Windows Nvidia 750m 2GB GDDR5 performance(video)

Discussion in 'Mac and PC Games' started by luffytubby, Oct 29, 2013.

  1. luffytubby macrumors 6502a

    luffytubby

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    #1
    This is not from the new MBP, but the video card should be identical, so this should give a good estimate of performance for a lot of you guys: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO8-Ji1PBBA


    He is testing Skyrim, Trine 2, Chivalry, Portal 2 and others. He seems to favor high settings over high resolution. A lot of the games run at high/very high/ultra at 720p.



    At the end of the video, he has some notes about BF4 performance.




    edit:


    BF4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWPERDqG0hg

    another BF4 video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_-z4hKQ2Fo

    Far cry 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkRreou3fjQ
     
  2. DOlsson macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    #2
    Wow, I'm impressed BF4 runs so well.

    I am seriously stuck with what to do. I just got the late 2013 iMac 27" (upgraded to 16GB ram, with the Geforece 755m).

    Should I install Bootcamp, throw Windows 8.1 on there and play BF4 on my machine?

    Or, should I just go buy it for PS3?

    I'm really stuck I don't know if my computer will handle it at reasonable graphics settings/resolution. Has anyone tried?

    Side note: I sure hope to hell they've resolved the Windows 8/Bootcamp install issues... Made a mess of my HDD partitions last time....
     
  3. luffytubby thread starter macrumors 6502a

    luffytubby

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    #3
    Dolsson, I would advice you to buy it for your iMac. 755m is slightly more powerful than a 750m with GGDDR5 and significantly more than a 750m with DDR3.


    The fact is that BF4 on XBox and PS3 are dying. both community wise but also, they can't handle it very well. You will be able to have a smooth experience with 64 player online battles. On PS3 you will deal with massive downgrades like maximum of 24 players and other sort of things. A lot fo the community will change to the PS4 and XBox One versions fairly soon, anyway.





    As Partition issues. If you have fusion drive, there is some issues with boot camp! Not sure what it's about, but boot camp should work fine on latest iMacs!
     
  4. DOlsson macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    #4
    Thanks for the advice! I did end up getting the game for PC (after I successfully installed Windows 8.1 on my Mac).

    I played for about 5 minutes tops this morning and all I did was run around for a few minutes. Seemed to run well enough at the auto-detect settings. I can further tweak them tonight and turn things off that I usually do.

    My initial impression is that this game runs smoother than BF3 did. Mind you, I had a different computer at the time (Mid 2011 iMac 27" with Radeon 6970M 1GB). That card seemed to have more ooomph than the 755M, but we'll be able to tell for sure tonight.

    Actually, I'm pretty certain that the 6970M 1GB is a more powerful card than the GT 755M. Can anyone confirm?



     
  5. pcfarrar macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2010
    #5
    Yep the 6970m is significantly more powerful than a GT 755m.
     
  6. DOlsson macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    #6
    That really sucks...

    While the new iMac I have (late 2013) is an upgrade, the GPU I guess is a major downgrade from my old iMac. Damn.
     
  7. TechZeke macrumors 68020

    TechZeke

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2012
    Location:
    Rialto, CA
    #7
    Its a game Apple plays. GPU-wise the first 3 iMacs are very close in performance, but they magically jump two GPU series in the $2000 iMac.(They skip the 760M series completely, just as in the 2011s they skipped the 6800M series completely) Mac gamers that want to max the latest games have to drop the dough for the 2k iMac. They realize that if they offer GTX 760M or 765M BTO in the base 27" or high end 21.5" no one would buy the 2k model.

    In fact, I bet at-least(AT-LEAST) 50% of the people who buy the 2k iMac is purely for the GPU.

    Honestly though, even my 6770M plays even modern games at high settings at at -least 1080p. Not a Crysis killer, but it's more than enough.
     
  8. cluthz macrumors 68040

    cluthz

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Location:
    Norway
    #8
    You realize that next thursday is the 6 year anniversary for the release of Crysis?

