Skyrim on rMBP 13"

[mistus]

Hey,

I was wondering if one of you has any experience with gaming on the MBPr 13´? Specificially running Skrim (what resolution, which settings, does it get very hot)? I´d be happy for any answers as it is the only thing holding me back from buying one right now. I couldn´t find any threads on this, only gaming on the 15´ MBPr.

I hope somebody can help me.

Thanks in advance,

mistus

 

[vmachiel]

Hey,

I was wondering if one of you has any experience with gaming on the MBPr 13´? Specificially running Skrim (what resolution, which settings, does it get very hot)? I´d be happy for any answers as it is the only thing holding me back from buying one right now. I couldn´t find any threads on this, only gaming on the 15´ MBPr.

I hope somebody can help me.

Thanks in advance,

mistus

It's mostly the lack of dedicated graphics that will hurt you performance wise. Anandtech has tested the HD4000 extensively including Skyrim:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5771/the-intel-ivy-bridge-core-i7-3770k-review/16

Check it out.

 

[mistus]

Is the HD 4000 perfomance the same for all processors? I thought it differs depending on the processor used (GHz, dual core vs quad core, i5 vs i7).

 

[NMF]

It's basically the same.

 

[snaky69]

I thought it differs depending on the processor used (GHz, dual core vs quad core, i5 vs i7).

No.

Gaming on a laptop, especially on a demanding game like skyrim is asking for poor performance, doing so on a laptop with a crappy integrated card, well...

 

[yusukeaoki]

Theres only threads about gaming on 15in because its near impossible to run heavy games on 13in.

HD4000 is all same and does not increase in performance depending on computer.
As a conclusion, 13in lacks the dedicated GPU and cannot handle graphic intensive work.

If you're planning to game mainly on high quality, go for gaming builds or Mac Pros/iMacs.

 

[Heresiarch]

It CAN run Skyrim, sure. I have the 2012 MBA which uses the HD4000. But do NOT expect to find it enjoyable, unless you don't care about constant 100 celsius in your rMBP with only 12~16 FPS.

the rMBP 13" without a DGPU is really a big turn off.

 

[bogatyr]

HD4000 is all same and does not increase in performance depending on computer.

Bunk. Depending on the CPU, the GPU performance does change. However, the rest of what you say - rMBP 13" sucking at gaming - is correct.

In our extensive tests with games the HD Graphics 4000 was able to beat the HD 6620G in a fast Core i7-3820QM by about 15%. In the slower i7-3610QM and a dual core i5 it was on a similar level as the 6620G.

Beware, that the HD Graphics 4000 is used with different clock speeds depending on the CPU model.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-4000.69168.0.html

And worse for MBAs with ULV:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5878/...ation-realtime-igpu-clocks-on-ulv-vs-quadcore

 

[Trubbles]

I bought the 15" for exactly this reason - I like to play Skyrim on my downtime

Performance without a dedicated GPU does suck, but I can point out something helpful. The retina display is the first LCD I have ever laid eyes on that looks good at non-native resolutions. You could play at a low resolution like 1024x768 (if Skyrim will go that low?) and it would still look half decent while giving you a bump in frames.

Don't expect too much, though ... You're going to be playing on low settings just to be playable, if that.

 

[yusukeaoki]

Bunk. Depending on the CPU, the GPU performance does change. However, the rest of what you say - rMBP 13" sucking at gaming - is correct.



http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-4000.69168.0.html

And worse for MBAs with ULV:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5878/...ation-realtime-igpu-clocks-on-ulv-vs-quadcore

Ah sorry forgot to mention, "no difference in MBP 13in models".
Since 13in models only equip the dual core CPUs (which are becoming old and weak),
they wont have the power to make a difference on the HD4000.
Now 15in Retina models, I believe there is somewhat speed increase in them.

 

[mistus]

Ah sorry forgot to mention, "no difference in MBP 13in models".
Since 13in models only equip the dual core CPUs (which are becoming old and weak),
they wont have the power to make a difference on the HD4000.
Now 15in Retina models, I believe there is somewhat speed increase in them.

