Macbook Pro 13" Bootcamp Gaming Benchmark (click me for more detail!!!!!)

[seong]

I've been playing three games recently (pretty impressive and addicting, 😀), and I'm here to tell you the experiences on these games. Don't post how biased I am, because I'm only here to show you how well it works, not to debate about wether the game is good or bad.

First off, Command and Conquer 3 Tiberium Wars.
This game is another RTS (I say this because I'm a Starcraft 2 player), where basically your major goal is to gather resources, use it wisely, and overrun your opponent. There were no lags or error on medium-high settings. Very playable.

Here are some Pics

Secondly, Puzzle Dimension.
This game is basically a puzzle in 3 Dimensions. With medium settings and full resolution, I was able to get around 28 fps of average. No lags, no error whatsoever.

Here are some pics.

Lastly, Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X.
Absolute and perfect game. I like either RTS or Flight Simulator Combat, and if you are like me, you would definitely love this game. I've been playing this game for several hours, and I love, love, love it. As you can see, on low-high settings, the average was around 65~75 fps.

Here are some pics:

 

[lilcosco08]

Wait, is this the 320m?
because your sig says '09 uMB

 

[unwinded]

I own the 2010 13" Macbook Pro with the 320m integrated video card. I came from a 17" windows laptop that had a dedicated 9800gts with a gig of vram so obviously it's quite a step down (but I decided I'm not much of a gamer and it was vastly under utilized)

The games that I do play run great on the 320m. I've been playing Fallout 3 a lot on it lately. I played around with the settings and FRAPs to get it right, I left the screen res at native, turned off AA (AA isn't really needed when running games at native display anyways, it'll smooth it out to a degree but its not worth the hit in performance) and use 2 samples of anisotropic filtering. Averages 45fps and often plays at 60fps with around 30fps when there is a lot going on. My former setup was mostly 60fps so this is a step down, and I can get that by turning off the details but I have it so everything looks great and it is still playable. (the 360 and PS3 versions don't go higher than 30fps)

I know it's a two year old game, but gaming hasn't advanced much except for the odd game here and there because most developers use consoles for the lead platform. As long as that happens, I would imagine that most games can be configured to look and play great on the 320m. A more serious gamer would be underwhelmed and then probably make a comment like "leave the gaming to the xbox/ps3". But both xbox and ps3 are a few years old and I have Fallout 3 looking and playing much better than it is on either platform.

 

[mgartner0622]

I own the 2010 13" Macbook Pro with the 320m integrated video card. I came from a 17" windows laptop that had a dedicated 9800gts with a gig of vram so obviously it's quite a step down (but I decided I'm not much of a gamer and it was vastly under utilized)

The games that I do play run great on the 320m. I've been playing Fallout 3 a lot on it lately. I played around with the settings and FRAPs to get it right, I left the screen res at native, turned off AA (AA isn't really needed when running games at native display anyways, it'll smooth it out to a degree but its not worth the hit in performance) and use 2 samples of anisotropic filtering. Averages 45fps and often plays at 60fps with around 30fps when there is a lot going on. My former setup was mostly 60fps so this is a step down, and I can get that by turning off the details but I have it so everything looks great and it is still playable. (the 360 and PS3 versions don't go higher than 30fps)

Yeah, I used to have an iMac with a dedicated ATi card, and while my 13" w/ 9400M is quite a step down, it runs maybe 3 less FPS than these WHEN THE NOTEBOOK IS COOL. If it gets hot (say after about 4 minutes of heavy use 😛 ) then the framerates go to about 25-33ish. When used on a cooling pad, I can get this back up to the high 30s and low 40s. I also use my Apple Cinema Display 23" @ 1900x1200 with this unit, and it performs at about 35FPS with high display settings, no filtering, and 2x antialiasing when cool. With the unit off a cooling pad, in the closed position, i get about 28 FPS. I'd love to see the 320M/330M differnces hands on, however I can't take the display units at the apple store home with me for a night ;P


I know it's a two year old game, but gaming hasn't advanced much except for the odd game here and there because most developers use consoles for the lead platform. As long as that happens, I would imagine that most games can be configured to look and play great on the 320m. A more serious gamer would be underwhelmed and then probably make a comment like "leave the gaming to the xbox/ps3". But both xbox and ps3 are a few years old and I have Fallout 3 looking and playing much better than it is on either platform.

I run these games on my 13" with the 9400M, My unit also has 6GB of RAM, and a faster 320GB 7200RPM Apple Hard Drive (Mines a CTO unit) I don't know if that makes the difference, however I get probably about 5FPS less than you when mine is cool (Remeber I have the last generation graphics), and about 35FPS @ 1920x1200 (Apple Cinema Display) on high settings playing the Orange Box via Steam. As long as I keep my notebook cool, on a cooling pad, it performs GREAT. However if it's closed and by itself, I loose anywhere from 7-10 frames per second, and some games become unplayable.
I think the trick here is keeping it pretty cool.

 

[Loptimist]

320m is good. a lot better than 9400m and slightly slower than 8600m gt. since the native resolution for 13" is 1280x800, 320m performs almost the same or better than 8600m gt in real world. (assume you'd play games on internal display)

a bit of overclocking under windows vastly improves fps. around +8 fps.