Horrible FPS on CSS and a MacBook

Discussion in 'Windows, Linux & Others on the Mac' started by Nyaos, May 3, 2008.

  1. Nyaos macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Location:
    Minneapolis
    #1
    I've kind of sad here. I've read tons of threads about how CSS runs very smoothly. My MacBook is the 2.4GHz, 2GB RAM model. I'm running Windows XP via BootCamp.

    I've installed all the drivers that came with the Leopard disks, can anyone explain why I only get 10 - 15FPS? Thanks.
     
  2. wgilles macrumors 6502

    wgilles

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    #2
    MBs aren't really that good for gaming, it is the MBP that is the beast. What video card do you have in it?
     
  3. Nyaos thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Location:
    Minneapolis
    #3
    I know they aren't but CSS is like almost 5 years old now. It's the latest integrated model, X3100 chipset. I'm just wondering because I've seen people playing it maxed out at good FPS on YouTube, and even on these forums.
     
  4. ULEE macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    #4
    just go back to 1.6. It runs great with up to 100 FPS on a mb and is more fun anyways. Of course the graphics arent as nice but the gameplay is and there are tons of players out there, plus theres a lot more league action.
     
  5. Jozone macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    #5
    Direct3D or OpenGL? If its software mode though, theres your problem :p
     
  6. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #6
  7. The Flashing Fi macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2007
    #7
    CS 1.6 and below offer DX and OpenGL as well as Software mode. Counterstrike: Source does not.

    OP. It doesn't matter if the x3100 is the latest offering by Intel. It's still integrated, it's still weak, and it's still not intended for games.
     
  8. Nyaos thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Location:
    Minneapolis
    #8
    thanks for your input guys but I got it working. I just upgraded drivers from intel's website. I can even play Battlefield 2 now.
     
  9. opeter macrumors 65816

    opeter

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2007
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    #9
    This is the dumbest thing i've read in couple of weeks...

    You can get great performance with x3100 with older games maxed out. Of course i mean the games that are now more than 2 years old.
     
  10. The Flashing Fi macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2007
    #10
    I beg to differ.

    The x3100 sucks.

    Maybe his expectations are lower than mine, and maybe the performance that he expects is a lot lower than mine, but I certainly don't find 40 FPS MAX acceptable.

    Intel designed it with energy usage in mind, not performance.

    CSS may be 4 years old, but I certainly wouldn't classify it as an "old" game by any means. It's still kept up to date, and while it scales really well on older and weaker hardware, IMO, I wouldn't find the performance on the x3100 elsewhere.

    If you have nothing constructive to say, please, go somewhere else. Typing this like "this is the dumbest thing I've read in a couple of weeks" is about the dumbest waste of time I have EVER seen.:rolleyes:
     
  11. Nyaos thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Location:
    Minneapolis
    #11
    I don't understand how 40 FPS is bad. Your eyes see only at what, 30? Also there ARE updates for CSS still, but it's not based on the new source engine, like Half-Life 2: Episode 2 is.

    When launching HL2 EP2 with -dxlevel 81 in the launch commands, I can get solid 20-30 FPS on mid-graphics levels.
     
  12. Stridder44 macrumors 68040

    Stridder44

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #12
    That's why.
     
  13. The Flashing Fi macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2007
    #13
    Don't get into the discussion of FPS and what the eye can see.

    I'm gathering that you're getting 30 FPS from the frame rate that CRT tvs run at? One thing you forgot to mention is that motion blurring is used with the content being broadcast on your TV. This give you to the impression that the transition between frames is seamless. Games generally don't use this (I think in a few games, like Flight Simulator, it's used) and I can't think of any others that do. So, 30 FPS does not look the same in a game as it does on a TV, at least not in CS:S and quite a few other games

    Also, most LCD monitors can display a maximum of 60 FPS (and the max for CRTs is the refresh rate), although some can go higher.

    Here's an article that goes into more detail about it:

    http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

    One thing I want to note. Some games, you can get by fine with 30 FPS, and others. In single players games, frame rate isn't as important. With multiplayer games, it is a priority. It can be the difference between figuring out where a shot came from and being able to kill them, and your character dying. A lot of it depends on how "fast" the action in the game is. CSS's action is relatively fast. You really need to be quick on your toes. TF2, I find that it's not as fast and that you can get by with a lower frame rate.

    So for me, 30 FPS is not acceptable for CSS. It's "playable." But it's certainly not ideal. I prefer 60+ FPS in CSS. Any lower than 45 and it it doesn't appear fluid to me.

    If you feel that 40 FPS is "acceptable," then you haven't played it for a great deal of time at a higher frame rate. Once you're used to it, you don't want to go back, and you can't figure out how you played at that frame rate in the first place.

    And as far as updates for CSS goes. I know it's not updated to the updated engine that Orange Box uses. It was only a few years ago that HDR was added, and I think it's only a matter of time before it is updated to the new engine.
     
  14. Nyaos thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Location:
    Minneapolis
    #14
    If you would have bothered to read the thread you'd realize that was NOT why. Drivers were the issue, not the chipset.
     

Share This Page