Core 2 Duo Mac mini: UT2004 benchmarks for the gaming elite

Discussion in 'Mac and PC Games' started by oingoboingo, Aug 14, 2007.

  1. oingoboingo macrumors 6502a

    oingoboingo

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #1
    OK I think it's taken as fact here at Macrumors that the Mac mini represents the sharp point of Apple's renewed thrust deep into the gaming market. It's small, quiet, and causes MacPro owners to cast envious glances sideways at it. I've just acquired one of the new 2GHz Core 2 Duo models, and have equipped it with 2GB of RAM. After setting it up, there was nothing more important than getting some Unreal Tournament 2004 benchmarks sorted out!

    The system: August 2007 2GHz Mac mini, 2GB RAM, 120GB hard drive, OS X 10.4.10, all latest patches applied. No other software except Finder running.

    The game: Unreal Tournament 2004 full retail edition, all latest patches including Universal Binary support applied.

    I used SantaDuck Toolpack to do the benchmarking.

    Flyby: DM Antalus, no sound, maximum graphics settings:
    - 800x600: 47.9 FPS
    - 1024x768: 34.1 FPS
    - 1280x800: 25.0 FPS

    Botmatch: DM Antalus, sound on, maximum graphics settings:
    - 800x600: 28.1 FPS
    - 1024x768: 23.6 FPS
     
  2. Denali9 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2007
    #2
    mac Mini

    if they were aiming at the gaming market they missed the mark by a mile and a half. With these score, it probably won't even play UT 2007. Don't get me wrong, the mini is a great computer, just not for gaming.
     
  3. QCassidy352 macrumors G3

    QCassidy352

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Location:
    Bay Area
  4. Scooby_Doo macrumors member

    Scooby_Doo

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2005
    Location:
    Chicago
    #4
    Thanks for the heads up

    Good post with some helpful numbers. We all know the Mac Mini is not a gaming machine, but for someone in the market for one (Or a MacBook) that wants an idea if he can play a 3 year old game this is a solid post.

    And I enjoyed the humor as well.
     
  5. dmw007 macrumors G4

    dmw007

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Location:
    Working for MI-6
    #5
    Blame the GMA950...that is still in the Mac Mini... :eek:
     
  6. torchwood04 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    #6
    UT2004 is a CPU intensive game for the most part, so the Core 2 does appear to make a difference to an extent.. And more whining about the GMA 950? The mini is NOT a gamer's machine! lol
     
  7. dmw007 macrumors G4

    dmw007

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Location:
    Working for MI-6
    #7
    No whining, but I wish that Apple would make use of the X3100 in the Mac Mini. :eek: :)
     
  8. oingoboingo thread starter macrumors 6502a

    oingoboingo

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #8
    Me too. Next up: Doom3 benchmarks! :D
     
  9. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #9
    so the current macm ini can take on with gaming pcs built for the same price of 2002

    SUCCESS
     
  10. telecomm macrumors 65816

    telecomm

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Location:
    Rome
    #10
    How does this compare to the PB in your sig? :D
     
  11. oingoboingo thread starter macrumors 6502a

    oingoboingo

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #11
    Ask and ye shall receive!

    From this time 3 years ago, I present Unreal Tournament 2004 on the 1.33GHz 12" PowerBook:

    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=875012#post875012

    Flyby: 'DM-Antalus'.
    - 1024x768, maximum detail settings. PB: 10.1 FPS, mini: 34.1 FPS
    - 800x600, maximum detail settings. PB: 14.1 FPS, mini: 47.9 FPS

    Botmatch: 'DM-Antalus'.
    - 1024x768, maximum detail settings. PB: 4.9 FPS, mini: 23.6 FPS
     
  12. Merser macrumors member

    Merser

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Location:
    NJ
    #12
    World of Warcraft

    Just an FYI,

    I play WoW on my 1 generation Macbook (Black) with stock RAM and it runs fine. I will have to check my FPS as I cant recall what I get on average, but I can say that its just fine for me. Sure it skips a hair in major cities but it works well for 5 man instances and farming.

    I just upgraded my RAM to 2gb and I have yet to try, maybe it will be even better.

    Certainly not a gaming computer, but more then adequate for playing a bit while traveling.

    But thats why I have a HP AMD64X2 4600+ with 2GB RAM and 512mb DDR2 Video card...
     
  13. telecomm macrumors 65816

    telecomm

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Location:
    Rome
    #13
    Wow! The Mini does represent a substantial increase in framerates! Gamers will be pleased!
     
  14. oingoboingo thread starter macrumors 6502a

    oingoboingo

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #14
    Yeah, look clearly this whole thread is a little tongue-in-cheek, but to be honest I was surprised that the mini even performed as well as it did. Don't misunderstand me: in absolute terms, it's a dog. And I never expected the mini to be a gaming machine...that's not why I bought it, and that's not why Apple makes it. But hey...you really can squeeze a (leisurely) game of UT2004 out of it when required :D I just thought owners of the new Core 2 Duo minis might like to know of the (small) amount of gaming potential hidden away in side that little box.
     
  15. telecomm macrumors 65816

    telecomm

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Location:
    Rome
    #15
    Yup, the Mini doesn't actually fair that badly for casual gamers. Quite a bit better than the PB, which is faster than mine (1 Ghz), and I've been wasting far too much time on UT2004 (which is completely playable even on my aging PB). Of course, I don't max out the graphics settings. :)
     

Share This Page