Do games look good on a 12" iBook?

Discussion in 'Games' started by t0xic_sh0ck, Nov 4, 2004.

  1. t0xic_sh0ck macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2004
    #1
    I'm considering switching from a Dell Inspiron 600m to a 12" iBook. The only downfall I see is that I won't be able to play games at the same level of graphics that I am now (considering my Dell has a 64MB Mobility Radeon 9000 and the iBook has a 32MB Mobility Radeon 9200).

    So the big question is, to all of you 12" iBook gamers... what games are actually playable and look good on the iBook, granted i have no idea how much faster or slower the iBook will be compared to my Dell.

    Thank you!
     
  2. Doraemon macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2001
    Location:
    Europe (EU)
    #2
    No.

    At least none of the latest 3D titles.
     
  3. oingoboingo macrumors 6502a

    oingoboingo

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #3
    I know this isn't the same system, but my 1.33GHz 12" PowerBook with a 64MB nVidia FX 5200 GPU and 768MB RAM has a hard time playing modern games (specifically UT2004 and Battlefield 1942) at reasonable speeds at anything other than very conservative resolution/detail settings. Your 12" iBook could only be slower. Search around the forums here and you will find gaming benchmarks of the 12" PowerBook, which will act as a kind of "absolute best case scenario" for a 12" iBook. Also take a look at sites like www.barefeats.com. I don't remember if they have done any gaming-related tests of the 12" iBook, but it would be a good place to start looking.

    Of course the best test is to get to an Apple retailer, and play around with a game on one of their demo 12" iBooks. Unfortunately, the reality is that the 12" iBook isn't a great gaming machine at all. To get playable frame rates, you're going to need to drop down both resolution and detail settings quite a way, and even then you may need to stretch your definition of 'playable'.
     
  4. dontpanic macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    #4
    little machine like a 12 inch ibook's not really built for 3d games is it?
     
  5. oingoboingo macrumors 6502a

    oingoboingo

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #5
    I dug out some old benchmarks I did on my 1.33GHz 12" PowerBook.

    Unreal Tournament 2004:
    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=875012#post875012

    Battlefield 1942:
    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=79472

    I would guess that even the newest revision of the 12" iBook would run these games slower than the 12" PowerBook. The 12" iBook isn't cut out to be a gaming machine, simple as that (and that goes for practically all of Apple's entry and mid-level hardware).
     
  6. Ninja_Turtle macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Location:
    Fullerton, California
    #6
    party


    well, it CAN to a certain point, for example, you can run the ever so famouse QUAKE 3 game on HIGHEST quality and get quiet good FPS, maybe in the 110fps maybe, also if you get the G4 ibook, QUAKE3 is optimized for the G4 processor...so yeah, also UT2k3 can also run at medium or low quality, so yes the ibook isnt the most game machine, but it CAN run some games at good FPS
     
  7. cluthz macrumors 68040

    cluthz

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Location:
    Norway
    #7
    The ibooks plays two years old 3d games well, never games will runs, but not good.
    The radeon 9200 is very comparable to the radeon 9000, except the amout of VRAM.

    The ibooks is probably a downgrade (in terms of gaming) compared to your 600m.
    (I'm not sure, but isn't the 600m is p4 1.50~2.0GHZ???)

    As said before, games like Halo, UT2004 will runs slow.
    Older games like MOH:AA, Soldier of Fortune, RTCW, Q3A will run great.
     
  8. vraxtus macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #8
    Not many.
     
  9. t0xic_sh0ck thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2004
    #9
    yeah, my 600m has a 1.4 GHz Centrino processor in it... it would have the Pentium M but it's a year and a few months old.
     
  10. iBunny macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    #10
    YOu could deffinatly play a good starcraft game on it :)
     
  11. chanoc macrumors 6502

    chanoc

    Joined:
    May 20, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage, Alaska USA
    #11
    You can play 2D Open Source games in X11. I play xinvaders and xgalaga, clones in X11. I played MOH AA on an 800MHz iBook G3 at the lowest resolutions, so that could be played no problem on a G4 iBook.

    /sw/bin/xinvaders

    woohoo!!!!
     
  12. cluthz macrumors 68040

    cluthz

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Location:
    Norway
    #12
    Pentium M is a part of the centrino technology,
    maybe you mean celeron?

    If if is a Pentium M, then it will be twice as good as the ibook for gaming.
    The celeron is MUCH slower than the pentium M, the Perntium M is probably twice as fast.
    If its a celeron, then im not sure about gaming, but in every thing else the ibook will be faster than the 600m
     
  13. dvdh macrumors 6502

    dvdh

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2004
    #13
    MOH:AA and Spearhead should be fine. I run them on my G3/900/14.1/32 at medium settings without to much trouble.
     
