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.
Anyone with the new Macbook tried any games yet?
- Thread starter mklnz
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You might be interested to see the benchmarks posted on the UK Macworld site, which compares the new and old Macbook and Macbook Pro running Doom 3, Quake 4, Unreal Tournament 2004 and Call of Duty 4 at different resolutions. The results given are surprising, particularly as even the base model unibody Macbook completely decimates a 20" iMac 2.4Ghz Core 2 Duo with discrete ATI Radeon HD 2400XT with 128Mb VRAM.
EDIT: I can't quite believe that an integrated graphics chip is better than the discrete ATI Radeon X1600 in my C2D Macbook Pro; but the results speak for themselves. It looks like I'm going to have to save up for a new laptop …
Check it out here!
EDIT: I can't quite believe that an integrated graphics chip is better than the discrete ATI Radeon X1600 in my C2D Macbook Pro; but the results speak for themselves. It looks like I'm going to have to save up for a new laptop …
Check it out here!
Crysis on a 2.4ghz macbook
Part 1 Loading up and settings
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHR7a7YlNC0
Part 2 The gameplay
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mL04m5jMDp4
Call of duty 4: Gameplay
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaBKZOBHpB0
Part 1 Loading up and settings
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHR7a7YlNC0
Part 2 The gameplay
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mL04m5jMDp4
Call of duty 4: Gameplay
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaBKZOBHpB0
can anyone tell me why i can't get steam to work on the new macbook? I'm running it through crossover, but it won't let me purchase any games. When I click on the purchase button nothing happens. I've deleted it then reinstalled it and the same thing happens. All I wanna do is play the original half life and it won't let me.
Even though I still firmly believe Apple should be using dedicated graphics and not integrated, I have to admit I'm impressed with the performance.
It's definitely a step in the right direction. It is a good performer, though still behind the GeForce 8400M GS and 9300M GS.
I wouldn't put too much hope in 3DMark scores either. 3DMark is highly inaccurate and very easily manipulated. ATI and nVidia have both been found guilty of manipulating the results via driver tweaks.
But this is a good solid performer. A huge step up from Intel. But, again, Apple needs to be using dedicated GPUs. Not integrated.
I would be curious to see, in person, how well it runs UT3, GRID, and HL2 EP2. If it can run those even at low/mid settings then it should be able to push GTA4 at low/mid settings.
It's definitely a step in the right direction. It is a good performer, though still behind the GeForce 8400M GS and 9300M GS.
I wouldn't put too much hope in 3DMark scores either. 3DMark is highly inaccurate and very easily manipulated. ATI and nVidia have both been found guilty of manipulating the results via driver tweaks.
But this is a good solid performer. A huge step up from Intel. But, again, Apple needs to be using dedicated GPUs. Not integrated.
I would be curious to see, in person, how well it runs UT3, GRID, and HL2 EP2. If it can run those even at low/mid settings then it should be able to push GTA4 at low/mid settings.
But my question is why everyone is playing under Vista? On my PC machine I always boot up XP when I'm going to play as I get muuch better performance when in XP. (of course there's games which only runs under Vista but if it's not, GO XP) I must say that I can be 20-30% better performance in XP depending on which game you are playing.
Perhaps, but I must say I find Vista to be a far far far superior OS than XP, so I will certainly install Vista instead of XP in bootcamp (assuming I can't be bothered to buy both, and who can?) and hence Vista is what I will run my games on.
I realise Vista hogs more system resources than XP, but that is a natural side effect of adding more features, though I will admit MS have a habit of adding unreasonable bloat.
Well, I see you have an ATI card in your PC.
My experience with ATI is that, even though people always claim ATI have finally gotten the drivers up to par, the drivers have always been terrible and held the hardware back.
So I don't know about ATI, but on the nvidia side, Vista's performance equaled XP many months ago. SP1 and updated nvidia drivers basically took Vista up to the same level as and, in some cases, even surpassed XP.
Thankfully, Apple went with nvidia IGPs for the MacBook and stuck with nvidia for the MacBook Pro, so theres no reason for anyone to install XP thinking they'll get a performance boost. It'll be exactly the same on both OSes.