Anyone else very disappointed with the 650m with 1GB

[Suno]

What sense did that make? Macs run games at full speed, just lower settings a bit if the game is stuttering. Simples.

All you need to play games competitively is bootcamp, a good mouse, keybinds and decent APM.

Only noobs think competitive gaming is about having a good GPU. That's why they get their mom to buy them a shiny pimped PC. Then they go rage on the forums about balance cos they really they suck.

Haha that's hilarious, it sounds like an accurate description of most people I come across online. As a SC2 player, I play mostly on low settings because I find that it not only lowers latency, but it's easier on the eyes and I don't get as distracted with how "pretty" all the lasers are.

I think the person you're arguing with is trying to make the claim that competitive gamers shouldn't play on the mac, but mac's should be able to play on maximum settings because... it's expensive? I'm not really sure.

Is there a category between 'professional gamer' and 'casual gamer' that would accurately describe a graphic-obsessed gamer? I mean personally I think that video showing the skyrim play was pretty decent, I wouldn't complain if that was me.

 

[thegreatdivorce]

Who care about running games on max? Some kid poser that makes youtube videos to impress his e-friends?

Competitive gamers run games low/medium to medium so they don't get stutter when another player loads. Try playing a siege in any next-gen game with 100's of people on high settings - just daft.

Implying that "competitive gaming" (lol) and MMO's are the only kind of gaming/games that matter ... /derp

Some people actually like games to look good, AND perform well. Shocking, right? Even more shocking, is that it's possible to have both, without "stuttering."

 

[Martialis]

Okay.

Did you really think apple would put a gpu in there that can drive games in 2800x1800.

Hell, even a gtx 680 (desktop card) would struggle at that resolution. And if you find the GPU lackluster, there are windows alternatives out there. But then you sacrfice weight, battery, worse screen, and it will be chunky as hell.

I think Apple struck a perfect balance with the new Mbp. Whats the point in a laptop if its 5kg heavy and fat.

I dont get why people dont understand this.

Because most of us are adults who aren't so weak that 5kg is seriously handicapping or inconvenient.

For the reference of those who use imperial measurements. 5kg is ~11lbs. If you find that too heavy to carry, you probably have worse problems than worrying about laptops.

And I imagine you are being hyperbolic anyways.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

WOW the new MBP can't play skyrim? Not a gamer but thought it would be able to play this game.

It can play it, just not at max settings.

Who care about running games on max? Some kid poser that makes youtube videos to impress his e-friends?

Competitive gamers run games low/medium to medium so they don't get stutter when another player loads. Try playing a siege in any next-gen game with 100's of people on high settings - just daft.

This MBP will run any game that's out on the market now on medium settings. I challenge anyone here to prove me wrong with a video.

You'd feel comfortable spending over $2,000 on a computer that can't even run current games properly? Imagine how outdated it'll be by this time next year, or in 2 years when the next-gen consoles come out and gaming takes another graphical leap?

 

[Samjohnson6]

Ok ok.. So it seems the argument that people are making here is that apple is putting the best GPU they can while considering heat and space requirements while maintaining form factor, well if that was true wouldn't the thicker MacBook pro be able to have a better gpu than the retina. It's just apple being apple. They could put in better gpus but that means one of two things... Higher prices or lower profit margins. If they thought they could make money from it I promise their designers would find a way to fit a 680m in a mbp

----------

Oh and I find it laughable that someone who is paying top dollar for a crazy high res screen is ok with low to medium details in games.

 

[therealseebs]

Who care about running games on max? Some kid poser that makes youtube videos to impress his e-friends?

People who enjoy how they look on higher settings.

I don't play "competitively". I'm not going for the absolute best frame rate, come what may. I turn a lot of things up because I like how the game looks, and then if it's a bit slow, well, it's a bit slow.

I'd rather play on high settings at 30fps than low settings at 60+. I'd also rather play on high settings at 30fps than high settings at 10.

 

[cubbie5150]

Why is anyone here surprised by this? This is what Apple does.

 

[iMusings]

It can play it, just not at max settings.



You'd feel comfortable spending over $2,000 on a computer that can't even run current games properly? Imagine how outdated it'll be by this time next year, or in 2 years when the next-gen consoles come out and gaming takes another graphical leap?

In Apple's defense, 2000 American dollars isn't a lot of money these days.

