@MrMM, I was only comparing the 660m version because it is the same price as the rMBP. Obviously the 680m is going to be alot better. I was only saying this because most PC gamers say that macs are crap for gaming and overpriced and usually they say Alienwares are the best. Well they both are overpriced. Although in this case the Alienware is more overpriced than the rMPB(i'm in australia and both are $2499). Because 256gb ssd>1tb hd, retina screen>1080p screen, 7 hour battery>4 hour battery. The Alienware has more ram but I don't think that makes a huge price difference.
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.
I think rMBP might have better gaming performance than Alienware m17x
- Thread starter macassassin
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
it works and win 7 worked on it too.
you are comparing pre configured machines, aside that you can call dell and get a discount, usually people that do that get some nasty 15% off or more.
still that doesnt exclude other gaming machines from msi, samsung, clevo and even the though to recommend asus G series with the 670m can be included on that.
I have had no heat issues with my thinner MBP. I tend to have a LOT more space available on my split SSD on Mac side than Windows side.
With the cMBP, if I run a reasonable graphical load (say, Minecraft even), I get fan speeds up to 6kRPM within a minute or three, which is pretty loud. With my G53, it makes a much quieter fan noise under any load I've ever found for it. Probably because the fins alone on the outgoing vent for the heat sink are taller than the MBP.
So far, my MBP experiences have been:
2007ish (GeForce 8600): Famously prone to massive failures from overheating. It was slow but livable for me, and if I set games to throttle frame rates, it never actually failed badly for me. Sold it to a friend in 2010, and the 8600 died spectacularly with about one month left on AppleCare.
2010 (GeForce 330M): Marginally faster than the 8600 at video -- noticable, but nothing incredible. No obvious severe damage from heat, but it was a little crash-prone. Got iStat Menus, set it to keep the fans a bit faster, and it was stable but quite loud.
2011 (Radeon 6770M): Tolerable performance, not crashy, but fans ran up to 6k and stayed there under basically any load.
2012 (GeForce 650M): Decent performance, by far the best of the lot (I don't just mean "faster than the others", I mean "faster compared to other hardware on the market than the others"). Haven't tested the fan behavior much yet.
Okay, on the 2012, I just started up Minecraft. Windowed, smallish window. CPU temp reached 97 C almost immediately, fan is now ramping up. Fan speed is gradually increasing, CPU temp has hit 102 C. Hovering around 100 C, with fan speed continuing to gradually increase. So, on the bright side, it's not running nearly as loud as it did on the 2011, but it's running a LOT hotter; the 2011 would have had the fans to 6k before letting the CPU reach even 90 C. Multiple threads elsewhere say that this is bad -- the CPU should not be clearing 85 C. Fan speed up to 4480 and still slowly rising. ... Okay, another couple of minutes, now at 95 C and 5500 RPM fan speed. Note: The minecraft window isn't even visible, it's in another desktop space. (I love me some mission control.) Temperature sensors are, according to iStat Menus, "CPU Die - Digital" and "GPU Die - Analog". Ambient temperature is pretty low -- my office is in a slightly drafty basement, in Minnesota.
Okay, it's finally reached 6kRPM, and the temperature's down to 88. Definitely louder than my G53 gets under any load I've ever managed to put it under. Also, and this does matter, the noise is a higher pitch than the G53's fan noise, simply because it's faster-moving air through a smaller area; the G53 may well be moving just as much air, but it has a lot more space to move it through.
Went and researched other stuff a bit, came back and checked: 87 C, 6200 rpm, a little louder than it was before.
The point is, I don't even have a Windows side, and I have the disk 88% full, having had the machine nearly a week. This is my primary working Mac. It has all my stuff on it. A bare games machine install for me would have ~70GB of games on top of Windows, give or take, so it would need >100GB of storage. So basically, I'd need a larger-than-512GB SSD to even do a split, and this really does not appeal to me at all.
The Retina supposedly has better thermal management, which wouldn't surprise me, but it has other issues that prevent me from getting one (such as the lack of an option of upgrading the SSD...)
