Gaming is excellent on the Retina.

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by skysailing, Mar 5, 2013.

  1. skysailing, Mar 5, 2013
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2013

    skysailing macrumors regular


    Jun 26, 2012
    For those asking if the gaming on the Retina is smooth on extremely high settings, the answer is YES.

    Just played Tomb Raider (2013) on 1920 x 1080 with everything maxed. Not only is it smooth, but the graphics are OUTSTANDING, and it didn't even stutter.

    SimCity (2013) also plays EXTREMELY well on maxed out resolution and settings.

    The entire process was just so fast and packed full with amazing animation.

    Couldn't be more impressed and blown away by the performance of these games on this Retina MacBook Pro.

    I know these were just two examples, but if you game, don't even hesitate-just buy the Retina.

    Played on a 2013 15" Retina MacBook Pro - 2.4GHz - 256GB - 8GB.
  2. kdoug macrumors 6502a


    Jun 2, 2010
    Iowa City, IA USA
    13" or 15". Inquiring minds want to know. Might add a signature also, takes the guess out of it.
  3. skysailing thread starter macrumors regular


    Jun 26, 2012
    Thanks man. Just updated the post.
  4. Acronyc, Mar 5, 2013
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2013

    Acronyc macrumors 6502a

    Jan 24, 2011
    Out of curiosity, when you say you played Tomb Raider with everything maxed does that include with TressFX enabled? I also get great FPS on high settings at the same resolution, but if I enable TressFX it drops by 20-30FPS. Looks amazing, but not very smooth.

    I agree with you though, generally speaking the 15" rMBP is a very capable gaming laptop. I don't use consoles anymore and only have one computer, and I've found the 15" rMBP to be really great with almost every game I've tried.
  5. Squilly macrumors 68020


    Nov 17, 2012
    Thanks! I'm on my 15" 2.3ghz rMBP now, haven't gamed on it yet. Now I'm excited :D
  6. urkel macrumors 68030

    Nov 3, 2008
    Gaming is one of those things that make me hate the rMBP. Its such an amazing machine in terms of Display, Power and even Sound. But those storage limitations... $2200 and all I can fit is 256GB?

    256GB is manageable but it requires a lot of compromise in order to live with such cramped space. And that usually means bloated files like games and home movies end up being put on external drives and thats just inconvenient.

    Ive been dying to play a few games on this thing but the only way I can make space is by taking off the apps and files that make me money. And thats not fun.
  7. HR24 macrumors newbie

    Feb 14, 2013
    Yeah I agree with you. I have windows on bootcamp and the windows OS itself takes about 50gigs?? is this normal anyone? I have windows 7 professional.
  8. MacKid macrumors 6502

    Jan 1, 2003
    Probably should have purchased a cMBP. :(

    That is abnormal. Windows 7 recommends ~16 GB for a 32-bit install; ~21 GB for a 64-bit install. My Boot Camp footprint, with a few things installed (Boot Camp drivers, Chrome, browser plug-ins) is around 23 GB. First thing to check: did you install all those language packs?
  9. Jasonx82 macrumors member

    Nov 18, 2008
    I have all my Music, Movies, misc files on a 64GB SDXC.
  10. HR24 macrumors newbie

    Feb 14, 2013
    Thank you for answering. No, No language packs whatsoever. Its a W7 64bit Professional. It was exactly about 50gigs when I first installed the Windows.
  11. ayeying macrumors 601


    Dec 5, 2007
    Yay Area, CA
    That's a little big. When I tested, a fully installed OSX with iLife took up ~20GB. A Windows 7 with updates install took up ~21GB for me. So really, there's no difference.
  12. MacKid macrumors 6502

    Jan 1, 2003
    I remember some hefty service packs for .NET frameworks and junk showing up in my optional/recommended updates list under Win. 7 Ultimate. I can't remember if they were there before (or only after) I'd installed some Microsoft programming software, but that would be another category of non-essentials.

    I really can't think of anything in the OS that could stealthily double your storage requirements except accidentally downloading unnecessary updates. But I can't say that I know a ton about Windows, to be fair.
  13. Dyno-Mike macrumors regular

    Aug 19, 2012
    United Kingdom
    I disable hibernate and page file on windows to save 16gb of space, enough for 1 or 2 more games!
  14. Macman45 macrumors G5


    Jul 29, 2011
    Somewhere Back In The Long Ago
    I will also disable hibernation...It's an OSX issue and was terrible on my new bad I nearly sent it all is well.

    I am waiting for delivery of my new rMBP 13" and I do play the odd game, will install a couple and see, went for the 512GB SSD and 3GHZ CPU...delivers Monday!
  15. leman macrumors G3

    Oct 14, 2008
    This is why I run my games from an USB3 drive.
  16. achilles10 macrumors newbie

    Mar 6, 2013
    Thanks for this. I've been gaming on my 2.3Ghz rMBP since I purchased it but one thing has been bugging me forever. I feel I'm not getting the performance I should be getting. For Eg. With Tomb Raider, I'm only able to play with a mix of high and normal at 1080p. If it's not too much trouble, could you post a screenshot of your normal and advanced settings? Also, I'm running this game off my SSD, not an external USB drive, just in case if that matters.


