I have a 2015 MBP which I have only played Hearthstone on, I do plan on getting the 2016.
But since I wanted to try out VR I built myself this:
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.
New MacBook Pro and Gaming?
- Thread starter thomas1984
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But since I wanted to try out VR I built myself this:
Any reason for not going for a CL CPU water cooler? You seem to have the space for a 240 rad on top.
Here are some gaming benchmark estimates.
I approximated based upon desktop card specs and the specs (that we know) of the Radeon Pro 460.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YcEwYGq8tSCFr5OcrnFbb3MPnkpLXsg86lNmQ9zyXBk/edit?usp=sharing
In general it should perform right between a Radeon 7770, and a GTX 750ti
I approximated based upon desktop card specs and the specs (that we know) of the Radeon Pro 460.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YcEwYGq8tSCFr5OcrnFbb3MPnkpLXsg86lNmQ9zyXBk/edit?usp=sharing
In general it should perform right between a Radeon 7770, and a GTX 750ti
Compute performance frequently doesn't tell the whole story, compare the 12% difference with the RX480 (5.8 TFLOPS) and the GTX 1070 (6.5 TFLOPS) v. the actual 46% effective speed difference
I think we may be getting our hopes up just to be disappointed as much as everyone else was with AMD and Polaris
I don't know if anyone is interested in gaming performance on the non touch 13.3 Base model. But I just fired up Civ Vi and I am quite happy with the performance. The game benchmark was putting me at 25-30 fps at 1280x800. This is in Mac OS.
Personally, I'm hoping for better Civ VI performance with the new 960 graphics. I'm currently running a GT 650M, and it struggles to play it even at low settings. Being able to play Planet Coaster in bootcamp would be a bonus for me as well
Yea I mean this is the cheapest (cheapest!!) model on offer. I'm sure the performance in the touch bar model will be a little better and in the 15s much better.
I also fired up hearts of iron iv and it runs pretty well at 900p. Loaded a late game save and it ran at a decent clip even with all the units on the screen at speed 5.
I also fired up hearts of iron iv and it runs pretty well at 900p. Loaded a late game save and it ran at a decent clip even with all the units on the screen at speed 5.
air is a bit easier to maintain over several years... noise is the same, cheaper.
water cooling is mostly a question of looks and the noctua with an extra fan (just for looks) is just fine
it will be hidden away at some point.I expected a bit more from the Iris 540 given that Civ VI is hardly a demanding game.
[doublepost=1478003608][/doublepost]
What are your temps like and what is it clocked at? I'm getting about 50-55ºC clocked at 4.8Ghz, 6600K chip.air is a bit easier to maintain over several years... noise is the same, cheaper.
water cooling is mostly a question of looks and the noctua with an extra fan (just for looks) is just fine
macs don't play video games really
get a pc
the only way to get close to gaming on a mac is to top-spec a 27" desktop and bootcamp windows
once you're in windows you can overclock the gpu and then play some games
get a pc
the only way to get close to gaming on a mac is to top-spec a 27" desktop and bootcamp windows
once you're in windows you can overclock the gpu and then play some games
That is not really true, i am playing Diablo3, Counter Strike: Global Offensive pretty well. Granted it is not 200frames but a god bit above 60. And that is on a 2013 15" MacBook Pro with GeForce GT750M. So assuming Radeon Pro 450 is a lot better than my 3 year old card, then it should be okay to game casually on just not 4k or everything on Ultra.
Got a similar question. At the moment I have my samsung ultrabook and have played some games like dark souls 2 and overwatch. With its low power 2.0 ghz processor, 4000 hd graphics and 4gb of ram, I have played on lowest settings with 20 fps and I don't really mind. What kind of performance may I expect with a 2.9ghz 13" macbook pro with 16gb of ram? I will almost never play games on it but for those rare moments I'd like it to be at least better than my samsung.
The Radeon Pro GPU is similar to AMD's former FireGL line. It's designed for applications like Maya, Final Cut Pro and Photoshop. It will work for gaming at moderate settings; but it's tweaked to do more "work" than "play" (cue "I'm a Mac" commercials and "Hey PC, doing some work? I'm gonna go have fun", whoops!)