 

[wywern209]

the 650m is faster than the 6750m from last year that i play skyrim on and it does well with high settings and no AA at native res. i think OP is trying to expect something from an orange when he really needs a pineapple. you dont yell at orange farmers because the inside of the orange isn't yellow because you want what you can get in a pineapple in an orange.

 

[awesomator]

I was hoping apple would start trying to get some the gaming market... This gpu is a sad choice for a $2000+ laptop and then to only give it 1GB of ram on top of that is insulting. Guess I won't cancel my Alienware m17x order after all...

Apple can definitely get into the gaming market with a gt 650m

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-650M.71887.0.html

A gt 650m can play most modern games at at least high.

If you are looking to get into buying a "gaming laptop" Alienware should be the last place you look. I would say about 95% of the time Sager has the best deals for "gaming laptops." They provide cheap powerful monsters. Apple provides slim well designed computers. Personally I would recommend one of the two for whichever interests you most. I guess pick Alienware over apple or Sager if your top priority is red lights.

 

[theSeb]

It can play it, just not at max settings.



You'd feel comfortable spending over $2,000 on a computer that can't even run current games properly?

Yes, how a computer plays games is my number 1 priority and it's what I base my purchasing decisions on. </sarcasm>

Imagine how outdated it'll be by this time next year, or in 2 years when the next-gen consoles come out and gaming takes another graphical leap?

The specs for the next-gen consoles are out there and if they turn out to be true, it will be more of a drunken waddle rather than a leap. When the new consoles come out then I'll buy a new console.

 

[MrD1sturbed]

My current laptop is an Alienware M14x R2, which has the EXACT same config as the new RMBP (CPU, GPU, Ram, etc) except of course the Retina display. Since the Retina display has amazing scaling ability, I can 100% accurately say that the 650GT can play ANY game on the market, on high, at 1440x900 up to 1920x1200 without any issues and at above 30 FPS.

 

[Durendal]

Ok ok.. So it seems the argument that people are making here is that apple is putting the best GPU they can while considering heat and space requirements while maintaining form factor, well if that was true wouldn't the thicker MacBook pro be able to have a better gpu than the retina. It's just apple being apple. They could put in better gpus but that means one of two things... Higher prices or lower profit margins. If they thought they could make money from it I promise their designers would find a way to fit a 680m in a mbp

----------

Oh and I find it laughable that someone who is paying top dollar for a crazy high res screen is ok with low to medium details in games.

Oh criminy, are you serious? Here's a tip: Take a look at the difference in TDP. The 680M has about TWICE the TDP as the 650M. There is no possible way they could cram it in there without making it ridiculously loud and eating battery like no tomorrow. Your analysis also falls flat when you consider battery life, assuming it could be done at all. The Retina MBP makes room for more battery by removing the optical drive. Not so for the standard MBP, which has the same battery life. Put something beefier in there, even a 660M, and you cut the regular MBP's battery life below that of the Retina MBP.

Most people buying Macbook Pros won't go beyond casual gaming. That's just the way it is.

 

[truciet]

To everyone who is saying the 650m has decent benchmarks, make sure you aren't looking at the 2GB version, I haven't seen any for the 1gb

Didn't read the entire thread but you're pretty "smart" to think its a huge difference between 1gb to 2gb.

Did Dell trick you into buying a bigger video card?

Example, Alienware m14x offers a 1gb and 2gb 650m. I bet you would pay the extra $100...

 

[therealseebs]

Most people buying Macbook Pros won't go beyond casual gaming. That's just the way it is.

Agreed. I sort of wish Apple would make some higher-power machines which are not as thin, but have beefier CPU/GPU and some combination of shorter battery life and more battery to bring it back up a bit, but I am gradually concluding that I am no longer in Apple's target markets.

It used to be that the "Pro" meant that the machine was designed to do things that most users didn't need, so all the people who are only a small market segment individually could get a machine that did what they needed (plus a few things they didn't). No longer...

 

[mrs1986]

Why people bother to answer this kind of topics??

Its super simple, if you want to game, get a Desktop, if you need portability and want to game, get a windows laptop, a gaming laptop to be precise, and if you WORK in your computer, get a Mac, this retina Macbook Pro is just and outstanding piece of engineering... People just dont get it and want Apple to make "Gaming" machines... Hell no, i dont think that is going to happen ever...

 

[PVisitors]

That's your problem OP. Apple would be geniuses if they could get a m17x chip into a laptop 0.71 inches thick.