So if I understand you correctly, you are saying that I can expect the same performance in the rMBP 13´ as the cMPB 13´ ?
Because I have seen videos that show the the cMBP 13´ is capable of running skyrim at settings that are good enough for my taste (for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEn4XklgRxs). I thought that having to drive a lot more pixels, the rMBP would do worse than the cMBP.

 

[yusukeaoki]

So if I understand you correctly, you are saying that I can expect the same performance in the rMBP 13´ as the cMPB 13´ ?
Because I have seen videos that show the the cMBP 13´ is capable of running skyrim at settings that are good enough for my taste (for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEn4XklgRxs). I thought that having to drive a lot more pixels, the rMBP would do worse than the cMBP.

No, I mean only rMBP 15in models.
As the user above me posted, i7-3820QM is equipped by the 15in rMBPs.
Now if you think 15~19FPS is playable, go right ahead but I wont.
The LEAST I can accept it 30FPS and IMO, under 20FPS is just useless.

If you want to play games a lot, build your own PC.
Or at least get the 15in rMBP. I can be sure all 13in models are useless in graphic intensive gaming.

 

[NMF]

If you want to play games a lot, build your own PC.
Or at least get the 15in rMBP. I can be sure all 13in models are useless in graphic intensive gaming.

You can be wrong, then. OP isn't talking about anything "graphic intensive," he's talking about playing PC ports of console games at low/medium settings. The HD4000 will do that, and usually at at least 30fps. I haven't played Skyrim myself, but I there are many videos out there showing that it's possible.

Some people don't want an hulking gaming tower and aren't serious enough "gamers" to buy a clunky gaming notebook. They just want to play the casual game every now and then on their MBP.

 

[yusukeaoki]

You can be wrong, then. OP isn't talking about anything "graphic intensive," he's talking about playing PC ports of console games at low/medium settings. The HD4000 will do that, and usually at at least 30fps. I haven't played Skyrim myself, but I there are many videos out there showing that it's possible.

Some people don't want an hulking gaming tower and aren't serious enough "gamers" to buy a clunky gaming notebook. They just want to play the casual game every now and then on their MBP.

Well if he wants to "run" the game, yeah it will run.
But if he wants to "play", thats a different story.
If you dont mind the game being under 20FPS, yeah go right ahead.
But tbh, its really hard to play in such low frame rate.

 

[NMF]

Well if he wants to "run" the game, yeah it will run.
But if he wants to "play", thats a different story.
If you dont mind the game being under 20FPS, yeah go right ahead.
But tbh, its really hard to play in such low frame rate.

Did you not even watch the video that was linked in this thread? The 13" MBP can play Skyrim at native resolution with medium settings, at 30-50fps (minimum I saw was 25 -- so better than the PS3 version, LOL). Cap it at 30 and you'll have a game that plays smoothly and looks on par with or better than the console versions.

Integrated graphics have come a long way in the past few years. You should probably educate yourself before spouting out nonsense. You still won't get the same performance as a dGPU, but again, most normal people don't want to make the trade-off of having a bigger, bulkier and/or more expensive machine.

 

[yusukeaoki]

Did you not even watch the video that was linked in this thread? The 13" MBP can play Skyrim at native resolution with medium settings, at 30-50fps (minimum I saw was 25 -- so better than the PS3 version, LOL). Cap it at 30 and you'll have a game that plays smoothly and looks on par with or better than the console versions.

Integrated graphics have come a long way in the past few years. You should probably educate yourself before spouting out nonsense. You still won't get the same performance as a dGPU, but again, most normal people don't want to make the trade-off of having a bigger, bulkier and/or more expensive machine.

Thank you for the link, but as mentioned above, HD4000's strength differ on CPU.
The i7-3820QM scored higher compared to i7-3610QM.
Which means that HD4000 in the link you've provided runs on the i7-3770K.
Beware, that the HD Graphics 4000 is used with different clock speeds depending on the CPU model.

If he's fine running with low-medium resolution than thats fine.
But again, IMO I would not play a game like that.

You get what you pay for. Pay more and have smooth high quality gaming.
The weight and size maybe a trade off, but if you want to game, you have to risk it.

 

[ScholarsInk]

So if I understand you correctly, you are saying that I can expect the same performance in the rMBP 13´ as the cMPB 13´ ?
Because I have seen videos that show the the cMBP 13´ is capable of running skyrim at settings that are good enough for my taste (for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEn4XklgRxs). I thought that having to drive a lot more pixels, the rMBP would do worse than the cMBP.

