War3 runs like crap on my Rev B 12"

Discussion in 'Games' started by vraxtus, Aug 18, 2004.

  1. vraxtus macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #1
    *sigh* I barely get 30 FPS if I'm not doing anything at all...

    1024x768 medium detail 32-bit.

    Not good not good...
     
  2. Schmittroth macrumors regular

    Schmittroth

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2003
    Location:
    NYC, Astoria-Queens
    #2
    How do you display FPS in WC3? I've got a 1Ghz TiBook and it plays WC3 just fine. 1024x768x32 and everything on high.
     
  3. vraxtus thread starter macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #3
    I'm going from an approximation I get from viewing the FPS rates on my other 3D games... believe me it lags badly. When 20 FPS seems smooth, you definitely notice what "choppy" is.
     
  4. sahnert macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Location:
    Seattle
    #4
    i was having problems on my Rev A 12". I got better results when I went into the video panel and switched resolution down, and then switched it back. Don't know if that will help.
    Also, I'm not a gamer so what I thought was smooth might not be to someone more experienced. But it did seem to lag a bit at first and then after I did this it was quite smooth. Also I have 640 MB RAM. Don't know if that makes a difference.
     
  5. vraxtus thread starter macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #5

    I'm running 512 RAM. Switching res shouldn't really do anything. I think it's just the crappy GFX5200 in mine.
     
  6. sahnert macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Location:
    Seattle
    #6
    I agree that it "shouldn't" really do anything. But the point is that it DID do something. It was choppy and basically unplayable, then after I switched away from 1024x764x32 and then back again, it was smooth. I played through the entire single player and only had a few slow spots during one or two of the very large battles.
     
  7. vraxtus thread starter macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #7

    How many times did you do this? (Switch resolutions I mean)
     
  8. sahnert macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Location:
    Seattle
    #8
    i would usually have to do it every time i started the game. when the screen comes up (in RoC, not TFT) and has the banner waving in the wind with the rocks or meteor things, i could tell that it was choppy, so I would go switch it, then go back to that screen and everything was smooth. Sometimes I would start up the game and that screen would be fine so I wouldn't have to do anything.
     
  9. vraxtus thread starter macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #9
    That's very weird... I'm also using TFT so that might change things.
     
  10. AppleMatt macrumors 68000

    AppleMatt

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2003
    Location:
    UK
    #10
    Update to 10.3.5, 10.3.4 destroyed the 5200 drivers. Also, log onto Battle.net to get the latest Warcraft III patch.

    I don't know why you're having problems on your machine though...

    AppleMatt
     
  11. vraxtus thread starter macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #11
    Everything is already updated.
     
  12. rareflares macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Location:
    Washington D.C.
    #12
    it could be the "rebooting" of the game is what's giving the performance boost rather than the actual resolution change.



    Try doing a fresh reboot of the entire computer, that often helps on 12" PB's.
     
  13. QCassidy352 macrumors G3

    QCassidy352

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #13
    it runs pretty well for me and I have the same model powerbook. Don't know what to tell you.
     
  14. BrianKonarsMac macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #14
    it should run fine...especially at only 1024x768...

    your hd is probably fragmented to ****. are you using HFS+ Journaling? i assume you've done repair permissions and ran cron scripts manually (if not, you really should). force optimize OS X using Onyx or a similar system maintanence application. while you're at it i'd run all other optimizations and clean the system of cache's, crash logs, etc. Restart your computer.

    are you running settings at High, Medium, or Low? Are we talking crappy FPS all the time, or in certain situations, i.e. the game winning battle of a 3v3 fight (where all armies are huge)? If it's only in huge games, lower your settings to medium or low (i need to run at medium, except I keep textures high, in 3v3 fights). If it's always, something is terribly wrong if the optimization of OS X didn't change performance. Hate to say it, but you may need to do a clean OS X install. If THAT doesn't fix things, you are hallucinating and War 3 is really running fine.

    I use a Rev C 12". I think the only difference between our PB's is a 32mb difference in the vram (mine is 64mb 5200FX). I run War 3 on my 17" LCD at 1280x1024 with all settings at high, and it doesn't skip a frame at all, even when running iTunes and Acquisition in the background. I'm only using 512mb of RAM as well. When running on the actual powerbook monitor (at 1024x768) it's absolutely smooth.

    10.3.5, i THINK, gave me improved WC3 performance. the graphics drivers DEFINITELY improved Open GL performance (iTunes visuals saw a 20+fps jump at 1280x1024 full screen, went from low 20s to high 40-low 50's). if your not currently running 10.3.5 get it.

    you mentioned W3 is up to date. if you can't fix this problem, contact blizzard (macsupport@blizzard.com), save a copy of your System Profiler, attach it to your email along with a explanation of your problem (****ty fps, no matter what), be nice, and they'll work you through it all. and if they can't help you, as i said before, you are hallucinating.

    and how do you measure your fps? if you are just estimating, 30 fps is basically smooth, any stuttering in the game is a dip below 30 fps. choppy is typically like 10-15fps. if you can actually make it show you i'd like to know so i can measure my performance.

    very weird.
     