So for now, I'm sticking with a dedicated gaming laptop and leaving the MBP to run only relatively low-powered games, because it's just not competitive in terms of fan noise and cooling with the machines that are built specifically to dissipate the heat they produce. Not to mention the PC having 2x the VRAM.
Windows 7, 8 (and I'm pretty sure Vista) can be installed directly onto a Mac without ever even touching bootcamp. In fact you could format the entire hard drive / SSD, remove OS X altogether and just use your MBP as a Windows PC if you wanted. Windows has supported EFI for a number of years now.
Is the connector a standard one, or just one that third parties have reverse-engineered?
In the cMBP, you can basically buy any standard SATA SSD and expect it to work, which is sort of a plus.
You're veering way off topic..
Practically speaking, he is right. Bootcamp allows the rMBP to run Windows 7 so close to "natively" that the difference is trivial. It will still give most Windows laptops (outside serious gaming laptops) a run for their money. In fact, I believe it was AnandTech who said that the rMBP runs Windows faster than many PC laptops with THE EXACT SAME HARDWARE (I think it was a comparison to an Alienware m14x, iirc).
Bootcamp is not a "layer" the way a VM is. As someone who has been emulating PCs on my Mac since SoftPC in 1993 (?) I can tell you that a tiny BIOS emulation blip is so trivial we should be enjoying our bridged OSs and not complaining about such trivialities.
There is a lot of misconception in this thread 
1. Alienware is far from being the 'best' gaming laptop, it is simply one of the most overpriced and ugly ones. If you want a gaming laptop, you'll be looking at brands like Sager. And Alienware m17x is faster than the rMBP simply because it includes a faster GPU (7970M) - no idea where the OP found the 660M version, I am unable to locate it on Dell's website.
2. The Bootcamp is no emulation, it runs the same hardware and the same drivers as your usual PC, aside trackpad/keyboard etc., which in no way affect gaming experience. The GPU performance of the rMBP is better than the usual most 650M laptops but slightly short of 660M GTX laptops according to benchmarks.
3. OS X graphics drivers are significantly worse than Windows drivers. This is a fact. A native OS X game will almost always run slower than a native Windows game, simply because the driver quality.
4. The rMBP does get hot during gaming. However, I fail to see why this even matters. I've been gaming on this machine ever since I received it and I have never experienced throttling/performance degradation etc. As to 'but its reducing your computers lifespan' frankly, I don't care if my CPU will live only 8 years instead of 10, because by then a) something else is guarantied to fail b) I would have replaced the machine anyway.
5. The rMBP is able to play any current AAA game on 1680x1050 or 1920x1200 on high settings. I fully consider it to be one of the most interesting gaming laptops currently available, simply because of its extreme portability. Compared to similar performance gaming laptops, the rMBP is 50% thinner, >40% lighter and usually has 30%+ better battery life. This machine is unique in being a light, portable workstation with an unparalleled screen quality and great battery life, and yet capable of some decent (for a laptop) gaming. I am not aware of any other laptop having these characteristics.
1. Alienware is far from being the 'best' gaming laptop, it is simply one of the most overpriced and ugly ones. If you want a gaming laptop, you'll be looking at brands like Sager. And Alienware m17x is faster than the rMBP simply because it includes a faster GPU (7970M) - no idea where the OP found the 660M version, I am unable to locate it on Dell's website.
2. The Bootcamp is no emulation, it runs the same hardware and the same drivers as your usual PC, aside trackpad/keyboard etc., which in no way affect gaming experience. The GPU performance of the rMBP is better than the usual most 650M laptops but slightly short of 660M GTX laptops according to benchmarks.
3. OS X graphics drivers are significantly worse than Windows drivers. This is a fact. A native OS X game will almost always run slower than a native Windows game, simply because the driver quality.