Presumably you won't be playing Skyrim at 2560x1600 though, will you? It shouldn't be too bad at 1280x800, though it's sad to think that the 2010 model's 320m still just about edges out the HD 4000.

(On the other hand, do bear in mind that the 15" runs Skyrim, Max Payne 3, Mass Effect 3 and quite a few other games at 2880x1800 without a hitch; if you're a student, the $200 discount makes it a really good value and I saw on MacMall earlier today that they're selling it at a $150 discount standard, which is quite good.)

 

[NMF]

If he's fine running with low-medium resolution than thats fine.
But again, IMO I would not play a game like that.

Obviously he's fine with that or he'd be wanting a gaming machine and not a 13" MBP. You're right that the clock speed of the CPU slightly impact the GPU performance -- but that video was taken on a 2.5 GHz i5. The lowest CPU available in a MBP. The fact is he could play Skyrim on any MBP no problem. Maybe not on high settings, but who cares. It'll still look better than the Xbox version, which is the normal alternative in these situations. Also, running at 1280x800 on the rMBP would avoid most of the blurriness you get from running games at non-native resolution, as it's exactly 1/4 of native. Directly proportional.

If you're a serious PC gamer you wouldn't be looking at a MBP as your primary machine anyway. You should also stop being a serious PC gamer; it's not healthy. I speak from experience.

 

[mistus]

Obviously he's fine with that or he'd be wanting a gaming machine and not a 13" MBP.

Yes I am. Quality on low is acceptable for me as I am spending more than 99% of my time browsing and word processing (and as I find fonts etc on the retina exeptionally good looking I am not going to buy a nonretina ever again). It´s just that I´ve always liked the TES games and wanted to at least be able to play the latest one. I really don´t like the 15´ form factor as it is too big and heavy in my option. I´ve got my Macbook with me everyday so the lighter the better (the weight of the Air is nice, but again the retina displays outweigh the weight factor).
The only thing I am worried about is that the same HD4000 that gets about 30 fps on the cMBP has to drive 4 times as much pixels on the rMBP (it has to do that even on a resolution like 1280*800, right?) meaning that frame rates would drop drastically (but again I don´t really understand it all that well). What really worries me is that nobody seems to have even tried to do it (I´ve searched the internet quite a bit, but did not find any real results).

Well, I´m still not decided on weather to buy or not to buy, but it would really bug me to spend this much without it being able to do what I´d want right from purchase, but waiting for haswell doesn´t seem to be a preferable option either.

 

[Freyqq]

So if I understand you correctly, you are saying that I can expect the same performance in the rMBP 13´ as the cMPB 13´ ?
Because I have seen videos that show the the cMBP 13´ is capable of running skyrim at settings that are good enough for my taste (for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEn4XklgRxs). I thought that having to drive a lot more pixels, the rMBP would do worse than the cMBP.

It should get identical performance AS LONG AS you set the resolution to 1280x800 (same as cmbp). However, if you can wait for haswell in a few months, the intel GPU is suppose to improve by 50%. Still not as good as a dGPU, but it is better than before.

 

[NMF]

The only thing I am worried about is that the same HD4000 that gets about 30 fps on the cMBP has to drive 4 times as much pixels on the rMBP (it has to do that even on a resolution like 1280*800, right?) meaning that frame rates would drop drastically (but again I don´t really understand it all that well).

Nah, that's not how it works. If you run the game at 1280x800 you'll get the exact same performance as you would from a cMBP. Especially since there's no scaling needed. At 1280x800 the display will simply render every pixel twice, since it's exactly half the resolution of its native 2560x1600. You're good.

 

[leman]

Nah, that's not how it works. If you run the game at 1280x800 you'll get the exact same performance as you would from a cMBP. Especially since there's no scaling needed. At 1280x800 the display will simply render every pixel twice, since it's exactly half the resolution of its native 2560x1600. You're good.

Well, the performance will be slightly lower, because the GPU still has to scale the framebuffer to the native resolution. But this operation is comparatively cheap, so we are talking about 0.5-1 fps difference here in the worst case.