Funny thing about that, while SC1 and Diablo have issues running in Win7, they still run fine on OSX.
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.
MacBook Air 13" (Late 2010) - Gaming Benchmark Thread!
- Thread starter colinthejanitor
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Funny thing about that, while SC1 and Diablo have issues running in Win7, they still run fine on OSX.
Quake 4 Patch Level 1.4.2
I just got my MBA 13.3 (2.13Ghz, 4Gb Ram, 256Gb SSD).
I loaded up Quake 4 and turned on the console to display my FPS while runnin' and gunnin' I was able to reliably get 30-45 FPS on High Graphics settings. The 1.4.2 patch also has a setting to enable multi-core support. I will need to play a bit deeper into the game to see if the FPS drop when there is a bunch of stuff going on, but Quake doesn't really have the hordes that say L4D/L4D2 have.
Dragonage is next in the hopper. Feel free to ask questions...
I just got my MBA 13.3 (2.13Ghz, 4Gb Ram, 256Gb SSD).
I loaded up Quake 4 and turned on the console to display my FPS while runnin' and gunnin' I was able to reliably get 30-45 FPS on High Graphics settings. The 1.4.2 patch also has a setting to enable multi-core support. I will need to play a bit deeper into the game to see if the FPS drop when there is a bunch of stuff going on, but Quake doesn't really have the hordes that say L4D/L4D2 have.
Dragonage is next in the hopper. Feel free to ask questions...
Isn't that the clown who thought SSDs contribute to the vastly improved frame rates?
Isn't that the clown who thought SSDs contribute to the vastly improved frame rates?
For some games, it will help. Especially ones that record.
This was a native OSX install. I will also load up Doom 3 under OSX to see how it performs
[Update] Doom3 running at High Settings, 1024x768 resolution gets a solid 60FPS while playing. There was no lag to speak of during play even with multiple targets attacking.
If I have some time I will build a matrix of the games I can load and capture the various setting vs. gameplay experience I get.
If it's anything like the MBP 2010 it'll run fine in Bootcamp, although even with textures low I had some issues with some texture loading problems. Considering how big maps can be, I think this may be the limitation of the 256MB vram.. here's my personal vid of it running for any of those that care since spec wise they're similar.. just to get an idea.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYxgxup54r0
I have a 4GB 13 and played Civ V for a bit on it. It played fine at native resolution, high textures, all other settings low.
I didn't play long enough to say definitively how it will handle the late-game slowdown that seems to occur in Civ V. The game is something of a bloated hog anyway and can run slow even on uber machines, especially in the later stages of a game on a big map.
So we'll have to see. But so far, so good.
I didn't play long enough to say definitively how it will handle the late-game slowdown that seems to occur in Civ V. The game is something of a bloated hog anyway and can run slow even on uber machines, especially in the later stages of a game on a big map.
So we'll have to see. But so far, so good.
Hi EggrollShop,
Where did you get the "performance DLL" for Fallout: New Vegas? What are the instructions for how to use it?
Thanks,
Andrew
I've just completed an install of Bioshcok on my baseline macbook air 13 and I haft to say I'm impressed! Started the game for the first time and went to graphics options and set everything to high (resolution was 1024 768, anything bigger was to small to see!). Started the first level and clocked framerates around 40FPS! As I got deeper into the game framerates remained around 35-40FPS. As a comparison I installed the game on my brothers macbook pro 13 (2.53ghz 4gb ram 9400m) and could barely get 25FPS on the same settings. Quick note, the macbook air got a 5.2 in windows rating, macbook pro got a 5.2. Base score for macbook air was cpu and base score for macbook pro was graphics.
setting max resolution doesn't make small. I am serious. I always set max it out because it looks right. but I doubt if you set max resolution for MBA, it will show 40fps? I doubt. 9400 graphic card is not dedicated. it's replacement for intel shared graphic chip. so intel customized for only apple. so that's why it performs sucks.
I don't play games on mac because performance issue even I have two. especially, when you play on this MBA, it is most likely suffered test how MBA is getting suffer. I am not sure whether assassin's creed 2 for mac is released. but if it is released, you'd better test real performance. bioshock is required very low system spec.
oh, I found that actually mac version of assassin's creed 2 is available now. so you should try. here is a link.
http://www.macgamestore.com/product/1612/Assassins-Creed-2-Deluxe-Edition/
System Requirement
Minimum:
Mac OS X 10.5 / Mac OS X 10.6
PROCESSOR: Intel Core 2 Duo 3.06 GHz
RAM: 3 GB
VIDEO CARD: 256 MB Dedicated Shader model 3.0 or higher (ATI RADEON HD 4000/5000 series,
NVIDIA GeForce® 100/200 series)
HD: 9 GB
PERIPHERALS SUPPORTED: Keyboard, mouse.
