Slashdot Mirror


Gaming Benchmarks For the New MacBook Pros

PC World takes a look at the performance of the new MacBook Pros compared to models from the middle of 2007. In addition to benchmarking software, they run comparisons on the Crysis demo and the World in Conflict demo. The results show improvement by a significant margin. Additional benchmarks are available at MacWorld. "Crysis shows a similar performance bump, though viewed practically, those numbers might look a little depressing. Crysis arrived in November 2007, but I'm fairly certain I won't be comfortably running it on a MacBook Pro until somewhere north of 2010. Drop the settings to 'medium,' however, and I can vouch that the average frame rate on the November MacBook Pro rested comfortably in the very playable middle 20s."

6 of 46 comments (clear)

  1. So? by pdusen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't think anyone questioned that the new Macbook Pros would probably perform better. The more relevant question is, are they priced competitively for their performance?

    1. Re:So? by JonathanBoyd · · Score: 3, Informative

      Making the difference, a not inconsiderable $750 - the Mac is a third more expensive than a Dell that gives twice the 3dmark performance. (this is what we're discussing remember).

      If you're so insistent on discussing that Dell with the Macbook, then the Apple blows it out of the water on a price comparison, since the Dell was 4480 USD (MSRP) and is now about 3349 USD. I guess you didn't bother to read the article and see that it's the special SLI configuration with a pair of Mobile 8800M GTXs. If you're doing a price comparison with the cheaper M1730s then you'll need to find benchmarks for them since they use a different graphics set up e.g. these CNet benchmarks. I have'nt seen link yet for performance of the 17" MacBook Pros; only the new 15.4" ones.

      Of course if you're going to make this comparison, then you have to acknowledge that the weight of the Dell (10.6 lbs, twice that of the Mac, along with twice the thickness) renders it unsuitable for mobile use and if you're factoring in sale prices, you need to take a look at Apple's refurb store a well. Compared to the 2099 USD Dell, the Mac has twice the level 2 cache, twice the VRAM and a faster processor. The Dell wireless is also inferior, supporting only g, compared to a/g/n for the Mac and Bluetooth (along with Firewire 800) is missing. Add these in as far as possible, bump the graphics from the single 8700 w/256 MB to the dual SLI version, ignore the sale discount since we could get that in the Apple refurb section and you find that the Dell is 2749 USD - 100 USD cheaper than the Mac, which is a negligible difference (less than 4%). The Dell will have higher framerates in games, but be far less portable (and lacking in Firewire 800) and chew your batteries up twice as fast (based on how long they last playing a DVD). It should also be remembered that the current 17" is quite old and wasn't updated when the other MacBook Pros were.

      So, what exactly do you want to discuss?
      * The very expensive custom Dell with the high benchmarks vs. an old 17" MacBook Pro?
      * The cheaper dual SLI Dell vs. an old 17" MacBook Pro?
      * The non-SLI Dell vs. an old 17" MacBook Pro?
      * A Dell vs. an old 17" MacBook Pro, each with custom configuration to match each other's specs as closely as possible?
      * A Dell on sale vs. a 17" MacBook Pro from the refurb store (i.e. on sale)?

      So far you've picked a cheap Dell, on sale, given the benchmark for the most expensive one and compared it to a full price MacBook with extra stuff added to match the Dell's configuration without getting the Dell to also match the MacBook's. Now, is it just me, or does that seem a little like tilting the playing field ridiculously in favour of one side? We'll forget about you giving the Mac price in Australian dollars and assume that wasn't trolling.

      If you compare full price products, specced to match each other, the Dell is slightly cheaper, better for gaming, but worse for high speed I/O and more of a movable desktop than a laptop i.e. gamers are better off with the Dell, but everyone else is probably better off with the Mac.

  2. This just in by poity · · Score: 4, Funny

    Current iteration of product better than last. Stay tuned for in depth coverage...

    --
    your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
  3. For gaming? Absolutely not. by SaDan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But how many people are going to buy a Mac for games anyways?

    Yes, I use a Mac every day. I also maintain an office of iMac and MacPro workstations as well as MacBook Pros. Yes, I even play Call of Duty 4 on a Mac sometimes.

    No, I don't think they're gaming machines, no matter what anyone tells me. I also think running Windows on a Mac is just ignorant, and throwing away even more money.

  4. Bullcrap, I get awesome FPS on my MacBook Pro by kbrasee · · Score: 5, Funny

    Spectre VR has never played this silky smoothly.

    1. Re:Bullcrap, I get awesome FPS on my MacBook Pro by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 3, Funny

      You should see the frame rate I get from nethack!

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.