Make the MacBook better for gaming

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Mar 15, 2008.

  1. macrumors bot

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    #1

    [​IMG]

    Category: Apple Hardware
    Link: Make the MacBook better for gaming
    Description:: If Apple isn't going to give the Macbook a dedicated graphics card, they should at least bring the graphic performance of the integrated card up to the same levels that are in Windows.

    Posted on MacBytes.com
    Approved by Mudbug
     
  2. macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Cuidad de México
    #2
    Multi-threaded OpenGL gives us MacBook owners some hope of a few more frames but Apple really needs to improve their drivers.
     
  3. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    #3
    Interesting facts.
    If I`m not wrong, some iBooks used to have off board video cards.
    Why not bring that back :D
     
  4. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    #4
    Some of the comments on the Macworld site blame the software and not Mac's drivers for the issues. I'm no expert, but they said that as most games are ports of DirectX games (based on and optimized for Direct X) to Mac and their OpenGL format, the problem lies with the optimization in the third party software, and not with Apple:

    This made sense to me. Peter Cohen, the author, never seemed to answer this. If its true, its upsetting as there's no likely magical software update that will better the Macbook's gaming...
     
  5. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2006
    Location:
    Colorado
    #5
    Apple needs this distinction between the MB and the MBP. Sales in MBP's would drop significantly if MB's had dedicated graphics. I hear all the time from people that bought MBP's because they wanted dedicated graphics that they wish they saved some $$ and got a MB because all day-to-day tasks work great w/o dedicated graphics. Also, I just started using Aperture 2 on my MB and it works fine for an amateur photographer.
     
  6. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    #6
    Nonsense. Both the PowerBook and the iBook had dedicated graphics. If they want to keep the distinction, all they have to do is have a low-end graphics card in the MacBook vs. a high-end (for a notebook) in the MacBook Pro. You know, like they used to. Which they never had a problem with before. Even a low-end dedicated card would be an improvement over the X3100.

    --Eric
     
  7. macrumors 68030

    BenRoethig

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    Dubuque, Iowa
    #7

    There's a there isn't just a two tier system here between integrated graphics and dedicated graphics. There are different levels of dedicated graphics. Apple could use the 8400GS. As it stands right now with integrated graphics, both the Macbook and the Mini are marginally faster than their G4 based predecessor while the newest MBPs are offering 3-4 times the performance. When it comes right down to it, my G3 iBook was a much more versatile system than what they ship now. Besides, there are a lot a users who want something full featured, but find even the 15" MBP too large.
     
  8. macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #8
    yeah the 8400 GS simply would make too much sense... especially for the price apple charges ... or at least make it optional on the macbook for extra 50 bucks .. many would be happy with that
    spice up the MBP to a 8700 etc. and then the distinction is there again
     
  9. macrumors 6502a

    apsterling

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    #9
    Hell, I'd be happy with an old Radeon Mobility 9700- that card fares quite well in any notebook I've seen it in.
     
  10. macrumors 6502a

    tsice19

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2008
    #10
    I don't see why everyone is complaining so much.

    I have a souped-up MacBook, and for me, it has everything I need in it (granted I don't play games). I may be boot camping soon for some games, but for a leisurely gamer like me, I could care or less if I'm not getting crazy FPS.

    In my eyes, and probably in Apple's too, the MacBook is for consumers who don't play games often, and who do the average consumer stuff with occasional work in Adobe CSx Software. If you want to play games or get even more powerful performance, then you should get a MacBook Pro.

    Everyone is so quick to freak out about stuff when Apple has a solution already.

    If you want high end performance then a MBP or MP are you options.
    If you want average consumer level performance, get an iMac or MB.
    And, if you are just switching from PC, get a Mac Mini.


    End Rant.
     
  11. macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Cuidad de México
    #11
    I guess you don't remember the days when all Macs had dedicated video cards? I've seen "It's a consumer Mac. They don't hardcore game." used before and it's not the first time. I'm sure you'd like to be the person to tell all the GMA950 users that they can't do any 3D gaming beyond 2003 games.

    I hated telling mothers and grandparents they needed to get a video card to play Lego Star Wars on their new computers.
     
