Hi, I'm considering buying a new mac mini (hold on) when it comes out, and, noticing the trend of how the base mbp's have similar specs to the base mini, I was wondering weather anyone has played minecraft on the new MVP and what fps you got. Thx for any help
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
13" MacBook pro minecraft fps question
- Thread starter theRAMman
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Tested in Single Player:
First load: I get around 40fps
Once the game stabilizes: around 80FPS
My settings have Open GL on, Normal seeing distance, Max Performance, Fast graphics, clouds on, particles set to all, max brightness, not running optifine.
Tested on 2.9GHz i7 Macbook Pro (Mid-2012 model) using 256GB Crucial M4 6GB/s SSD and 8GB RAM.
First load: I get around 40fps
Once the game stabilizes: around 80FPS
My settings have Open GL on, Normal seeing distance, Max Performance, Fast graphics, clouds on, particles set to all, max brightness, not running optifine.
Tested on 2.9GHz i7 Macbook Pro (Mid-2012 model) using 256GB Crucial M4 6GB/s SSD and 8GB RAM.
I find it funny that your MBP gets less fps in Minecraft than mine. I get around 300 FPS in Minecraft with all the settings maxxed out i can post screenshot for you if you want.
You have the same MBP that I do? Maybe it's because I run so many apps in the background... lol
my MBP doesn't have a 2.9 GHz i7, i have a 2.7 GHz i7, yours must be the 13 inch, while mine is the 15 inch.
I'm going to guess that yours is a quad core? That's the only way I can see it having such a high FPS. Are you sure you're not on tiny? Lol.
Yup, you have the best GPU currently available in a MacBook, so I'm not surprised that your performance is so good.
I thought the Intel HD4000 was currently the best? I had that GPU on my MBA before I sold it and was only getting around 60 fps
Minecraft is heavily RAM based and CPU bound. It's hardly ever GPU bound.
Its also a single threaded application, so the higher your clock speed, the more frames per second you will get.
The HD4000 is the best integrated chip available to Apple users right now, but the 650m is discrete, only available in the 15" models, and walks all over the HD4000.
You probably had the HD3000 in your old MBA assuming it wasn't a 2012 one. The HD4000 should perform significantly faster so it doesn't sound like you need to worry about your graphics performance in Minecraft, assuming it actually runs off of the GPU. Which, iirc, it doesn't - it's a more CPU intensive game I think. But it's been a while so I could be wrong.
Last edited:
So if you have Turbo Boost you're not to worry and should run very good. Plus the efficiency of the newer processors would help, its not necessary higher clock speeds at all. But its true what you say, not entirely, but still can be proofed.
My MBA was the 2010 model before they made the backlit keyboards. I could take the FPS on that to 150 using optifine, but sometimes I do prefer the fancier look.
I've always heard that Minecraft was a RAM and CPU intensive game... I'm sure that I should get a good FPS with 2.9Ghz i7 and 8gb of RAM. 80 is fine for me, I don't think making it higher would have much of a difference.
*Apple at WWDC* We have found an innovation that can change the world. *Few seconds for next slide to appear* PoTaTo *Audience applauds* The potato is the biggest step for all you gamers.
----------
Although... after 8GB RAM, fps doesn't have much of a difference, unless you have an AMAZING GPU and CPU
EDIT: Holy ****, user above me necrobumped this....
Let's see...Early 2011 cMBP i5 2.3 dual, 384MB HD3000. I play with Fancy Graphics, 8 chunk loading (16 on 1.8), and turning off just about everything. Minimum smooth lighting vanilla, about 35% on optifine. I play with a decent amount of mob farms around, both manual and automatic.
1.8 Snapshot 14w30c - gameplay, average 20fps on world load, during chunk loading, 35fps gameplay. No optifine for
1.7.9 Non-Optifine - 30-40fps consistently, depending on how many chunk loaders I have active/mob farms
1.7.4 Optifine Vanilla - 60-80 fps.
1.7.4 Vanilla - 30 fps
1.7.4 Optifine Bukkit - 20-40 fps (server)
1.7.2 Optifine Vanilla - 50 fps
1.7.2 Optifine Bukkit - 20-30 fps
1.7.2 Vanilla - 40 fps
1.6.4 Optifine vanilla - 40 fps
Honestly minecraft isn't something you have to worry about, assuming single player. Multiplayer with bukkit will heat it right up if there are lots of plugins installed. Don't even think about ftb/crackpack/etc, lol.
Let's see...Early 2011 cMBP i5 2.3 dual, 384MB HD3000. I play with Fancy Graphics, 8 chunk loading (16 on 1.8), and turning off just about everything. Minimum smooth lighting vanilla, about 35% on optifine. I play with a decent amount of mob farms around, both manual and automatic.
1.8 Snapshot 14w30c - gameplay, average 20fps on world load, during chunk loading, 35fps gameplay. No optifine for
1.7.9 Non-Optifine - 30-40fps consistently, depending on how many chunk loaders I have active/mob farms
1.7.4 Optifine Vanilla - 60-80 fps.
1.7.4 Vanilla - 30 fps
1.7.4 Optifine Bukkit - 20-40 fps (server)
1.7.2 Optifine Vanilla - 50 fps
1.7.2 Optifine Bukkit - 20-30 fps
1.7.2 Vanilla - 40 fps
1.6.4 Optifine vanilla - 40 fps
Honestly minecraft isn't something you have to worry about, assuming single player. Multiplayer with bukkit will heat it right up if there are lots of plugins installed. Don't even think about ftb/crackpack/etc, lol.
Thats a load of ********.
Just because it doesn't look graphically intensive doesn't mean it isn't. the HD3000 in my old MBP only got around 30fps with most things reduced significantly.
----------
erm 40 fps isn't really playable imo. I get 80-100fps on my rMBP and its good then.