    I use a regular USB 2.0 hard drive for games and it works absolutely fine. The load times will be higher but other than that no issues.
  17. Serban Suspended

    Jan 8, 2013
    hibernation issue on imac?? what kind of issues ? and hibernation on mountain lion or windows?
  18. Macman45 macrumors G5


    Jul 29, 2011
    Somewhere Back In The Long Ago
    It's been discussed and a workaround found here:

    At first we though that this was confined to Imacs with the Fusion drive, but more folks are reporting issues with MacBooks too. Apple know about it. I'd only recommend disabling hibernation if you are suffering from the issues described...IE: random wake ups, slow to regain wifi connection as described in the thread.

    I have used the fix on three new Imacs now and it does the trick...Until last week I was unaware that it applied to laptop models too, but it seems to...specifically those with SSD's...First thing I'm going to do after I set my newbie up.
  19. ScholarsInk macrumors regular

    Apr 3, 2010
    Seconding this. I get great performance on my rMBP gaming wise, but I would like to see your TR settings for some guidance.
  20. urkel, Mar 6, 2013
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2013

    urkel macrumors 68030

    Nov 3, 2008
    All those suggestions/solutions do work, but the actual problem is still being ignored. At $2000+ then why should we have to make compromises?

    I love the rMBP which is why I bought it. But I think if we were to ask 100 people why they bought the MBP then we'd get 99 people saying its for the screen and 1 liar claiming that the thinness enables them to do something they could never have done if it were a few millimeters thicker and housed a 2.5" bay to enable us to use a standard SSD or opt for a Fusion Drive.

    The Retina display absolutely improves my photography workflow so Im likely going to keep it. Im just saying that after about ten generations of MacBook Pros then this is probably the least versatile of them due to the lack of storage options. Hard drive dongles? Slow(er) external disk access? Go get a cMBP instead? Those are solutions for a problem Apple really didn't have to introduce.

    [Translation: After working hours on a photo session, I kinda just want to play some games on here] :)
  21. Crzyrio macrumors 65816

    Jul 6, 2010
    Because the world doesnt revolve around you. I would much prefer the overall thinness over more storage. The average consumer doesnt need more than 100GB in most cases and if they do they likely have an external or NAS.

    The size of the SSD currently in the rmbp is less than half the size of a standard ssd. Not to mention that means they would have to work around its placement so it is convenient to replace.
  22. urkel macrumors 68030

    Nov 3, 2008
    So you're that one guy... :rolleyes:

    I know youre trying to defend the honor of the rMBP by attacking the end user for the problems with an object, but lets be honest. If it were slightly thicker and housed a 2.5" bay for off the shelf SSD then would it really no longer be thin enough for you?

    Seriously? We're talking about PRO level machines with Pro level pricetags so average consumers have nothing to do with it. And if someone uses a NAS they aren't an average consumer. Ive used a Time Capsule for my files that wont fit on my Air's or rMBP and, while it does work, it's a pretty poor solution.


    If you can be this faithful in defending Apple, I'm sure you can also be equally as faithful in believing that Apple could've figured it out if they wanted to. Im fine with living with the fact that they chose not to, I'm just not going to pretend that they went proprietary for the end users benefit.
  23. Maggot FF macrumors member

    Maggot FF

    Sep 24, 2012
    Oslo, Norway
    I don't even see the storage as a problem? I have 512gb, and i have used 170gb so far, but the extra space isalways nice to have, with me adding new programs to my repertoire every now and then. And what takes up that space is mainly programs and the files I am currently working on.

    For my finished files, documents, photos, design and videos I always use an external hard drive. The computer i have with me all the time, it can be lost, but also replaced. My files on the other hand... If I lose my MBP and all my work is on it, my day would be much worse than just losing my machine.
  24. w00t951 macrumors 68000


    Jan 6, 2009
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Absolute BS. According to this benchmark, your cards are performing faster than an NVIDIA GeForce GTX670, GTX680, AMD HD7950, HD7970 GHz Edition, and GTX690 (basically two GTX680's pasted onto one PCB).

    Can you post your actual settings and FPS? I'd like to know - but your card is clearly not fast enough to play this game maxed out at any semblance of a playable FPS, let alone a "smooth" one.
  25. swerve147 macrumors 6502a

    Jan 12, 2013
    1. Define "smooth". 25 fps is smooth for some people
    2. Is Tress FX enabled. This seems to cause a performance hit.

    These posts claiming "everything maxed out at x resolution and it's smooth" without identifying the actual settings and providing FPS are frustrating. They cause other people who read the post to question and panic if their own settings don't match.

Share This Page