  15. vraxtus thread starter macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #15
    Not fragmented. The comp is 3 weeks old, it was a refurb.

    Medium. Custom games lag. Sub 30 FPS. OSX was reinstalled when I wiped the drive to test for kernel panics I was having. This one got sent back to Apple.

    That and the 333 mhz CPU increase and the 33 mhz bus increase and the DDR333 RAM instead of DDR266 RAM. I find it hard to believe that it runs without "skipping" a frame at all, when even on my G5 it stuttered much before I upgraded my video card.

    I am, I see very little difference. In fact my Halo benches showed a DECREASE in avg FPS rates.

    Trust me, I'm not hallucinating. I know exactly what my FPS rates look like. For instance, I run Halo at 12x10 on my G5. The avg FPS rates are around 20-22 at high detail (timedemo). The general smoothness of War3 on my PB is much choppier than Halo runs... hence it's definitely less than 20 FPS in general. The most noticeable aspect is when I am just moving my view around the map. Using the arrow keys is the easiest way to notice the "chop". Its at 10x7 right now, medium detail all across the board, 32 bit.
     
  16. BrianKonarsMac macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #16
    that blows a fat one man. even my 933 tower with a GeForce 4 MX and SDRAM (133mhz) sounds like it get's better performance than your powerbook. if i were you i'd probably be dousing my warcraft cd in lighter fluid at the moment.

    try blizzard's mac support, very nice guys, and they seem to know OS X really well.

    maybe i'm just over-estimating my powerbook's performance because i want it to be decent, but seriously, it sounds like my powerbook ran better than your G5 before you upped the vid card.

    when i say it didn't skip a frame, i meant as far as i can tell. i'm sure it does, but it doesn't stutter or chop, even when switching songs, completing downloads in the background and writing them to disk, etc. this is frustrating me and it's not even my powerbook.
     
  17. rareflares macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Location:
    Washington D.C.
    #17
    did you set processor performance to "HIGHEST" in the Energy Saver in System Preferences?

    If it's on "longer battery life" your computer will basically be operating at like 60-70% processor speed (not sure of the exact number but you get the point).

    the game requirements are 400 Mhz, 16 MB of VRAM, 128 MB RAM!


    You have practically quadruple that! All with the most up-to-date drivers and patches! It should be screaming!
     
  18. rbarris macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2003
    Location:
    Irvine CA
    #18
    I'll point out that 933MHz towers have 2MB L3 caches on them? IIRC.
     
  19. vraxtus thread starter macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #19
    Well it usually ran fine on my G5... only when I'd get into very large battles or when there were huge particle renderings would the game start to dip down heavily. That could have been more of a CPU issue however.

    I'm not sure what's going wrong with my PB... I thought it should work fine also. Even Jedi Academy gets pretty decent FPS rates at 10x7 med detail... however they range from 5-90 which I attribute more to bad code. I'm not sure what's up with these poor Mac drivers... at times it seems like Jedi Academ runs better on it's low points than my G5!
     
  20. vraxtus thread starter macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #20
    Yeah it's on highest... I knew about that for a while. That actually gives about a 20% increase on Halo timedemo avg rates...
     
  21. Edot macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2002
    Location:
    NJ
    #21
    It is all based on your opinion of smooth!

    Someone here said TFT ran "smooth" on a 800 emac at those settings:rolleyes: I have a 700 emac and on everything on lowest settings it is choppy, but playable. It depends on how you actually play the game. If you are on bnet and are good, "smooth" is different than if you played through half of the campaign. I play a lot and 1024x768x32 is SMOOTH on Dual 2Ghz G5 not on an 800 emac. It doesn't bother me much playing on lowest settings since I play for the game not the graphics, but on a G5 you can play better and the experience is much more fun.
     
  22. rbarris macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2003
    Location:
    Irvine CA
    #22
    It is. Battle simulation is pretty CPU intensive especially when a lot of units try to calculate new routes of attack at the same time.
     
  23. vraxtus thread starter macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #23
    I know what you mean. Compared to my G5 it runs like crap... HOWEVER the difference is significantly noticeable... to the extent that it's not just crappier compared to my G5, but such that I actually notice the difference because it is noticeable outside of comparison.

    It's just strange because Jedi Academy runs VERY well at times, almost comparable to my G5, but yet War3 doesn't...
     
  24. Darwin macrumors 65816

    Darwin

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2003
    Location:
    round the corner
    #24
    When I play War3 I usually put it at 1024x768 32 and for a while it works out ok, then when playing a LAN game it seems to be slow

    I've found that turning the settings from 32 bit to 16 bit makes the game feel much faster and also setting Animation and others down to Low but keeping Textures at High, with those settings it runs faster and I don't notice any difference in the look of the graphics :)
     
  25. vraxtus thread starter macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #25
    I actually tried that, but it made virtually no difference in performance at all...
     

Share This Page