INTERNET CONNECTION: Broadband Internet connection with 128 kbps upstream or faster
Recommended:
PROCESSOR: Core i5 2.66Ghz or better
RAM: 4 GB or better
VIDEO CARD: 512 MB Dedicated - ATI Radeon HD 4850 , NVIDIA GeForce GT120 or better
Laptop and integrated versions of these cards may work but are NOT supported. These chipsets are the only ones that will run this game.
I don't think that 13 inch MBA will run this game. why just don't people admit MBA is not for gaming? come on. if you disappoint performance, get over it. it is for mostly simply works.
Last edited:
First off I never said the Air was good for gaming in general, all I wanted to do is test the performance of the air. Second I tried bioshock at native resolution and got max 30FPS and the lowest it got was 20FPS, the pro and native res got max 20FPS and lowest 10FPS ( max res for pro is 1200 800, air 1400 900). And third the 9400m AND the 320m are not dedicated and both share system ram. In all the Air is better at playing SOME games then the macbook pro OF 2009. Older games should run on the air but the newer games like assassins creed 2 will not run (well). Please read the reply before you post comments!
well, first off, 9400 is shared graphic. 320M is dedicated. new MBA has also intel integrated graphic card as well. I don't think that you know system spec much deeper than me. second, Steve jobs said that 9400 is replaced for intel integrated graphic chip for better performance. if you didn't watch keynote about macbook's intel customized 9400 graphic card, shut up. you do know nothing. NVIDIA 320M has 256MB dedicated video memory. god, how can I get you understanding on basic? just simply check 'about this mac' on the menu (new MBA). it obviously says '256MB Independent memory'. total shared memory is not just 256MB if you say so. for example, my sony F13 have NVIDIA 330GT 1GB dedicated memory, and it shares up to 2044MB (about 2.1GB total). so I don't think that you understand what shared and dedicated.
that's not much smaller. plus, it looks much better. I am not scarified performance if mac or PC has high spec. it's just you.
The NVIDIA GeForce 320M is an integrated chipset graphics card for Core 2 Duo based laptops and successor of the GeForce 9400M. It does not feature dedicated graphics memory but uses the systems main memory instead (shared memory, in Mac OS X 256 MB from the main memory). Therefore, the performance is not as good as similar cards with dedicated graphics RAM. The mGPU is based on the GT216 core (as the GeForce GT 325M e.g.) and offers all 48 shader cores. The similar called GEFORCE GT 320M is a dedicated graphics card and a bit faster than the Geforce 320M.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-320M.28701.0.html
PLEASE READ!
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-320M.28701.0.html
PLEASE READ!
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.
You're not even close.
I'd suggest you go watch the keynote (back to the Mac Keynote) he doesn't even mention anything about what you just said, in fact he never even talks about how much video ram or what kind. The tech specs do however clearly state the 320M is using shared memory and has a footnote(number 3) explaining what it means.
Last edited:
OMG ROFL. I will be surprised if you come back in this thread and try to claim any of that as fact.
I just don't understand Apple. What has taken them so long to figure out that consumers want dedicated graphics in sub 15" laptops. Its plainly obvious that bootcamp is primarily used by gamers.
I can tell there are a few windows users and or recent converts in this thread that plainly dont understand .Mac users are excited about being able to play 3D games. This is a relatively new feat and is seriously impressive to see medium settings on such a thin laptop. Let alone and Apple laptop.
I have feeling the Mac App Store will deliver massive content to keep 320m owners happy for several years. Shoot, the 11 can play COD MW2! (High settings, native res, with no shaders, sync or AA.
I can tell there are a few windows users and or recent converts in this thread that plainly dont understand .Mac users are excited about being able to play 3D games. This is a relatively new feat and is seriously impressive to see medium settings on such a thin laptop. Let alone and Apple laptop.
I have feeling the Mac App Store will deliver massive content to keep 320m owners happy for several years. Shoot, the 11 can play COD MW2! (High settings, native res, with no shaders, sync or AA.
If you are going to be playing for a lengthy time, you should purchase a cooler for it. That will help the longevity of the laptop for sure.