First off, do you need a laptop for gaming? Mobile components, CPU's and GPU's especially, have to confine themselves to certain heat and power requirements, to do so means cutting performance. Even if the numbers are identical, they aren't identical. For example, a "GTX 970 with 2GB of VRAM" you'll see on the label of a Windows Gaming laptop is far slower than a "GTX 970 with 2GB of VRAM" desktop card in a desktop PC. It's all just marketing. Gaming laptops are both more expensive AND slower than their desktop counterparts. Now, some people need a laptop; I get it! So if a Laptop is what you must do, then go for it!
If a laptop is what you must do; then a Windows gaming laptop is a far better value. To be honest, if you want a MacBook Pro; then you should have a reason to want a MacBook Pro. You need portability and want certain Mac Apps to work as well as possible (I ordered the 15" for Final Cut Pro, for example). Or maybe you just love the industrial design, ease of use and reliability; and that's worth the money for you. But if you're buying a laptop to play games on, a MacBook Pro simply is not the right tool for the job. A Ferrari and an 18-wheeler with trailer cost about the same amount of money. If you're hoping to win your next track day, the 18-wheeler isn't gonna do it. If you're hoping to branch out as an over-the-road trucker; then the Ferrari isn't going to get you very far. You need the right tool for the job.
Depending on your needs; one option might be a 12" MacBook or a 13" non-touchbar MacBook Pro, AND a Gaming Desktop; for about the price of a 15" MacBook Pro. You've got a Mac for Mac stuff that you might want to do; and a gaming PC for gaming.
NOW; if you NEED a Mac for some specific reason. For example, Final Cut Pro, or developing for iOS, or whatever. And you're buying a 15" MBP for that reason? Then it makes sense to get the 460 GPU; and then you can do some light duty low-to-mid-settings 1080p gaming in your spare time.
[doublepost=1478007115][/doublepost]
Better than your HD4000 setup. Not significantly better, but better nevertheless. When it comes to me and my laptop, I want a Mac. I also like to play games. I game on a Windows PC. But I didn't mind paying more for the faster GPU both for the "Mac Stuff" I want to do; but also to be able to play games occasionally, like you, perhaps when I'm traveling. It's all about expectations. The fact that my Mac is powerful enough to play most games at reasonable framerates at reasonable resolutions is icing on the cake. However, I'd be sorely disappointed if I bought it expecting to get a "gaming laptop".
For the record, if you can spring it, the 15" Model (Quad-Core CPU and Dedicated GPU) is significantly more powerful, and will be much better for those occasional games. IF you can stomach the pretty substantial price.
First off, do you need a laptop for gaming? Mobile components, CPU's and GPU's especially, have to confine themselves to certain heat and power requirements, to do so means cutting performance. Even if the numbers are identical, they aren't identical. For example, a "GTX 970 with 2GB of VRAM" you'll see on the label of a Windows Gaming laptop is far slower than a "GTX 970 with 2GB of VRAM" desktop card in a desktop PC. It's all just marketing. Gaming laptops are both more expensive AND slower than their desktop counterparts. Now, some people need a laptop; I get it! So if a Laptop is what you must do, then go for it!
If a laptop is what you must do; then a Windows gaming laptop is a far better value. To be honest, if you want a MacBook Pro; then you should have a reason to want a MacBook Pro. You need portability and want certain Mac Apps to work as well as possible (I ordered the 15" for Final Cut Pro, for example). Or maybe you just love the industrial design, ease of use and reliability; and that's worth the money for you. But if you're buying a laptop to play games on, a MacBook Pro simply is not the right tool for the job. A Ferrari and an 18-wheeler with trailer cost about the same amount of money. If you're hoping to win your next track day, the 18-wheeler isn't gonna do it. If you're hoping to branch out as an over-the-road trucker; then the Ferrari isn't going to get you very far. You need the right tool for the job.
Depending on your needs; one option might be a 12" MacBook or a 13" non-touchbar MacBook Pro, AND a Gaming Desktop; for about the price of a 15" MacBook Pro. You've got a Mac for Mac stuff that you might want to do; and a gaming PC for gaming.
NOW; if you NEED a Mac for some specific reason. For example, Final Cut Pro, or developing for iOS, or whatever. And you're buying a 15" MBP for that reason? Then it makes sense to get the 460 GPU; and then you can do some light duty low-to-mid-settings 1080p gaming in your spare time.
[doublepost=1478007115][/doublepost]
Better than your HD4000 setup. Not significantly better, but better nevertheless. When it comes to me and my laptop, I want a Mac. I also like to play games. I game on a Windows PC. But I didn't mind paying more for the faster GPU both for the "Mac Stuff" I want to do; but also to be able to play games occasionally, like you, perhaps when I'm traveling. It's all about expectations. The fact that my Mac is powerful enough to play most games at reasonable framerates at reasonable resolutions is icing on the cake. However, I'd be sorely disappointed if I bought it expecting to get a "gaming laptop".
