This newest MacBook revision and Gaming

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by 11blue, Feb 26, 2008.

  1. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2008
    #1
    So, will this newest MacBook revision (2.4 in mind) do anything for gaming? I'm not personally looking to play Crysis on high settings, but, whats the most current game i could play, possibly on low settings? This is with Bootcamp in mind as well, btw.

    Thank you!
     
  2. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #2
    Crysis on High settings, not even the MBP could do that mate.
     
  3. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    #3
    o
     
  4. thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2008
    #4
    But yeah, will I be able to run Half Life 2 pretty alright at lower settings though? That's all I'm really looking for, and maybe the Team Fortress 2 stuff. As well, how about older mac games, like Warcraft 3? They are compatible with the current Mac's right?
     
  5. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    #5
    WC3 works on macbooks by far.
     
  6. macrumors 68000

    Bobioden

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2007
    Location:
    Denver
    #6
    The newest Macbook has the same graphics card as the SR 2.2 version. So if a game could not run on that version, it will not run on the latest one either.
     
  7. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #7
    Actually that's my biggest regret about buying my Macbook is that I didn't splurge more for a decent video card that's available on the Macbook Pro. Intel video cards are just garbage in my opinion. I feel as though I have this amazing hotrod that looks just fantastic with crappy little wheels on it :(

    As a recent convert that was the biggest stumbling block to making the purchase. If Dell and HP like can find a way to cram an nVidia 8400M GS in a sub $1000 laptop then Apple should be able to find a way to add it in their mid level consumer lines.

    Oh well everyday is one day closer to when my gaming rig will eventually die and I can replace it with something that has some balls :D
     
  8. macrumors 604

    gkarris

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Location:
    "No escape from Reality..."
    #8
    June?
     
  9. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #9
    If they had a 2 GB, 2.2+ Ghz Mini with a decent nVidia/ATI card in it by June I'd buy it and I wouldn't be the only one.
     
  10. macrumors regular

    kamm

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    #10
    No chance, it would kill MBP sales.
     
  11. macrumors regular

    durant0s

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #11
    yeah, then it would be almost the exact same machine as the base MBP for $500 cheaper.
     
  12. macrumors 6502a

    compuguy1088

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Location:
    In the Sub-Basement of Solitude
    #12
    Its the same graphics as before, the x3100. I have not personally tried this with a actual MB, but with another laptop with 2 gigs of ram. The x3100 is a hit or miss propositon. Especially with HL2, it runs pretty bad with that. If you really thinking about any type of gaming, you really need a discrete graphics card, not the x3100.
     
  13. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2007
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    #13
    Heck, I can play HL2 on my original Core Duo macbook 1.83Ghz.
    Just run it under 640 x 480 resolution and it works great! :p
     
  14. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #14
    Only it would be a 13.3 inch instead of a 15 no Firewire 800 port and not encased in aluminum and still has the MB's tiny little speakers. Maybe it's just me but if you try and be too stategic about your product offerings then you're passing up potential customers and really just outsmarting yourself. Although I agree with not swamping the customer with too many choices but shipping with an anemic video card doesn't sound right for a company trying to bank on it's reputation on being the best out there for handling digital media.

    Ideally, if I could choose as an upgrade option for a few extra hundred bux to put in something with more umph I'd be more than happy. You can't go wrong by giving your customers a choice.
     
  15. macrumors 6502a

    compuguy1088

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Location:
    In the Sub-Basement of Solitude
    #15
    With probibly everything on low. Though this may also depend on CPU clock and ram. When I tried to play HL2 on a friends Sony Noetbook (with the same IGP- x3100) it ran like junk. I never checked what his CPU model was.
     
  16. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2007
    #16
    How about World of Warcraft? How does that do with the X3100 chipset?
     
  17. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    #17
    My roommate plays World of Warcraft on an 18 month old 2.0 Core Duo MB, and it runs fine. I think you will be ok.
     
  18. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #18
    This is what it looks like on a MB Intel Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz / 1 GB / X3100.

    Notice the frames per second.

    On my XP rig that has a Pentium 4, 3GHz with HT, 1 GB, with a GeForce 7800 GS w/ 256 MB it pops between 30 and 60 frames at 1680 x 1050, 24 bit color depth 2x multi-sampling.

    Notice the frames on that one.
     

    Attached Files:

  19. macrumors regular

    Kalafut

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Location:
    pocatello
    #19

    i have played counter strike source on my macbook, and my mac is last version.
     
  20. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    #20
    I have been running World of Warcraft on the lowend Macbook released in November with maxed out ram. Low to medium settings give me single digit FPS in busy areas like major cities, around 20fps out in the wild. Bearable, but not recommended.
     
  21. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    #21
    Wow. My roommate regularly gets 20ish FPS on his 2.0 CD MB. I wonder why you're running so low...?
     
  22. macrumors regular

    Kalafut

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Location:
    pocatello
    #22
    its because the macbook has somewhere around 128 shard mb of ram so it is very slow.
     
  23. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    #23
    What about eve-online?
     
  24. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #24
    He's probably running it at a very low resolution with all effects turned off. But then it goes from looking like hell to looking like freaking hell :)

    When WoW idles at 20ish it'll drop to 5's and 6's when there's actually stuff going on. For me that's unplayable and the limiting factor here is the video card. Not having it's own dedicated RAM means you're playing with less overall RAM while the game is running and your Video Card and CPU are fighting over the same bandwidth to the same memory.
     
  25. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    #25
    Just got a Macbook (November refresh & x3100 Intel graphics) and WoW gets about 25 fps at the lowest of settings and least intensive onscreen conditions.

    IT's doable, but not acceptable for me as far as gaming goes. Just my experience.
     

Share This Page