    New games like Metro Last Light runs at 14 FPS on a 660M (should be comparable to the 750M) coupled with a i7 at very high in 1080p.
    [​IMG]

    I use a GTX660OC and it's barely adequate running games at high settings at 1680x1050. Seeing the 660OC pretty much has the same performance as the 680MX and more than twice the power of a 750M.
     
  9. TechZeke macrumors 68020

    TechZeke

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2012
    Location:
    Rialto, CA
    #9
    And your point is? I know that my iMac and MBP can play all the games I like to play at high-settings. Is it 1440p with 60 fps? No, but your GTX 660OC is not really mine nor the poster's problem. I go by enjoyment and real-word performance, not random benchmarks from the internet.

    Crysis is 6 years old, so what? Company of Heroes was released in 2006 and it still looks amazing for an RTS. Again, your point?
     
  10. cluthz macrumors 68040

    cluthz

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Location:
    Norway
    #10
    I'm just pointing out that the 6770M, or the 750M, cannot play recent games at 1080p at 60FPS at high settings. This does not mean you cannot enjoy tons of games on a laptop. The matter of fact is that the games I have enjoyed the most over my gaming career does run remarkably well on Intel integrated graphics..

    However, people are fooled to buy mobile hardware for gaming purposes all the time. For games like BF4, COD:Ghosts, Metro:LL and so on a midrange mobile chipset is not ideal. When you mentioned "modern games" these was the titles that came to my mind. Sure, you can play those games, but saying you can play those games at 1080p at high settings on a 6770M is just a lie, unless you are content with 15 FPS.

    The reason I brought up my gfx card, is that it is my point of reference, the same way you brought up your 6770M. I'm just trying to voice my own experiences, and not belittle others opinion by being demeaning towards them..
     
  11. TechZeke, Nov 8, 2013
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2013

    TechZeke macrumors 68020

    TechZeke

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2012
    Location:
    Rialto, CA
    #11
    Well, I can't really take your post seriously now, anyway, but I'll bite. Firstly, by "high" I do mean some custom options. BF3 for example, I put everything on high(Textures/shadows/whatever) but I turn down things like AA and AF and ONLY AA and AF.

    You call me a liar, and to add to the fact, you are basing this off some random benchmark off the internet, for which my GPU isn't even on the list. I even said in my post that I wasn't getting 60 FPS.

    I concede that I have a different I idea of modern games. My view of modern games are back up to 3 years. Sue me.

    Of course, after all this bull said, if you are buying a computer just to play Metro last light at Max settings at 60+ constant fps at 1080p+, you should buy a gaming PC. No one is being fooled. I don't even know anyone who would think a midrange mobile card is ideal. It's just that people who actually care about bull gaming benchmarks off the internet have dedicated gaming rigs. Surprise! The dude who brings the benchmarks to this thread has a hackintosh gaming rig!
     
  12. cluthz macrumors 68040

    cluthz

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Location:
    Norway
    #12
    The benchmark is from notebookcheck.net, which is probably regarded as the most prominent site to compare performance of laptops.

    "High" is usually a predefined setting in pretty much any game. The FPS will of course be playable if you cut down on things like AA and AF.

    Maybe I worded myself a bit incorrect, as english is not my first language, but it did seem like you meant my opinion was not valid because I did have a GTX660.

    And fyi I did not built my computer to game on OSX, but I do prefer to not have to reboot each time I fire up a game after my work is done.

    I don't know about other ways to compare performance outside of benchmarks and subjective opinions, and although not perfect, I find benchmarks to be the most reliable. If if you think that benchmark is faulty, and the 660M was performing 50% better, you are still looking at sub 25FPS.
     
  13. MartinAppleGuy macrumors 68020

    MartinAppleGuy

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    #13
    I know this is an old thread and all but the point I'm going to make still stands.

    The 750m is great and for all of the games I have tried in OSX, it runs everything maxed out with no problems what so ever. The only game (that I have not tried) that I don't think will run well if XPlane.
     
  14. Natzoo macrumors 65816

    Natzoo

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2014
    Location:
    Not sure where i am
    #14
    i get 20 fps on mc with my gt 750m, internet speeds are great. 50mbps. computer specs are listed in signature
     

Share This Page