For the record, if you can spring it, the 15" Model (Quad-Core CPU and Dedicated GPU) is significantly more powerful, and will be much better for those occasional games. IF you can stomach the pretty substantial price.
OK but you're naming games that are almost 5 years old, and were designed for low-power mass-market systems in the first place.
I understand you can literally play video games. You can play Doom on a printer. But that's not really a relevant point. You've been able to play old, low-requirement games on a mac since the day they switched to Intel processors. But you've never (and still can't really – aside from bootcamping a 27" iMac) been able to "game" on any mac.
If you want to game, the Windows platform and PC hardware ecosystem are just undeniably 8 billion times better.
8 billion times is a bit of a stretch.
You certainly can play the latest, greatest games on a Mac, especially a 15" Mac Pro; and not even the new ones on their way. Modern games are really scaleable. You can't play them at super high resolutions or maxed out settings; but you CAN play them. For a purely gaming computer, a Windows PC is the way to go. But for a great computer to do other things; a Mac can still play those games in the meantime.
Here's a game that's not even out yet (Beta), running on last years 15" MacBook Pro;
The high end MacBook pros can usually play the latest games at around medium settings. So they can be used for some gaming.
You should never get one for gaming. That would be stupid. You could get a gaming laptop that would perform much much better for the price, albeit a heavier and bigger machine.
However if you want or need a Mac for other reasons and want to do a little gaming on the side, you'll be able to. Probably should in this case aim for the upgraded 460 though if gaming matters to you.
That's my situation. I want a 15 inch Mac laptop for various reasons. I also like to do a little gaming now and then. So, I always aim for the 15 inch with the better graphics.
If I didn't want a 15 Mac laptop for various reasons, including work, I wouldn't get one for gaming. Again, that would be silly.
You should never get one for gaming. That would be stupid. You could get a gaming laptop that would perform much much better for the price, albeit a heavier and bigger machine.
However if you want or need a Mac for other reasons and want to do a little gaming on the side, you'll be able to. Probably should in this case aim for the upgraded 460 though if gaming matters to you.
That's my situation. I want a 15 inch Mac laptop for various reasons. I also like to do a little gaming now and then. So, I always aim for the 15 inch with the better graphics.
If I didn't want a 15 Mac laptop for various reasons, including work, I wouldn't get one for gaming. Again, that would be silly.
http://www.laptopmag.com/reviews/laptops/alienware-13-r3-oled
$2099; 1060; VR ready; OLED; Looking pretty good.
$2099; 1060; VR ready; OLED; Looking pretty good.
I can't say for sure how well it'd run, but... The biggest and most fundamental problem is, CPUs and GPUs make heat, and heat goes into heat sinks and fans and things. And if you want that to be effective and/or reasonably quiet, you need more space; at some point, it comes down to the amount of air that has to move and the size of the vents it has to move through, and Apple's focus on Everything Very Thin is gonna work against you here.
That said... The CPU and GPU in the new machine are way more efficient, power-wise, than previous generation stuff, in general. The 460 isn't gonna be competitive with the high end of the video card market, but it's going to be a lot closer than you might have expected.
I guess it's a question of how much the gaming matters to you. I once made the mistake of believing someone on these forums who swore up and down that the crappy portable nvidia chip in one of the previous-gen machines (a while back, it was a 17") was just fine for gaming. It wasn't. It wasn't even close to fine for gaming. On the other hand, from everything I've seen, this won't be anywhere near that bad.
I guess my suggestion would be: Wait until someone who needs the Mac anyway gets one and can show you how the game runs on it, and then you'll know. I do suggest looking in person rather than trusting forum cheerleaders, though.
Good post, that's a decent general comparison.
I was following your posts on this, pretty neat. I've got a situation where I'm putting in a significant amount of dev cycles on OSX (that I mostly prefer), but I'd occasionally like to fire up Windows to cross check some VR related work, don't feel like managing two machines - basically having a high[er] performance GPU option at my desk is just about my perfect scenario.
Lol this is pathetic, for a laptop that costs a fortune they should use nvidias new 10 series cards which are fantastic, offer desktop like performance and are affordable. Affordable PC notebooks with the new 10 series cards will thrash these amd chips .