Jump to content


2011 MacBook Pro 17" and 13" game tests


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 rob_ART

rob_ART

    Bare Feats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 792 posts
  • Location:Portland, OR

Posted 04 March 2011 - 12:35 PM

http://barefeats.com/mbps01.html

In this first article, I pit the 2010 MBP 2.66 (17") against a 2011 MBP 2.30 quad-core (17") and 2011 MBP 2.7 dual-core (13") running Starcraft, Portal, L4D2, and WoW at 1280x800 (since that's the max for the 13") and with setting that make games playable on the 13".

Next I will test the three 2011 MacBook Pros (2.0, 2.2, 2.3) against the 2010 MacBook Pro (2.66) using a 27" LED Cinema display at 2560x1600 and High settings.

Any suggestions?
rob-ART morgan
mad scientist
BareFeats.com

#2 Janichsan

Janichsan

    Jugger Bugger

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8102 posts
  • Steam Name:Janichsan
  • Location:over there

Posted 04 March 2011 - 03:16 PM

A direct comparison of the new 13" MBP with its direct successor would be nice.

"We do what we must, because we can."
"Gaming on a Mac is like women on the internet." — "Highly common and totally awesome?"


#3 Mister Mumbles

Mister Mumbles

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2511 posts
  • Location:Not here; not there; not anywhere!

Posted 04 March 2011 - 06:54 PM

View PostJanichsan, on 04 March 2011 - 03:16 PM, said:

A direct comparison of the new 13" MBP with its direct predecessor would be nice.

Fixed. ;) Yes, a direct comparison is always helpful.
Formerly known as a Mac gamer.

#4 Sneaky Snake

Sneaky Snake

    Official Mascot of the 1988 Winter Olympics

  • IMG Writers
  • 3304 posts
  • Steam Name:SneakySnake
  • Steam ID:sneaky_snake
  • Location:Waterloo, Canada

Posted 05 March 2011 - 12:56 AM

That is Starcraft 2 right? for the Starcraft test?
2015 13" rMBP: i5 5257U @ 2.7 GHz || Intel Iris 6100 || 8 GB LPDDR3 1866 || 256 GB SSD || macOS Sierra
Gaming Build: R5 1600 @ 3.9 GHz || Asus GTX 1070 8 GB || 16 GB DDR4 3000 || 960 Evo NVMe, 1 TB FireCuda || Win10 Pro
Other: Dell OptiPlex 3040 as VMware host || QNAP TS-228 NAS || iPhone 6S 64GB

#5 The Liberator

The Liberator

    Liberate Tutemet Ex Infernis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3707 posts
  • Steam Name:Meriones
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 05 March 2011 - 02:25 AM

View PostSneaky Snake, on 05 March 2011 - 12:56 AM, said:

That is Starcraft 2 right? for the Starcraft test?
Well, errr why would it not be? The frames per second on the tests show that it could not be SC, but SCII.  They are too low for it to be the first game.

Liberator.

iMac: 2.8GHz i7 | 16GB RAM | 10.10.5 | ATI Radeon HD 4850M | 512MB VRAM

Custom: 3.4 GHz i5 | 16GB RAM | Win 7 SP 1 | nVidia GeForce GTX 660 OCII | 2GB VRAM


We hang in D.C. with them CIA killers

Baraka Flacka Flames - Head of the State


#6 ltcommander.data

ltcommander.data

    Positronic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 480 posts

Posted 05 March 2011 - 09:41 AM

A HD 3000 vs. 320M shootout would definitely be interesting. It should be noted though that the HD 3000 is clocked differently in different models for max Turbo Boost. 1200MHz on the 2.0GHz Core i7 2635QM quad core and 1300MHz on the 2.2GHz Core i7 2720QM and 2.3GHz Core i7 2820QM quad cores and 2.7GHz Core i7 2620M dual core. The 2.3GHz dual core 13.3" model appears to be using a custom Core i5 2415M presumably because Apple is using a higher clock speed 1200MHz or 1300MHz HD 3000, whereas the normal 2.3GHz dual core models clock at 1100MHz. It would be good to figure out definitively what clock speed the 2.3GHz Core i5 2415M really clocks it's GPU at.

