Hd4000 comparable to current gen consoles?

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by ee13lbp, Dec 3, 2012.

  1. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    #1
    Hi,

    So I currently have a 2006 MacBook and am considering upgrading to the base 2012 model mini since this MacBook has stuck up well with my main uses (photoshop and coding), but I need a little bit more oomph.

    This gen I've only gamed on the wii and from the few times when I've played ps360 I've been impressed with the graphics. I'd also like to use the mini for catching up with the games I missed this gen. From what I've read, the hd4000 performs decently with new titles (aka skyrim) at medium settings ad 30-40 fps. Is this comparable to current consoles? I've never gamed on pc so I don't know the scale of the difference between 30 and 60fps.
     
  2. macrumors 6502

    MatthewAMEL

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2007
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    #2
    The Intel HD Series is NOT acceptable for anything but casual gaming.

    Skyrim on low yields about 30fps, on medium it hovers around 11fps (unplayable).

    Heck, even my all-time favorites Fallout3 and New Vegas (4+ years old) can easily bring a HD 3000/4000 to it's knees.

    If you just play Source games (Portal, Left For Dead, TF2), StarCraft 2, or Torchlight then the IGP should be adequate.
     
  3. thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    #3
    http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wZQgVlk7Bvw - Here's a video of the MacBook Pro which has pretty much the same specs as the mini I'm referring to. It's running skyrim at medium, and I've seen other videos that suggest it is still 'playable' at 20-30 fps at high.
     
  4. macrumors 6502

    MatthewAMEL

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2007
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    #4
    And that's exactly what I am running on. An i7 13" MBP.

    I gave up on Skyrim because in-game sections (like Whiterun) and Dragon fights turned it into a 3-4 fps slide show.
     
  5. thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    #5
    Sure you don't have the 2011 model with the hd3000? Skyrim runs on that specifically only on low (as you earlier said), and from what I understand the hd4000 is a pretty big leap from this. Running skyrim on low on hd4000 gives 50+ fps, and should be capable even in those demanding dragon fights.

    Well, as far as I know. If you indeed have the 2012 model I suppose I'll stick with the MacBook for a little while more :(
     
  6. macrumors 6502

    MatthewAMEL

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2007
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    #6
    Sorry. Should have been more clear.

    I have a 2012 i7 Mini, a 2011 13" MBP and a Late 2009 iMac.

    My MBP gets 30fps on Skyrim at low, but drops to ~5fps in demanding areas.

    My Mini gets 30fps on medium, but drops to ~11fps in demanding areas or during combat.

    The iMac (i7, Radeon 4850) runs 2560x1440 on high and 30fps.
     
  7. thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    #7
    Ah thanks. So the hd4000 will be worse than ps360 then? Do you know how much putting settings on low would improve performance? I don't really care that much about graphics, I mean anything now will look better than wii.
     
  8. macrumors 65816

    dasx

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Location:
    Barcelona
    #8
    What's a ps360 anyway. A mix between a PS3 and an XBOX 360?
     
  9. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #9
    Hi, and what about mac mini 2011 with ATI, would it be better in games? (mainly Starcraft 2, source games)?
     
  10. thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    #10
    Sort of, I suppose. They're both pretty much the same thing anyway.

    As for the 2011 mini, I know that is marginally better than this years model, but where I live I have no chance of getting it so I was hoping the new one would do the trick. Seems not :( Was hoping to even connect it to the tv every now and then to play a few games.

    How long does the 11fps happen anyway? If there's just a couple of seconds slowdown it should be fine for me, i just don't want it to become game-bracingly slow..
     
  11. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    #11
    This is an odd comparison, anyway.

    The 360 and PS3 are known quantity platforms, so the game developers can do a lot more optimization and fine-grained tuning (not to mention tricks) to get consistent graphic performance even with hardware that is far behind what even an average gaming PC will have these days.

    The PS3 has a video card that is around that of an Nvidia 7800 and the 360 is ~ ATI/AMD X1900.

    But, again, the comparison really isn't meaningful in the way that one might initially think.
     

Share This Page