Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Macbook Pro, how good is it for gaming?

C

CasiLindberg

macrumors member
Original poster
May 20, 2008
38
0
I am just wondering exactly how good a macbook pro with these specs, would be at running games.

2.4Ghz, 2Gb RAM, 256Mb VRAM (low end latest rev macbook pro)

At what fps would games such as Call of Duty 4 and even crysis run at medium-high specs.

Thanks
 
It handled crysis with dignity.

Gears of war with little difficulty.

Rainbow 6 Vegas with grace.

and EVE-Online with reliability.

nuff said
 
ert3 said:
It handled crysis with dignity.

Gears of war with little difficulty.

Rainbow 6 Vegas with grace.

and EVE-Online with reliability.

nuff said
Click to expand...


How did it handle it with DIGNITY, GRACE or RELIABILITY??

How is that 'nuff said? You didn't say anything.
 
i have the 256mb graphic 15" penry MPB. it runs crysis on all high settings at 1000x700ish resolution with no problem. my only complaint is the noise and heat it makes
 
Dignity= very seldom did I get lag and considering how the computer that can play this game supposedly does not exist I think it did pretty well

Grace= Looked like it did on my PS3 and felt like playing a normal console game.

Reliability= no hangs no freezing and certainly no slow downs.
 
ert3 said:
Dignity= very seldom did I get lag and considering how the computer that can play this game supposedly does not exist I think it did pretty well

Grace= Looked like it did on my PS3 and felt like playing a normal console game.

Reliability= no hangs no freezing and certainly no slow downs.
Click to expand...

Now it makes sense.
 
My 2.33 w/ a 256 card handles games like splinter cell doble agent, rainbow 6 vegas, battle feild 2, and the sims2 on high and close to high settings just fine. A 2.4 should do nicely
 
I'd say for the casual/average gamer its more than good enough but for the hardcore gamer its not enough probably alienware or xps kind of deal.

I only play COD4 sometimes and it runs cod4 via 23" ACD at 1920x1200 without any problems with all the settings at high.
 
Feng Shui said:
i have the 256mb graphic 15" penry MPB. it runs crysis on all high settings at 1000x700ish resolution with no problem. my only complaint is the noise and heat it makes
Click to expand...

Come on. I have a 4.5 ghz quad core with three 8800 GTX's in SLI and four 10,000 RPM Raptors and nobody is getting really good frame rates in Crysis with everything cranked on high! Let alone a laptop with a 8600 GT.

Color me doubtful.
 
MacBookProJoe said:
Come on. I have a 4.5 ghz quad core with three 8800 GTX's in SLI and four 10,000 RPM Raptors and nobody is getting really good frame rates in Crysis with everything cranked on high! Let alone a laptop with a 8600 GT.

Color me doubtful.
Click to expand...

Nice desktop!
 
MacBookProJoe said:
Thanks. That QX9650 Yorkfield OC's like a dream. She's a speed demon to be sure. Four Raptors raided together are aweful fast too.
Click to expand...

I wish I even had the space for that; I'm running a media center slim case; so no can do.

And my MBP overheated today while gaming and it crashed... :(
 
There's only one crysis, and yes he's talking about the one EA made...for me it runs playable at a lower resolution at medium.

its a decent gaming computer, but you can certainly get a better one in terms of performance for cheaper/same price.

what it comes down to is: is there a "gaming"-capable computer thats made of aluminum and one inch thick?
 
e12a said:
There's only one crysis, and yes he's talking about the one EA made...for me it runs playable at a lower resolution at medium.

its a decent gaming computer, but you can certainly get a better one in terms of performance for cheaper/same price.

what it comes down to is: is there a "gaming"-capable computer thats made of aluminum and one inch thick?
Click to expand...

Yeah I know, I was just trying to be a little funny. Yes, I can get it to run decently, but with taking a serious hit in quality.
 
I've been playing Half-Life 2 (I know it's a few years old) on my Macbook Pro 2.4 (June 07 revision), and with default quality settings, I can run it at 1680x1050 on a 22" monitor, and get 71fps. I haven't even taken the time to see how high I can get the settings. It runs ultra-smooth, though.

Still, keep in mind, it's a laptop, so if you're looking for something that's going to run the absolute newest games at full settings with 8x anti-aliasing, etc. then you probably need to buy a desktop gaming rig. But for me, it's a lot better gaming machine than my 2-3 year old PC was, and a LOT quieter.