For all models, it'd be good to see an OpenCL faceoff between the HD 6750 and 330M GT and confirm that the 13" models lack GPU accelerated OpenCL. Some results for the HD 6490 would also be nice. I'm thinking it'll slot between the 9600M GT and 330M GT.

As well, previously after touting H.264 hardware accelerated decode in Snow Leopard, only select nVidia GPUs were ever officially supported. Can you confirm whether H.264 hardware accelerated decode has been dropped in the new MacBook Pros now that they use Intel and ATI GPUs or are they actually supported now?

A shootout using Civ V would also be great and will perhaps give the new quad core CPUs more of a workout compared to other games. And perhaps Borderlands and an older game like Call of Duty 4 or Quake Wars that the drivers should be very well optimized for by now.

And as a comparison point it'd be good to put a desktop GPU in there. I'm thinking the Mobility HD 6750 should slot in somewhere in between the HD 4670 and HD 5670 in the iMacs, probably very close to the HD 5670 actually since it's really a Mobility HD 5730.

#7 Janichsan

Janichsan

    Jugger Bugger

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8102 posts
  • Steam Name:Janichsan
  • Location:over there

Posted 05 March 2011 - 11:48 AM

View PostMister Mumbles, on 04 March 2011 - 06:54 PM, said:

View PostJanichsan, on 04 March 2011 - 03:16 PM, said:

A direct comparison of the new 13" MBP with its direct predecessor would be nice.
Fixed. ;) Yes, a direct comparison is always helpful.
Err... yes. I mean: no I want a benchmark comparison with next year's 13" MBPs...  :whistling:

"We do what we must, because we can."
"Gaming on a Mac is like women on the internet." — "Highly common and totally awesome?"


#8 rob_ART

rob_ART

    Bare Feats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 792 posts
  • Location:Portland, OR

Posted 05 March 2011 - 07:30 PM

View PostSneaky Snake, on 05 March 2011 - 12:56 AM, said:

That is Starcraft 2 right? for the Starcraft test?

Yes. Starcraft 2.
rob-ART morgan
mad scientist
BareFeats.com

#9 rob_ART

rob_ART

    Bare Feats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 792 posts
  • Location:Portland, OR

Posted 10 March 2011 - 12:42 PM

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll work them into future postings or update existing ones.

Meanwhile, here's a High Rez, High Quality round of testing with the 2011 MacBook Pro compared to two popular Mac desktops used for gaming:

http://barefeats.com/mbps03.html
rob-ART morgan
mad scientist
BareFeats.com

#10 Sneaky Snake

Sneaky Snake

    Official Mascot of the 1988 Winter Olympics

  • IMG Writers
  • 3304 posts
  • Steam Name:SneakySnake
  • Steam ID:sneaky_snake
  • Location:Waterloo, Canada

Posted 10 March 2011 - 02:43 PM

View Postrob_ART, on 10 March 2011 - 12:42 PM, said:

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll work them into future postings or update existing ones.

Meanwhile, here's a High Rez, High Quality round of testing with the 2011 MacBook Pro compared to two popular Mac desktops used for gaming:

http://barefeats.com/mbps03.html

Looks like the 6750M is a massive stepup from the 330M. It gets more then double the frames in pretty much every test. Obviously the quad core helps, but most games are a lot more GPU dependent
2015 13" rMBP: i5 5257U @ 2.7 GHz || Intel Iris 6100 || 8 GB LPDDR3 1866 || 256 GB SSD || macOS Sierra
Gaming Build: R5 1600 @ 3.9 GHz || Asus GTX 1070 8 GB || 16 GB DDR4 3000 || 960 Evo NVMe, 1 TB FireCuda || Win10 Pro
Other: Dell OptiPlex 3040 as VMware host || QNAP TS-228 NAS || iPhone 6S 64GB

#11 rob_ART

rob_ART

    Bare Feats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 792 posts
  • Location:Portland, OR

Posted 23 March 2011 - 06:04 AM

I compared the 2011 MacBook Pro with Radeon HD 6750, Radeon HD 6490, and Intel HD 3000 running Portal and X-Plane:
http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html

It includes the 2010 MacBook Pro with GeForce 330M and MacBook Air with GeForce 320M.
rob-ART morgan
mad scientist
BareFeats.com