  14. wPod macrumors 68000

    wPod

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #14
    i ran warcraft III on an ond iBook G3 with 16mb (i think) of video ram. it worked. thechnically speaking. but the resolution was set low. i run warcraft III and medal of honor on my PB G4 (867mhz with 32 mb of v-ram . . . if i remeber correctly) and again, it works but on lower resolutions. so, im sure games will work on the iBook G4. . . on lower resolution settings. but i would reccomend getting the iBook then getting a cheaper windows machine for your gaming desires! thats what i plan on doing. . . getting (er building) a cheap windows box for when matrix online comes out!
     
  15. johnnyjibbs macrumors 68030

    johnnyjibbs

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Location:
    London, UK
    #15
    That's odd because I have the older version of your machine (1GHz instead of 1.33GHz, same graphics card but with only 32MB VRAM, same 768MB system RAM) and Unreal Tournament 2004 (demo with the sound bug) works like a dream on my system. I run it at full 1024x768 resolution with all the effects on. What's funny is that when I turned down the screen res to 800x600 or 640x480, I couldn't tell any difference in frame rate. Nor was it faster when I turned all the detail down to low.

    The main surprise was when I hooked up our Dell desktop 17" CRT (VGA) and ran it at 1600x1200 - the max for that display - and my 12" PB ran it in dual screen mode (this time with only 16MB VRAM due to screen split) almost as well! I'm not talking 60FPS in any one of these scenarios, but I must be getting 25-30FPS as it is smooth and not jerky (with the exception of Assault mode).

    I don't know why my 12" PB seems to run Unreal Tournament 2004 so well when others at the time had got much poorer results.
     
  16. brap macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Location:
    Nottingham
    #16
    Nah, see, my 12" PB runs UT2004 just as well. I also noticed the resolution weirdness - though you do get a noticeable hit when you turn on FSAA at any res..
    BF1942, though, is 15-20fps maximum, when online. I played 'Liberation of Caen' on an EA server and it was borderline playable.
     
  17. oingoboingo macrumors 6502a

    oingoboingo

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #17
    That is odd. Would you mind downloading SantaDuck Toolpack and running some Flyby and Botmatch demos? SantaDuck will report minimum, maximum and average FPS scores, and as such doesn't rely on any type of subjective interpretation. I think the different subversions of Mac OS X 10.3 can have quite an effect due to driver differences. I'll have to go back and see what version I was running when I ran the original benchmarks.

    I make no apologies for BF1942 though. It's a dog whichever way you cut it on the 12" PowerBook. Runs nicely on my G5 though.
     
  18. johnnyjibbs macrumors 68030

    johnnyjibbs

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Location:
    London, UK
    #18
    I will when I get some time. But 10.3.6 seems to have broken all my game demos. Can't get gish demo or Unreal 2004 demo to even launch now :( (Permissions repaired and everything).
     
  19. cluthz macrumors 68040

    cluthz

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Location:
    Norway
    #19
    My Powerbook 1.33ghz 64mb FX5200, runs UT2003 worse than yours run ut2004.
    Not that it runs bad. I'm running with medium/high quality @ 1024x768 and I stays mostly at about 30-40 fps, it drops down to about 20 sometimes.

    Dual screen with ut? My machine turns OFF one of the screens when playing Ut2003, doesn't yours?
     
  20. Matt01792 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #20
    hmm...

    Well, I have a iBook G4 (800mhz) and I only have 256mb RAM (upgrade on its way tho) and games run fine. It got just over 80 on XBench.

    Old games like Quake III run amazingly well. If you're looking at games like Halo, or Generals I wouldn't recommend it... But I've played UT 2003 on this (the demo) and it ran fine, not amazing... but playable and not lowest settings either. I've also played a demo of Homeworld 2, and even though the graphics weren't amazing the gameplay was still awesome - after all, what's more important to you in a game - playability or graphics? If graphics, then I wouldn't recommend it, but otherwise go for it!

    The key issue really is that you shouldn't buy an iBook and expect the latest releases to work, because even though most will, some won't (take Halo).
     
  21. johnnyjibbs macrumors 68030

    johnnyjibbs

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Location:
    London, UK
    #21
    Yep, mine does switch off the PB's screen but my point was that it was a method of getting my PB to run the game at higer than its native 1024x768 resolution. And it ran with no problems. I'm not sure if it gave the external screen the entire 32megs of VRAM though.
     
  22. pimentoLoaf macrumors 68000

    pimentoLoaf

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2001
    Location:
    The SimCity Deli
    #22
    Tropico Mucho Macho looks alright, as does any of the Sims games, though the Makin' Magic pack slows to a crawl on practically everything.
     
  23. stevietheb macrumors 6502a

    stevietheb

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2004
    Location:
    Houston
    #23
    Been playing World of Warcraft on my iBook (see sig) the last few days. I'm actually impressed with it's performance (especially considering it doesn't meet the min reqs).
     

Share This Page