  12. macrumors 68030

    Full of Win

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2007
    Location:
    Ask Apple
    #12
    I made a post about this a few weeks ago. The GMA X3100 can do OpenGL 1.5, as per Intel, but Apple only supports OpenGL 1.2 on it with the current drivers. Given that many graphics programs use this (e.g After Effects), it would be a welcome change for them to support what the hardware can do. I've come to think they do it to keep a seperation between the MBP and the plain jane MacBook.
     
  13. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Location:
    Ontario Canada
    #13
    Apple is just not the same they have became lazy and cheap, make them cheap sell them expensive. They are just not like they used to be they always used to have the very best of every thing and they even offered value. Now look the iPods don't have FireWire Consumer macs don't have dedicated graphics they use cheap screens. It's only down hill from here.
     
  14. macrumors 68030

    BenRoethig

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    Dubuque, Iowa
    #14
    I'll also say this, having a dedicated graphics card will also help your performance on non graphics related issues. My mother bought a HP with integrated graphics. I was able to get a used 32mb TNT2 which was completely obsolete at that time. That computer was a completely different animal with the video card in. With an IG setup, you're not only taking away from your RAM, you're using CPU power to help drive that display.
     
  15. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    #15
    If Apple continues to use the Intel graphics solution, the Macbooks should get noticeably better. The x3100 was better than 965 and the new x4500 coming from the Montevina chipset appears to be quite a bit better than the x3100. Intel seems to be focusing on improving their integrated graphics solution offerings. I thought there was a roadmap to that effect.

    Glenn
     
  16. macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Cuidad de México
    #16
    Even if you're not gaming there is a slight memory performance loss when using a integrated video card. A coworker of mine said it was somewhere around 1 in 4 memory cycles is lost to do video work.

    I fixed it for you.

    Montevina IGP Information
     
  17. macrumors member

    UCLA-Bruin

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    #17
    I think my old PowerBook G4 handled graphics better than my MacBook.
     
  18. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    #18
    Thanks, yes you are correct. When I was researching the integrated graphics solutions last summer, I found an Intel roadmap presentation. It appeared in that presentation that the real performance boost will come after the Montevina platform. It will be very interesting to see how far they can close the gap to a discrete graphics solution.

    Glenn
     
  19. macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Cuidad de México
    #19
    I've found that the GMA X3100 provides performance like a Geforce Go 5650 or 6200.
     
  20. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    #20
    I would definetly like to have a macbook that is upgraded a little bit with a dedicated graphics card because that and small things like the non-backlit keyboard and plastic casing are what keep me from getting one....there is no in between its either $1000ish for macbook or double the price $2000ish for Macbook Pro....and all of this is why I still have my Powerbook G4 :rolleyes:
     
  21. macrumors 6502a

    tsice19

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2008
    #21
    True. But my old Dell had an integrated graphics card in it, and it ran most new games (Flight Sim. X, America's Army) in or around 30 fps. This was at low settings and it only had 512 MB of ram. My point is, aren't the games still playable? Even without dedicated graphics?

    Also, I remember hearing somewhere that Apple said that the reason the Mini didn't have a dedicated graphics card was because the C2D and 2 gigs of RAM made up for it.

    Just my 2 cents, however I've only had my Mac for a month, so I guess you are right in the end. :apple:
     
  22. macrumors 65816

    Dustman

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2007
    #22
    First of all, the Mini only comes with 1 GB standard; and second, it absolutely does NOT make up for having a graphics card. Some things will simply refuse to run without a graphics card, and if its true that apple said something like that, TISK!
     
  23. macrumors 604

    zap2

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Washington D.C
    #23
    Honestly if you want to game look away from the MacBook...its just not going to be good....i wish apple would go back to decated GPUs,but clearly the low end intel solution is good enough...and pads their bottom line nicely
     
  24. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    #24
    IF they stayed a generation behind and gave us the x1600 that would still be a lot better than integrated graphics.
     
  25. macrumors regular

    Westsider 4 Mac

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Location:
    On the West Side
    #25
    My PBG4 is just as good as my MBP

    for real...
     

Share This Page