Will the PowerBook I'm getting be sufficient? (specs inside)

Discussion in 'Games' started by FasterSoonerNow, Jun 14, 2004.

  1. FasterSoonerNow macrumors member

    Jun 14, 2004
    Hey everyone..

    Next month I'll be getting a PowerBook, and before I do make the purchase, I want to be sure it will be sufficient in running my favorite games I've played for so long on the PC, and run them beautifully :)

    PowerBook G4 1.5 Ghz 17" display
    128 Radeon 9800
    80 GB hard drive @ 5400 rpm
    1 GB RAM
    Also: LaCie d2 250 GB external hard drive @ 7200 rpm, 8 MB cache

    So, as you can see, I'm basically getting the maxed out, top level PowerBook at the moment...

    What I need to know is, how will it run the following games?

    Halo: Combat Evolved
    Battlefield 1942 (obviously many won't know yet, as it isnt released yet)
    Return to Castle Wolfenstein
    America's Army
    Call of Duty
    Unreal Tournament 2004

    Thanks for all replies/comments/answers. :D
  2. ZildjianKX macrumors 68000


    May 18, 2003
    Well, all computers IMHO run Halo like crap. It was a pretty bad port, so unless you're one of those people who likes to turn everything off, you probably won't like how it will run.

    Call of Duty and Wolfenstein should run great, both are based on the Q3 engine and run pretty well in general.

    UT2K4 will probably run pretty good at default settings, but my lag on Onslaught maps. America's Army should run fine as long as you don't max out everything.

    So pretty much your $3000+ powerbook will run all your games probably worse than a $1000 PC... if you're coming from the PC world, be prepared to be shocked. Not to mention you'll want to run all of the games at 1440x900, because it will just look bad if you run it at anything other than the native resolution IMHO.


    Edit - and you realize your "LaCie 250 GB external hard drive @ 5400 rpm" doesn't really have anything to do anything with your question, right? :p
  3. FasterSoonerNow thread starter macrumors member

    Jun 14, 2004
    Hehe... yeah.. but hey... Just more space to put games on. It's all good. :)
  4. FasterSoonerNow thread starter macrumors member

    Jun 14, 2004
    And also...

    Do "No CD" patches exist on the Mac? Or are those really only found for PC versions of games?
  5. SiliconAddict macrumors 603


    Jun 19, 2003
    Chicago, IL
    If possible I'd suggest getting the smallest and cheapest hard drive possible and having a Mac store upgrade to one of these bad boys when they are release:

    Seagate drives, both big and small

    www.barefeats.com has reported a nice little performance boost with a 7200 RPM drive. I doubt Apple is going to be offering a 7200 RPM drive anytime soon but I've been told by several people on the board that you can take in the drive to an Apple store and they will upgrade you for a price. *shrugs* If you are going to spend close to 4 grand on a laptop waiting a little longer and spending a little more shouldn't matter too much. I'm still at a loss as to why Apple doesn't provide a current 60GB 7200RPM drive as a BTO option. I think this is just another example of Apple making stupid decisions with their laptop line.
  6. ZildjianKX macrumors 68000


    May 18, 2003
    Yeah, they sure do. Not quite as common, but they're out there. ;)
  7. legion macrumors 6502a

    Jul 31, 2003
    Why exactly are you using a 5400rpm drive? You should use at the very least a 7200rpm 8MB cache drive if you're going to have an external drive.
  8. virtual3 macrumors newbie

    Jun 15, 2004
    iBook and Call of Duty

    Just for the record, I have an iBook 1Ghz, 512 Mb ram and CoD runs smoothly. I don;t have the highest options turned on, but game play is great. I use a Logitech Mx510 mouse with Nostromo N52 game controller. However, I am still rubbish. :)
  9. FasterSoonerNow thread starter macrumors member

    Jun 14, 2004
    Actually, that was my mistake.

    It's the LaCie d2 250 GB drive, which has both a 7200rpm rotation speed and an 8MB chache.

    Original post is fixed.
  10. invaLPsion macrumors 65816


    Jan 2, 2004
    The Northlands
    Halo: Around 30-35 FPS at 1024x768 at normal settings

    Battlefield 1942: Piece of cake, no problem for that powerbook

    Return to Castle Wolfenstein: see above

    America's Army: I've played this on my 1.5GHz 17 inch powerbook and received anywhere from 15-70 FPS at 1024x720 at normal settings.

    Call of Duty: Runs over 40FPS on most single player maps EXCEPT Stalingrad. Runs seamlessly on multiplayer. All settings were MAXED.

    Unreal Tournament 2004: Gets 20 - 40 FPS on Onslaught maps and constantly over 30 on all other maps.
  11. Converted2Truth macrumors 6502a


    Feb 6, 2004
    Your 'normal settings' are 'shhitt settings' then... I don't know what ur pulling data from, but even the ati 9800 se runs halo at 28fps on a dual 2.0 G5 (with all the settings turned up).

    Let's not be decieving the 'switcher' into thinking that he's gonna have an awesome gaming machine. But, halo runs just fine on my 800mhz Ti PowerBook (albeit with everything turned down).
  12. applekid macrumors 68020

    Jul 3, 2003
    Assuming the 17-inch PB truely uses the same screen as the iMacs, 1440x900 isn't the only sharp resolution. I found for gaming both the 1440 x 900 and 1024 x 768 had the same amount of sharpness, IMHO. I think the 10242 x 768 resolution is basically the 1440 x 900 with about an inch on the sides cut off. I found 640 x 480 to not be that bad, but if you find it too blurry, that is your opinion.
  13. ZildjianKX macrumors 68000


    May 18, 2003
    Well, I did say IMHO :D
  14. invaLPsion macrumors 65816


    Jan 2, 2004
    The Northlands
    I got my information from Barefeats...

    Why would they lie?

Share This Page