video of me playing a certain game with FPS give me a request in this thread and il try to make a video.

[aznguyen316]

WOAH! WOW! OK I'm set! I'm buying a MB UniBody for myself in May for my birthday; the home iMac can wait till July!

Curious ... a lot of terms I'm not understanding (I don't game myself because my ancient PC is well just too old; 6yrs). CrossOver; what is this? Also "damnTINYvista Gamer's Ed" - is this been stripped down of regular Vista Home/Professional original? I'll bit-it to see how it runs.

Has anyone tried running the official Win7 Beta for the above games mentioned? IF so how is the performance?


=D.. k crossover games is a Mac program that sort of emulates the Windows environment but doesn't need a windows install. It can run a few games in Mac natively, especially some source games, like The Orange Box, which is what I use it for. Then Windows for everything else.

DamnTiny Vista is a stripped down ver of Windows, a lot of stuff removed to stop any unneccessary system resource hogging. Only downside is no .NET framework so any games that require it will not install correctly. Of the top of my head Lord of the Rings Online will not work, but I tested the above games fine on DTV. It's a 64bit OS too so if you have 4GB ram this is the way to go. Ultimate Windows actually. Dekker is the host on TBP

[Veryomally]

Really glad I took the time to read this Thread, As I just ordered my 13.3 In. Almn. and I was worried I wouldn't have at least a "little" gaming power until I can afford a custom desktop P.C.

[sikkinixx]

ugh this damn thread :P making the decision between a 2ghz unibody mb, or a refurb 2.4ghz 236mb 8600 mbp that much harder....

[0makol16]

ugh this damn thread :P making the decision between a 2ghz unibody mb, or a refurb 2.4ghz 236mb 8600 mbp that much harder....

get the mbp, its got a dedicated graphics card and the 9400m is 50% slower than the 8600 in the mbp

[sikkinixx]

get the mbp, its got a dedicated graphics card and the 9400m is 50% slower than the 8600 in the mbp

Yeah but the unibody is sexy... and the smaller size is nice and it's $300 cheaper. *sigh* the 8600 is a crappy card, and all I will really play on my laptop is Civ 4,SC4 and L4D so... I dunno... argh./

[0makol16]

Yeah but the unibody is sexy... and the smaller size is nice and it's $300 cheaper. *sigh* the 8600 is a crappy card, and all I will really play on my laptop is Civ 4,SC4 and L4D so... I dunno... argh./

oh well if thats wat you're going to mostly play then go for the unibody, i got one and its great :p

[PurpleCliff]

Yeah but the unibody is sexy... and the smaller size is nice and it's $300 cheaper. *sigh* the 8600 is a crappy card, and all I will really play on my laptop is Civ 4,SC4 and L4D so... I dunno... argh./

I say go for the unibody :D
It's cheaper - which in a way could mean it can be less time before you get a new one (if you need it) when they are war more awesome :D

[Chundles]

How about Quake 4 for Mac? Anyone running that on a unibody MacBook?

[iann1982]

Hey all, just got a Macbook Air and i'd like to have a blast on Command & Conquer, it seems the problem with mac gaming is there's no definitive way of knowing if something will work or not, older games require patches to run on Intel, even older ones will run fine under Rosetta. Newer ones should work, but most haven't been written with the 9400 in mind..

Which gave me a thought...

Would a simple website with a list of all games and a guide to what systems they would work on be worth while? Say you enter model of your machine and then can see which games should work and what patches are available?

It's the sort of nice little application I could probably knock out in my spare time, most of the content would need to be user generated.

Good idea? Lousy idea?

[adamvk]

Sorry ignore this ;)

[PurpleCliff]

Hey all, just got a Macbook Air and i'd like to have a blast on Command & Conquer, it seems the problem with mac gaming is there's no definitive way of knowing if something will work or not, older games require patches to run on Intel, even older ones will run fine under Rosetta. Newer ones should work, but most haven't been written with the 9400 in mind..

Which gave me a thought...

Would a simple website with a list of all games and a guide to what systems they would work on be worth while? Say you enter model of your machine and then can see which games should work and what patches are available?

It's the sort of nice little application I could probably knock out in my spare time, most of the content would need to be user generated.

Good idea? Lousy idea?

Sounds excellent! :D :D :D

[sikkinixx]

oh well if thats wat you're going to mostly play then go for the unibody, i got one and its great :p

I say go for the unibody :D
It's cheaper - which in a way could mean it can be less time before you get a new one (if you need it) when they are war more awesome :D

You guys... tempting me to spend my tax money early... :P Yeah I am pretty sure I will just get the unibody. I have a gaming PC/PS3/360/Wii/etc. to play serious games on, just needs my L4D and Civ 4 *hugs Civ box*


Which gave me a thought...

Would a simple website with a list of all games and a guide to what systems they would work on be worth while? Say you enter model of your machine and then can see which games should work and what patches are available?

It's the sort of nice little application I could probably knock out in my spare time, most of the content would need to be user generated.

Good idea? Lousy idea?

Thats actually a good idea. Problem is, you need people to use a standard rubric to see how well games work. The "it looks fine" isn't super helpful because to me, sub-30fps or wild spikes (ie. 25 to 60 to 12) ain't "good". When I get one, I'd be willing to FRAPS it up for people and share :D