Macbook + Vista + HL2

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by ElCambo, Jun 11, 2007.

  1. ElCambo macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2007
    #1
    Anyone playing HL2 using Vista via bootcamp on the macbook? Whats the quality like? I would prefer to install Vista over Xp, but if HL2 on vista is bad i might have to install XP.
     
  2. Trepex macrumors 6502a

    Trepex

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Location:
    Ottawa, Canada
    #2
    I'd be surprised to hear that HL2 runs on the Macbook at all...
     
  3. ElCambo thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2007
  4. Igantius macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    #4
    Pretty sure - actually make that very sure - that one or two people on MacRumors have posted about MB/HL2 performance, so would be worth doing a search. From what I've seen on other forums, it's fairly playable.

    I think XP would be the way to go - I'm sure if I'm wrong someone will correct me - rather than Vista... certainly all the PC technicians I know are sticking to XP anyway!
     
  5. Trepex macrumors 6502a

    Trepex

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Location:
    Ottawa, Canada
    #5
    Agreed. It if does in fact run, performance will be better on XP. Vista hogs more RAM if nothing else.
     
  6. PhatBoyG macrumors regular

    PhatBoyG

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Location:
    Tulsa, OK
    #6
    Having tried a number of games on Vista and comparing the responsiveness of the system at the time, there is nothing in Vista that makes the current games play any better than they did on XP SP2. In fact, they are usually much faster loading in XP SP2, particularly when moving around quickly and HL2 loves to say, "Loading..." a lot.

    I would use a minimal install of XP SP2 on a Boot Camp partition, but the Intel GMA 900 is going to make things pretty slow anyway.
     
  7. darkcurse macrumors 6502a

    darkcurse

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    Location:
    Sydney
    #7
    Gaming performance in Vista now is extremely sucky because of the new aero interface. Depending on which version of Vista you have of course. If you don't have one with Aero, the overhead of the new UI will definitely slow down your gaming experience. So if you want to game, stick to XP.
     
  8. Trepex macrumors 6502a

    Trepex

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Location:
    Ottawa, Canada
    #8
    What no. It's not Aero that is affecting games. It's just Vista as a whole. In any case, people with Aero can disable it just like those who don't have it. If you turn everything off and make Vista look like a vanilla Windows 2000 without any themes, it's the closest you can get to performance. Given the choice though, use Windows XP.
     
  9. Igantius macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    #9
    or 950 :p
     
  10. darkcurse macrumors 6502a

    darkcurse

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    Location:
    Sydney
    #10
    '

    Well we were both wrong in a sense. Read it here and here oh and here too. Basically, with Aero a lot of the UI drawing elements is offloaded to the graphics card. But since the GMA950 is an integrated thing so the CPU will have to bear the brunt of the work anyways. So, unless you have discrete graphics, its better to stick to XP :D
     
  11. timestoby macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Location:
    north devon,uk
    #11
    youtube macbook and you will come across people playn hl2,cod2 and wow.using parallels or something
     
  12. Trepex macrumors 6502a

    Trepex

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Location:
    Ottawa, Canada
    #12
    Right but none of that stuff is going on when you're in a game. From what I've read and been told, the UI only affects things really when it's actively rendering...
     
  13. Jman888 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    #13
    Actually it would look Pretty bad but Would Definately Play at 30+ FPS at some settings Mayby 800 x 600 Med or High.
    I play it sometimes on Intel Extreme 2 Graphics All lowest but playable.
     
  14. Wolfpup macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    #14
    Must switch to it's Direct X 7 code path to be able to run. Although technically the 950 is a Direct X 6 part.
     
  15. Jman888 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    #15
    The 950 is a full Direct X 9 Part... GMA x3100 is Full DX10....
    You guys arent pc hardware people :p
    Intel Extreme 2 is DX8
    GMA 900+ is DX9.
    Gma x3100 Can do DX10 but drivers cant yet.
    Also a x3100 is about as fast as a 7300.. Pretty good for integrated.
     
  16. Wolfpup macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    #16
    No it isn't (the 950 I mean). A part has to meet ALL the requirements of a shader model to be that level. It can't just cherry pick some features and do the rest in software. It doesn't even qualify as a Direct X 7 part, let alone 9.

    The highest level it fully meets is DX 6, so it's a DX 6 part. Having some features from DX 9 doesn't change that.

    Other companies that have tried to pawn stuff off like that have gotten slammed by Microsoft and the press, but I think since it's Intel, they have the clout to make bogus claims and not really get corrected (aside from us hardware geeks).

    In theory at least, the x3100 is Intel's first part that exceeds DX 6 level...if they actually get drivers working (that part reminds me of one of S3's chips years back that never actually supported features it supposedly had).
     
  17. Jman888 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    #17
    It supports them but doesnt do them. Like the Gma 3100 could do DX10 if it wanted but wont.
     
  18. Wolfpup macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    #18
    Also, think about what a nightmare it would be if other companies got to get away with this sort of thing. ANY part could be labeled as DX 10, even a 12 year old Rage 128, if it included emulation in it's drivers. Specs would become totally bogus if they didn't list actual HARDWARE support.
     
  19. keenkreations macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    #19
    Geez...I rather prefer a dedicated video card so i would not worry about performance.
     
  20. Jman888 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    #20
    ...There is a amount it has to actually do.. but the GMA_950 isnt fast enough for the like 2 features it doesnt do anyway but a core2 is.
     
  21. Wolfpup macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    #21
    Regardless, it's a Direct X 6 part. Other companies wouldn't be able to get away with calling it DX 9.
     
  22. Jman888 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    #22
    It supports all DX8 Features and does some in software... Other people do that you know intel just advertizes
     
  23. Episteme macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2007
    #23
    Doing it in software isn't supporting a feature ;)

    GMA950 does transform, lighting and vertex shading in software, and those are all required for full hardware DX7 support.
     
  24. Wolfpup macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    #24
    Exactly. That's why it's only a Direct X 6 part.

    I really don't think anyone but Intel could get away with this. They're one of the few companies that even Microsoft can't automatically boss around.
     
  25. Freyqq macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2004
    #25
    wrong. If you're in a game or doing anything really heavy, it turns off aero..
     

Share This Page