Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Mac and PC Games' started by mrjosh, Mar 6, 2009.
If so, what graphics card do you have and how well does it run?
Yes, with the non-premium client and it works fine, it has very low requirements. The Mac premium client will be out in a few hours and I'm waiting to see how it runs on this new iMac (3.06ghz stock 4gb, GT 130). I'll let ya know!
Looking forward to seeing how you get on with the iMac and EvE. I'm an avid EvE player and I'm looking to get my first Mac soon ( probably the 3.06 ATI option ). Good luck!
Works Fantastic - 60 - 80 FPS
Downloaded the new EVE client (premium) for Mac today. Gave it a go and it is running much better than I expected. I'm getting 60-80 FPS with all but HDR and BLOOM turned up all the way. With HDR and BLOOM switched on (all settings maxed) I'm getting 35-55 FPS. Looks absolutely beautiful and runs very smoothly. No fleet fights yet though.
Model Name: iMac
Model Identifier: iMac9,1
Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo
Processor Speed: 3.06 GHz
Number Of Processors: 1
Total Number Of Cores: 2
L2 Cache: 6 MB
Memory: 4 GB
Bus Speed: 1.07 GHz
The 24" iMac 3.06, 2009 model, basic store bought setup. I was a bit afraid I'd regret not waiting for the ATI graphics card, but I decided to go with the default from the store so I could return it if it was way off what I needed. I'm happy
Thanks for the replies. Hopefully next week I'll have new imac in hand. I'm hoping the GT120 will be ok since I may go the 2.93 route.
Running latest Apochrypha client on MacBook White 2009
I'm running the latest Apochrypha client (v: 6.10.84244) on my MacBook White 2009 2.0GHz w 9400 GPU, 2GB RAM (original, but I'm upgrading), 500GB HDD. HDR & Bloom disabled, with shader & texture quality high.
So far so good, it has only crashed on me after 4+ hours of playing... but otherwise graphics look very good, no discernable lag and pretty stable. Haven't tried it in fleet action though...
Can you post some frame rates maybe? Just hit CTRL+F and you'll get a nice framerate graph.
I played Eve quite a bit on my original Macbook (2 GHz Core Duo, GMA950 graphics). It's kind of playable when doing solo stuff, but I have to zoom out all the way for missions, using just the overview. So battles are rather silent and graphicall unexciting.
Fleet battles are a no-go, basically I warp in, then freeze frame for a minute, and the next frame is me in a station because I've been podkilled...
I'm planning on getting the 2.4 GHz alu Macbook. It's identical to yours, the 400 MHz more shouldn't make any difference. What's your framerate near stations and during combat missions, with multiple ennemies, asteroids and stuff around?
I haven't really had much time to play recently. I just logged on to change skills & check out the fps in-system.
In-station around 22 ~ 25 fps, outside station between 30 ~ 80 fps, usually hovering ard 35, in belts around the same. Currently I'm in Empire, an 0.9 system that is not very crowded, so these numbers may be because of little traffic in-system.
But to my eye, gameplay is quite smooth. If I didn't turn on the fps monitor, I wouldn't know it was only around there.
I have a friend using a HD4850 (not a mac), he gets ~91 fps in fleet battles.
Hope this helps.
I'm planning on purchasing the 2.93 with GT 120 on Monday and maybe even play a little Eve. I'll see how it goes. I'm still wavering between the 2.93 and the 2.66 with 9400m...
Hmm, there's little action but lots of fancy lighting in stations. 30 fps sound totally playable. I could still turn stuff off for fleet battling I guess. Thanks for the info.
Tip: There's a neat widget called "Eve Skill Monitor". Check it out, it's free and useful.
I play Eve on an old and busted Acer laptop with a 1.6 Ghz processor and on low settings and I can get by. However, I have a small problem where my computer crashes when rendering accel gates. Never had this issue with the classic client.
I want to get a 2.0 Ghz UMB and was hoping the mac client would work well enough to run the game on medium settings or something. Now I know I should be ok, I feel a lot better.
EDIT: EveMon on the computer (PC) and Eve Tracker on the iPhone is the way to go. I don't know about tracking programs for the Mac though.
