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

Macbro17

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jul 1, 2012
28
0
Hello, I recently ordered the new MacBook pro with retina display configed
2.3ghz quad core
16 GB ram upgrade
Will this be good enough to run skyrim at 1920 by 1200 on max settings? I also plan to add mods. How would it run at 1680 by 1050? Thanks for responding in advance as I have time to change my order if it isn't good enough to be consistently higher than 30 fps.
 
Thank you! I really appreciate it. Will there be much of a diff between 2.6 ghz and 2.3 though as that was running 2.6.
 
Thank you! I really appreciate it. Will there be much of a diff between 2.6 ghz and 2.3 though as that was running 2.6.

Very minimal difference, but the card used in the link had another 512 MB of dedicated video memory. Regardless, it should still run great.
 
Very minimal difference, but the card used in the link had another 512 MB of dedicated video memory. Regardless, it should still run great.

The 2.3Ghz Retina MBP has 1GB of VRAM, same as the 2.6.
 
Thanks a lot guys, I've been worried that I would get it and it wouldn't be good enough so thanks for helping me out.
 
Hello, I recently ordered the new MacBook pro with retina display configed
2.3ghz quad core
16 GB ram upgrade
Will this be good enough to run skyrim at 1920 by 1200 on max settings? I also plan to add mods. How would it run at 1680 by 1050? Thanks for responding in advance as I have time to change my order if it isn't good enough to be consistently higher than 30 fps.

Your better off running at 1440x900 as this is 50% of native the other resolutions make games look blurry.
 
Hello, I recently ordered the new MacBook pro with retina display configed
2.3ghz quad core
16 GB ram upgrade
Will this be good enough to run skyrim at 1920 by 1200 on max settings? I also plan to add mods. How would it run at 1680 by 1050? Thanks for responding in advance as I have time to change my order if it isn't good enough to be consistently higher than 30 fps.

On my early 2011 MBP with the ATI 6750M, I can run Skyrim at 1680x1050 @ 25-30 FPS. I have no doubt that the new 650M can do much better than that.
 
Wow, I am surprised at how well it runs on ultra. Skyrim isn't the demanding game I thought it was.

What are load times like, anyone know?
 
That's running 2.7 ghz as opposed to 2.3 that's wht my question was regarding but thanks great piece of info!
 
I run Skyrim 1680x1050 with my desktop settings (all at max, texture pack, FXAA, AA 4x, AF 8x, some mods) except resolution (1920x1200 on desktop). It reach 35 fps at worst. I got MacBook Pro 15 classic 2,6 GHz. I did not expect so much. :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.