#12 Sneaky Snake

Sneaky Snake

    Official Mascot of the 1988 Winter Olympics

  • IMG Writers
  • 3304 posts
  • Steam Name:SneakySnake
  • Steam ID:sneaky_snake
  • Location:Waterloo, Canada

Posted 23 March 2011 - 09:29 AM

View Postrob_ART, on 23 March 2011 - 06:04 AM, said:

I compared the 2011 MacBook Pro with Radeon HD 6750, Radeon HD 6490, and Intel HD 3000 running Portal and X-Plane:
http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html

It includes the 2010 MacBook Pro with GeForce 330M and MacBook Air with GeForce 320M.

Thanks for the benchies!

So it looks like the 6490M is a little worse then the 330M, but the quad core CPU makes up for it, so they get around the same frames
2015 13" rMBP: i5 5257U @ 2.7 GHz || Intel Iris 6100 || 8 GB LPDDR3 1866 || 256 GB SSD || macOS Sierra
Gaming Build: R5 1600 @ 3.9 GHz || Asus GTX 1070 8 GB || 16 GB DDR4 3000 || 960 Evo NVMe, 1 TB FireCuda || Win10 Pro
Other: Dell OptiPlex 3040 as VMware host || QNAP TS-228 NAS || iPhone 6S 64GB

#13 XxtraLarGe

XxtraLarGe

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2324 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 13 June 2011 - 09:24 AM

This is really helpful info. I'm probably going to buy one of these in August (hopefully there will be an iPod Touch deal). Only thing I'm curious about is if it's worth the extra $225 to upgrade from the 2.2 GHz to the 2.3 GHz?

Also Rob, if you're checking this thread still I have a suggestion. If I click on a link to get to a benchmark, the only way to get back to the home page is by clicking back. How about making your logo image (http://barefeats.com...s09/bf_logo.gif) a link back to the home page?

View Postrob_ART, on 04 March 2011 - 12:35 PM, said:

http://barefeats.com/mbps01.html

In this first article, I pit the 2010 MBP 2.66 (17") against a 2011 MBP 2.30 quad-core (17") and 2011 MBP 2.7 dual-core (13") running Starcraft, Portal, L4D2, and WoW at 1280x800 (since that's the max for the 13") and with setting that make games playable on the 13".

Next I will test the three 2011 MacBook Pros (2.0, 2.2, 2.3) against the 2010 MacBook Pro (2.66) using a 27" LED Cinema display at 2560x1600 and High settings.

Any suggestions?

Of course right after I post this, I noticed the "index" link. Still, I think linking the logo to the front page is a good idea.

View PostXxtraLarGe, on 13 June 2011 - 09:21 AM, said:

This is really helpful info. I'm probably going to buy one of these in August (hopefully there will be an iPod Touch deal). Only thing I'm curious about is if it's worth the extra $225 to upgrade from the 2.2 GHz to the 2.3 GHz?

Also Rob, if you're checking this thread still I have a suggestion. If I click on a link to get to a benchmark, the only way to get back to the home page is by clicking back. How about making your logo image (http://barefeats.com...s09/bf_logo.gif) a link back to the home page?


#14 DrJohnFever

DrJohnFever

    Notorious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 191 posts

Posted 13 June 2011 - 03:36 PM

View PostXxtraLarGe, on 13 June 2011 - 09:24 AM, said:

This is really helpful info. I'm probably going to buy one of these in August (hopefully there will be an iPod Touch deal). Only thing I'm curious about is if it's worth the extra $225 to upgrade from the 2.2 GHz to the 2.3 GHz?
You also get a slight amount more cache, but IMHO, 2mb of cache and 100MHz is barely worth $75, let alone $225.

#15 XxtraLarGe

XxtraLarGe

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2324 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 11 August 2011 - 02:29 PM

Just ordered my 17" MacBook Pro w/2.2 GHz i7, 8GB RAM, 750 GB HD, 17" matte screen.   :happy:  

I know there will probably be a new one in November or so, but I've heard it will have an SSD HD & no optical drive. I wouldn't be a fan of either of those changes.