To the person complaining about the noise, yes the fans are a little bit noisy, but it's nothing compared to a gaming desktop. Mine sounded like a freaking jet taking off when it would start to heat up.

Don't play games with it on your lap, though, unless you want second degree burns. :)
 
Vertigo50 said:
I've been playing Half-Life 2 (I know it's a few years old) on my Macbook Pro 2.4 (June 07 revision), and with default quality settings, I can run it at 1680x1050 on a 22" monitor, and get 71fps. I haven't even taken the time to see how high I can get the settings. It runs ultra-smooth, though.

Still, keep in mind, it's a laptop, so if you're looking for something that's going to run the absolute newest games at full settings with 8x anti-aliasing, etc. then you probably need to buy a desktop gaming rig. But for me, it's a lot better gaming machine than my 2-3 year old PC was, and a LOT quieter.

To the person complaining about the noise, yes the fans are a little bit noisy, but it's nothing compared to a gaming desktop. Mine sounded like a freaking jet taking off when it would start to heat up.

Don't play games with it on your lap, though, unless you want second degree burns. :)
Click to expand...

i find if i dont enable vsync in HL2, that my mbp and external 22" 1680x1050 HP w2207 both have horizontal sync lines. same issue with you?

im running xp pro sp3, drivers from laptopvideo2go, and stock speeds.
 
Has anyone seen a big difference between the 512 and 256 Spec'd MBP's?

I'm trying to see if the extra money is worth it, or if I would be better off with more RAM and getting photoshop too
 
MattZani said:
Has anyone seen a big difference between the 512 and 256 Spec'd MBP's?

I'm trying to see if the extra money is worth it, or if I would be better off with more RAM and getting photoshop too
Click to expand...

Yes the extra ram is better because it will increase graphics performance. with the new photoshop actually taking advantage of your GPU 512 is the choice I would make.
 
what about the fact the 8600M GT only having a 128 bit memory controller, doesn't that mean it can only address 256Mb of RAM?

Also, I'm waiting until the supposed update, and im really hoping to see a 9600M! :D
 
Handled Crysis? This has to be a joke. I've got a Quad Core Q6600 @ 2.4 Ghz, 4 GB Memory, Dual Nvidia GeForce 8800 GTX (768MB), WD VelociRaptor 10000 RPM w/ 16MB Cache SATA 3.0 HD and my system doesnt run it as well as I would like.

Crysis is a hog, period!
 
bigfatdummy said:
Handled Crysis? This has to be a joke. I've got a Quad Core Q6600 @ 2.4 Ghz, 4 GB Memory, Dual Nvidia GeForce 8800 GTX (768MB), WD VelociRaptor 10000 RPM w/ 16MB Cache SATA 3.0 HD and my system doesnt run it as well as I would like.

Crysis is a hog, period!
Click to expand...

OC that CPU!!! I it can easily reach 3-3.2Ghz, if not 3.4, yet your running it at stock?
 
I will, I will...

I went with the Q6600 for that exact reason. Im swapping out my case and power supply to an Evolution 830 to bump to 1000W PS. Once I toss in a liquid cooling system, I plan on pushing it to the limit.
 
MattZani said:
what about the fact the 8600M GT only having a 128 bit memory controller, doesn't that mean it can only address 256Mb of RAM?

Also, I'm waiting until the supposed update, and im really hoping to see a 9600M! :D
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't mean it can only address 256 megs of RAM. I don't know where you pulled that number out from.

The 512mb version isn't worth the money IMO, at least not with the 15" MBP.

The 1440x900 resolution is hardly what I'd consider a "high" resolution. The 128 bit memory interface does limit memory performance (the 9600 GT has a 256 bit interface), making that extra 256mb of memory an added cost for little benefit.

Perhaps at higher resolutions, it would be worth the cash (like the 17" mbp). But for gaming performance, that 128 bit interface is crippling, and I was kind of suprised that Nvidia used it for the 8600 series.
 
You can get it to 3Ghz on air, maybe even 3.4 if your lucky (G0 stepping though)

Anyway, back onto topic.

The 8600 GT is a good card, the mobile version is clocked lower than desktop, but its still a good card. My advice, wait a month or so, I reckon the update will be bringing a new GPU, and of course, get the best you can afford, stretch your limit £100 if it means getting the better model.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back