4. The rMBP does get hot during gaming. However, I fail to see why this even matters. I've been gaming on this machine ever since I received it and I have never experienced throttling/performance degradation etc. As to 'but its reducing your computers lifespan'
frankly, I don't care if my CPU will live only 8 years instead of 10, because by then a) something else is guarantied to fail b) I would have replaced the machine anyway. 5. The rMBP is able to play any current AAA game on 1680x1050 or 1920x1200 on high settings. I fully consider it to be one of the most interesting gaming laptops currently available, simply because of its extreme portability. Compared to similar performance gaming laptops, the rMBP is 50% thinner, >40% lighter and usually has 30%+ better battery life. This machine is unique in being a light, portable workstation with an unparalleled screen quality and great battery life, and yet capable of some decent (for a laptop) gaming. I am not aware of any other laptop having these characteristics.
Wow, a lot of people throwing stones from inside their glass house. The worst part is, most of them don't know how to throw stones or who they're throwing stones at lol.
First: Windows on MacBook Pro:
lol @ it slowing things down. MacBook Pro at one point, was the best laptop to run Windows. They even tested it and it scored higher on PC Mark and other suites than Windows laptops. And most of the drivers you use while in Windows are straight from the vendors. While Apple writes its drivers for OSX, Manufacturers write their drivers for Windows. As for the trackpad on Windows, that's just because OSX has integrated the trackpad into the OS usage. Do you really think three finger gestures and swipes are really part of the drivers? Spaces and dashboard and features like that are unique to OSX and part of the reason you migrated to Apple to begin with.
Second: Gaming on OSX:
Gamers don't use OSX. That doesn't mean gamers don't own Apple devices. I own a MacBook Pro and I am a gamer. I play as many games as I can on OSX like Borderlands 2 and Heroes of Newerth but most games I play require me to boot into Windows 7: League of Legends, Call of Duty, AION just run better on Windows. But trust me, when I'm playing those games, I miss my OSX aplenty. This doesn't mean OSX sucks and that OSX doesn't have games, it's just that Windows has much better gaming support so it's the ideal platform.
Third: Is the rMBP better?
I would say it is a better machine over all for a mobile gamer just in the fact that it runs games probably 95% as well as the Alienware, but simply holding the Option key while booting gives you access to an operating system that's probably 150% better than the only viable operating system you can use for the Alienware. In a sense, by getting the rMBP, you get almost the same gaming power as the Alienware along with Windows 7, but you ALSO get a sweet MacBook Pro, built into the same machine for almost the same exact price. Who wouldn't go for that? It's almost like if you buy the Alienware, you had to choose between OSX and Windows but by buying the rMBP, you don't have to make that choice: you get both.
First: Windows on MacBook Pro:
lol @ it slowing things down. MacBook Pro at one point, was the best laptop to run Windows. They even tested it and it scored higher on PC Mark and other suites than Windows laptops. And most of the drivers you use while in Windows are straight from the vendors. While Apple writes its drivers for OSX, Manufacturers write their drivers for Windows. As for the trackpad on Windows, that's just because OSX has integrated the trackpad into the OS usage. Do you really think three finger gestures and swipes are really part of the drivers? Spaces and dashboard and features like that are unique to OSX and part of the reason you migrated to Apple to begin with.
Second: Gaming on OSX:
Gamers don't use OSX. That doesn't mean gamers don't own Apple devices. I own a MacBook Pro and I am a gamer. I play as many games as I can on OSX like Borderlands 2 and Heroes of Newerth but most games I play require me to boot into Windows 7: League of Legends, Call of Duty, AION just run better on Windows. But trust me, when I'm playing those games, I miss my OSX aplenty. This doesn't mean OSX sucks and that OSX doesn't have games, it's just that Windows has much better gaming support so it's the ideal platform.
Third: Is the rMBP better?
I would say it is a better machine over all for a mobile gamer just in the fact that it runs games probably 95% as well as the Alienware, but simply holding the Option key while booting gives you access to an operating system that's probably 150% better than the only viable operating system you can use for the Alienware. In a sense, by getting the rMBP, you get almost the same gaming power as the Alienware along with Windows 7, but you ALSO get a sweet MacBook Pro, built into the same machine for almost the same exact price. Who wouldn't go for that? It's almost like if you buy the Alienware, you had to choose between OSX and Windows but by buying the rMBP, you don't have to make that choice: you get both.