#16 DrJohnFever

DrJohnFever

    Notorious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 191 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 03:14 PM

Nice! Tell us how it fares.

#17 Sneaky Snake

Sneaky Snake

    Official Mascot of the 1988 Winter Olympics

  • IMG Writers
  • 3304 posts
  • Steam Name:SneakySnake
  • Steam ID:sneaky_snake
  • Location:Waterloo, Canada

Posted 11 August 2011 - 05:02 PM

View PostXxtraLarGe, on 11 August 2011 - 02:29 PM, said:

Just ordered my 17" MacBook Pro w/2.2 GHz i7, 8GB RAM, 750 GB HD, 17" matte screen.   :happy:  

I know there will probably be a new one in November or so, but I've heard it will have an SSD HD & no optical drive. I wouldn't be a fan of either of those changes.

How are you not a fan of like 10x faster drive speed (i.e. an SSD)? I will never buy a computer again without one after using one
2015 13" rMBP: i5 5257U @ 2.7 GHz || Intel Iris 6100 || 8 GB LPDDR3 1866 || 256 GB SSD || macOS Sierra
Gaming Build: R5 1600 @ 3.9 GHz || Asus GTX 1070 8 GB || 16 GB DDR4 3000 || 960 Evo NVMe, 1 TB FireCuda || Win10 Pro
Other: Dell OptiPlex 3040 as VMware host || QNAP TS-228 NAS || iPhone 6S 64GB

#18 ltcommander.data

ltcommander.data

    Positronic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 480 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 10:54 PM

View PostSneaky Snake, on 11 August 2011 - 05:02 PM, said:

How are you not a fan of like 10x faster drive speed (i.e. an SSD)? I will never buy a computer again without one after using one
Well if it's like the blade SSDs in the MacBook Air, limited capacity and limited third-part upgrade options could be a concern. Going from 750GB to 256GB can be a problem if the notebook is intended as the primary computer and having to attach external hard drives all the time isn't convenient.

In any case, I'm thinking there won't actually be a major redesign this year. Intel's doing a minor Sandy Bridge refresh with 200MHz clock speed bumps so those will be added and perhaps high-res screens will finally be standard, 1440x900 for the 13" and 1680x1050 for the 15". That avoids concern that production upsets with a major design change could effect Christmas sales. The next major redesign can then occur in Q2 2012 when Ivy Bridge arrives, which will probably be necessary anyways to take advantage of lower thermal requirements as the Ultrabook initiative takes hold at Intel starting with Ivy Bridge.

#19 XxtraLarGe

XxtraLarGe

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2324 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 15 August 2011 - 10:26 PM

View Postltcommander.data, on 11 August 2011 - 10:54 PM, said:

View PostSneaky Snake, on 11 August 2011 - 05:02 PM, said:

How are you not a fan of like 10x faster drive speed (i.e. an SSD)? I will never buy a computer again without one after using one
Well if it's like the blade SSDs in the MacBook Air, limited capacity and limited third-part upgrade options could be a concern. Going from 750GB to 256GB can be a problem if the notebook is intended as the primary computer and having to attach external hard drives all the time isn't convenient.
That's exactly it.

#20 teflon

teflon

    Bastard of the Popeye Analogy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9589 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 16 August 2011 - 05:47 AM

There's replacements for the MBA SSDs, and there were after about 2 days on the market with that particular design, just Apple blocked them, I think. TRIM support is there in OSX, too, but it is software limited to Apple drives only, with minor tweaks enabling it very simply.

The only point that still holds water is the capacity of the drives. It's tough to go back 5 years in capacity. Heck, I had a 250GB drive in my Cube since 2004, and that was pretty cheap back then... 256GB would be an absolute pain to live with again. I'd need to have a second HDD in there for storage, to make it OK again. That's only possible if Apple design around that, or there's an optical drive for me to replace.
Polytetrafluoroethylene to my friends.

Macbook Pro - C2D 2.4Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Geforce 8600M GT 256Mb / 15.4"
Cube - G4 1.7Ghz 7448 / 1.5GB RAM / Samsung Spinpoint 250GB / Geforce 6200 256Mb
Self-built PC - C2Q Q8300 2.5Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Radeon 7850 OC 1GB / W7 x64
and a beautiful HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS monitor