Oh and for the record the m14x offers the exact same chip the 15" MBP has, customise to the closest spec (missing the obvious benefits of a MBPR naturally) and it's £1550. Maybe pictures will help get through to you the extent of just how powerful the 650m is in comparison to the size of the laptop. Here is an m14x running the same 650m chip:

 

[mrs1986]

Ok ok.. So it seems the argument that people are making here is that apple is putting the best GPU they can while considering heat and space requirements while maintaining form factor, well if that was true wouldn't the thicker MacBook pro be able to have a better gpu than the retina. It's just apple being apple. They could put in better gpus but that means one of two things... Higher prices or lower profit margins. If they thought they could make money from it I promise their designers would find a way to fit a 680m in a mbp

----------

Oh and I find it laughable that someone who is paying top dollar for a crazy high res screen is ok with low to medium details in games.

Your are 8 years old arent you?? When you get a job you will understand that everything is not gaming... Some of us have some time to play every now an then, but not primordial thing in life....

Lol you are hilarious...

Get a desktop and get away from here, if you want Apple to do all that stuff is because you are an idiot that just want to have the "Apple" brand in his computer...

If there where just one more brand that make a laptop this high end with its design and complete made from scratch without using ANY standard part, you would probably be paying this price, and a LOT more too...

Get a desktop

 

[Cypther]

1GB of Vram for 2800x1800 is a joke! That's like a race car with a steam engine.

 

[PVisitors]

Yeah, but it can't even drive games at 1440x900 properly, which I believe is the problem that people are having.



Skyrim.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-650M.71887.0.html

Funny that. Seems to run Skyrim on high detail at an average of 43fps.

Totally doesn't run.

 

[mrs1986]

Because most of us are adults who aren't so weak that 5kg is seriously handicapping or inconvenient.

For the reference of those who use imperial measurements. 5kg is ~11lbs. If you find that too heavy to carry, you probably have worse problems than worrying about laptops.

And I imagine you are being hyperbolic anyways.

I think you are pretty wrong... I'm a big guy, like big... My wight is 115kg and i have a MSI GT780DX, is a gaming laptop... And its heavy as hell.... I dont want to travel with it anymore, its just destroing my backk i think...
You just dont count with the charger, these are MASSIVE, some books, some things you need for the day and you have a nice 10kg backpack, without mention the added weight of the backpack itself, it cant be a girly backpack cause it wont hold the laptop weight or size... So any laptop backpack for this kind of laptop could easily weight like 2kg....

I can clearly see that your backpack is not that heavy...

 

[minnus]

Okay.

Did you really think apple would put a gpu in there that can drive games in 2800x1800.

Hell, even a gtx 680 (desktop card) would struggle at that resolution.

Wrong, the GTX 680 definitely CAN. Max settings? Probably not - but definitely depends on the game and the settings. I'm also talking about modern games, so please don't turn around with a "YEAH, 2800X1800 MINESWEEPER" or something.

Just saying.

Also,yes 2GB would be beneficial over 1GB - I don't understand how people can say it would not. Once again, depends on the game and settings.

I'm not sure what the engineering implications are, so I can't judge Apple's decision much (dramatic heat increase? or power consumption? - dunno). I do wish it was 2GB though.

----------

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-650M.71887.0.html

Funny that. Seems to run Skyrim on high detail at an average of 43fps.

Totally doesn't run.

It doesn't report resolution ~ is the benchmark for 1440 x 900?

 

[Mr MM]

this thread is... pointless.

You are comparing a gaming laptop with a premium consumer one.

now go play some games at max settings in a vaio z13, its 2k

and sincerely making points with a asus G series, is just... stupid.

try a 7970m, and see how it compares to that measly thing called 660m.

there are 4 OEMs that make gaming laptops, msi, clevo, aw and samsung.

660m, even lenovo put that in the y580

 

[taedouni]

I feel that Apple should have put something better such as a GT 660M. But at least they are improving. In 2010 they had the GT 330 (low end). In 2011 they offered the 6750M, although it wasn't spectacular it was still a huge improvement. Now they are using the GT 650M which is better than the 6750M (thinking retrospective). The GT 640M (if I am not mistaken) performs better than the 6750M by 10-15%. So my point is Apple seems to be improving every year in terms of choosing a higher ranked GPU. I wouldn't be surprised if by next year Apple uses a GT 770M.

 

[Dammit Cubs]

Im actually more disappointed that you actually made this thread to express your disappointment