15" Macbook pro for gaming?

[boonlar]

I was going to get a MBP but ended up getting an asus g73Jh instead. This laptop is freaking amazing. It maxes out every single game including MW2 and stays at 60FPS at 1920x1080. Yeah the battery only lasts two hours but that's fine as I always have power nearby lol.

If you want to game on high settings and have a bit of cushion for future games get a gaming laptop instead.

 

[0186279]

Yeah the battery only lasts two hours but that's fine as I always have power nearby lol.

If you want to game on high settings and have a bit of cushion for future games get a gaming laptop instead.

2 hours of battery, a not so sleek/light design, and no OSX. This is a mac forum ha, we are here for mostly the things I listed. We all know that we could get a gaming laptop for strictly gaming, but I'll take my 40 fps with the great battery, design, and OSX : )

 

[boonlar]

2 hours of battery, a not so sleek/light design, and no OSX. This is a mac forum ha, we are here for mostly the things I listed. We all know that we could get a gaming laptop for strictly gaming, but I'll take my 40 fps with the great battery, design, and OSX : )

The design is pretty cool actually, it has angles like the F-117 stealth fighter. Some people are trying to put OSX on a g73 but I don't think there are graphics drivers yet

 

[The Final Cut]

I could NEVER use that as my primary computer. Asus is in the top three windows laptop makers though, great for those that can do windows, I cant.

 

[mikeo007]

Although the 15" has a faster processor and twice as much vram.

Yes but neither of those make much difference since the speed og the gpu is usually the bottleneck.

3dmark06 scores on the 320m and 330m aren't that far apart, and that's with them both running at 1280x800.

 

[DesmoPilot]

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry8330/4.5.0.77 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/278)

Although the 15" has a faster processor and twice as much vram.

Yes but neither of those make much difference since the speed og the gpu is usually the bottleneck.

3dmark06 scores on the 320m and 330m aren't that far apart, and that's with them both running at 1280x800.

Of course they'll be close, that's a pretty low resolution.

 

[mikeo007]

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry8330/4.5.0.77 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/278)



Of course they'll be close, that's a pretty low resolution.

Well the performance gap is most easily measured by using an identical resolution for both tests. If you ran the 15" mbp at 1440x900 the gap would be even smaller.

 

[Freyqq]

Yes but neither of those make much difference since the speed og the gpu is usually the bottleneck.

3dmark06 scores on the 320m and 330m aren't that far apart, and that's with them both running at 1280x800.

that's pretty sad actually =\

 

[rmbrown09]

Are you on the high res screen?

negative

 

[0186279]

negative

Did you avoid the high res for gaming purposes?

 

[Dozerrox]

Is it really that bad to get the high res and play on a lower resolution? Does it ruin the game? Surely computers interpolate effectively enough nowadays?

Can someone post some screenshots of a high res scaled down to 1400 resolution vs a native 1400 screen? If gaming matters that much that it's worth getting a lower resolution screen, I don't see why you'd pick a mac...

 

[barefeats]

Interesting results from Steam's Portal using my recorded game sequence.
At 1280x800, "High-Medium" Settings -- mixture of high and medium, 2X AA, 2X Aniso, Vsync off...
15" MBP Core i5 2.53GHz with 256MB VRAM = 45 fps avg
17" MBP Core i7 2.66GHz with 512MB VRAM = 45 fps avg

Switch to 1920x1200 (using external display)...
15" MBP Core i5 2.53GHz with 256MB VRAM = 12 fps avg
17" MBP Core i7 2.66GHz with 512MB VRAM = 30 fps avg

I plan to run other resolutions between those two resolutions to see at what point the MBP with 256MB of VRAM starts to struggle.