Console versus PC, no comparison. Consoles have fallen way behind. Way way way behind.
Yeah i was just about to say that msi and asus and other gaming laptops are far better for their price than an alienware. There is a lot of misconception that alienware is the best but to get an actual gaming card (to me that's gtx670m>) you'd have to pay over 3k but for a gtx 680m from msi I'd only have to pay just over 2k.
@thereelslabs: wow that's strange that Minecraft is making your temps go that high. On my cMBP it stays just over 40c with fans at medium
@thereelslabs: wow that's strange that Minecraft is making your temps go that high. On my cMBP it stays just over 40c with fans at medium
In what way? True, PCs may offer increased graphics in some games, however console gamers know that if they bought a launch day PS3 any game they buy today will "just work" on the console, you don't need to adjust graphics options, replace hardware (which is honestly above 99% of the population), worry about displaying directly onto the TV or having the latest updates for multiple components.
+ they get more games... console exclusives, and time exclusives for almost every major title out there. Assassins Creed, Red Dead, GTA are only a small amount of games that come out first on consoles and when they eventually do come to PC, they are lazy ports hardly optimized...
The reality is that developers know the bucks are in the console market that is why every game they design is mainly focusing on the console part. That is why Crysis 2 wasnt open world that is why skyrim has console UI that is why a lot of games are coming out first on consoles.
Well I have found just as much updating with my PS3 as I do with any PC game I have ever had. And games don't just work all the time. Take NHL 2013 what a disaster to get that up and running. Some people prefer consoles other PC's. There is also only so much visually you can do with a console, unlike PC's.
I will agree that the money is in consoles, but the visuals are far better on PC's.
There are obviously pros and cons gaming with a console, but lets be fair here, PC games are just in better shape right now. Both consoles (Xbox and PS3) at the moment are way to outdated (7-8 years without upgrades GPU wise). Yes, games will just "work" and you don't have to spend 2 minutes messing around adjusting graphics, but does that compensate for the lack of 60 fps in most games plus the fake 1080p during the whole game experience?
The fact that you mention "replace hardware" as a bad thing is just wrong. This means you can upgrade your PC whenever you want without waiting for a new console generation.
First person shooters are just better in PC, that's a fact. And ultimately if you want to play on your HDTV all you have to do is plus a controller and play as if it was your console.
Load of old tosh. I ran my 2011 MBP for a constant 24 hours of gaming for charity and there were no heat or performance issues.
The macbook pro is designed for power users, some of those uses are gaming and it handles them very well.
Oh dont get me wrong the visuals on PC are leaps in fromt of consoles. No discussion there, but it is true that consoles pretty much define the industry at the moment, meaning most developers will code with consoles in mind because the real money is there... Thus PC gets most of the time sloppy @ss ports and poorly coded material.
I trully believe that most of our awesome hardware goes wasted and is never used to its true potential. I mean if a ps3 can produce gfx like uncharted 3 or Last of Us or an xbox 360 can produce halo 4 geo3 and skyrim gfx with such an outdated hardware with only 512ram... Then i cant help but wonder what the true potential of a 650m gfx card and quad core cpu can do for gaming if it was developed especially with that specific hardware in mind...
Because consoles run the same games with vastly reduced visual quality and on much lower resolution. A console struggles with 30fps on 720p resolution in a modern game, while a mid-rande desktop can run the same game at 1080p with much higher details.
No, the gtx 660m runs normally at 835 mhz /2000 memory but boosts to 950/2500 making it slightly better than the overclocked 650m in the rmbp. (basically runs at 950/2500 unless it throttles).
Yes, PCs can generally run games with better graphics. It' also true that the Wii showed that the average person really couldn't care less about graphical ability (as does the advent of smartphone "gaming") At the end of the day, however, the average person is going to be a lot more inclined to play a game where they put a disc in the machine and get this:
As opposed to putting in a game, having it not looking great, and being confronted with this:
Why is bootcamp have an additional layer of software?
Bootcamp on gaming performance is far superior than running on OS X.