EDIT: EveMon on the computer (PC) and Eve Tracker on the iPhone is the way to go. I don't know about tracking programs for the Mac though.[/QUOTE]
There is an EVE Skill Monitor widget for OS X dashboard. Can't remember the exact name right now (I'm at work, shhh....), but you can probably find it on Apple's downloads site. Try searching there.
Here it is: http://www.cornerspeed.com/kasey/esm/
Not as advanced as EveMon though. It only tells you when the skill is done, shows the ISK and what skill you're training.
How is the newer OS X EVE client nowadays anyway ? Just now getting into EVE and I remember lots of complaints I read about with the initial OS X client.
I got rid of my last PC gaming rig and am now to only Mac's and do all my work related things that might require windows inside Fusion.
So if the latest EVE OS X client runs decently enough I can not have to bother with boot camp either.
The old client worked mostly fine on My Core Duo (2006) Macbook. Only very low framerates and large fleets were unplayable.
The new Client won't connect, saying "incompatible build". Makes sense though, the GMA950 could barely handle the old client and somewhere on the Eve websites it says that Macbooks (doesn't specify which models) are not supported.
urghhh please dont get 9400 if you want to play games... Its about 1.5-2x slower than even GT120. Integrated cards aren't the gamer's dream at all.
I decided to go with the GT 120. However, I had to delay my purchase (I need to make sure I'll still have a job in the next few months!). Trying to be responsible can be a hassle sometimes...
Well, guys, as I said earlier, I'm playing the latest Apochrypha client on a MacBook White 2.0GHz w 9400 integrated graphics, and it looks pretty playable on my end so far. Personally, I'd say earlier models without at least the 9400 are probably a non-starter. No, the 9400 isn't a hard-core gamer's dream of course, but for the busy working joe who wants to squeeze in a few hours playing time here & there to relax & unwind, but doesn't want to splash out on a fancy new machine with all the bells & whistles, its ideal, imho.
Of course, my choice of the MacBook was down to budget, mainly, and the lack of a better graphics card on the new entry-level iMacs. And then when deliberating on the MacBook, I also considered the Mac mini. In the end, i chose the MacBook because for the specs/ price, I'd rather have the portability.
Personally, I held out purchasing my new MacBook, and returning to the EVE universe, until the much-anticipated refreshed iMacs came out. I was hoping Apple would put a 9600 (or GT120) in the lower mid-range iMac, was crossing my fingers it may even have been in the entry-level. Alas, it was not to be... and the upper mid-range model with the GT120 is out of my league for now...
Oh well, maybe at the end of the year, when I get my bonus (if I get to keep this job), I can hand down this MacBook to the wifey (then the daughter gets the heavily-upgraded iBook G4) and get myself a decent game-playing iMac... unless the new baby needs more stuff......
Damn its hard to play EVE and have a family...
Yes, the 9400 is powerful enough for casual gaming on 13" screen, but on a 24" iMac even 1280x800 resolution looks really bad. The GT 120 provides additional horsepower to drive those extra pixels at higher speed.
Also, family >>> EVE
But, but, but, Eve has over 250.000 players! Your family isn't as big, is it?
Played it a while back and might check it out again. It appears they made the first few months less boring.
Eagerly awaiting Starcraft 2 though. Should run ok on the 9400M, low detail, 1280x800. Too bad there's no set requirements yet. When do you guys think will the 13" Macbooks be updated? Maybe along with Snow Leopard? Apple likes releasing the OS with new Hardware, right? And the Buyer's guide says: "Buy only if you need it - Approaching the end of a cycle".
Are you talking about the 13" MacBook White or the 13" unibody Alum MacBook? Cos the 13" MacBook White just got upgraded in Jan this year. That's how it got the 9400 graphics...
Oh, yeah, and another minor reason I got my MacBook White was that I was expecting to EOL after this refresh, so I wanted to have the "last of the line".
I seriously doubt Apple is going to put much plastic at all in any of the future products, at least on the outside, anyway. Aluminum is the current flavour of the, well, next few years, at least.