Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Notebooks > Time to settle the PB games argument!...

Time to settle the PB games argument!...
Thread Tools
Tom Rudderham
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 09:40 AM
 
It's not yet clear if the new AluBook 17" is faster than the 15" when it comes to games.
So it's time to settle the argument!
First up is Quake 3. I've captured 3 screenshots, at a setting of...
1024 by 768 / 32 bit / High Textures / High Geometry / Trilinear / and LightMap lighting.
I was using a TiBook 1Ghz, and OS9. Later I'll do the same in OSX 10.2.4 for a comparison.

The first screenshot is of the mirrored room in the "Introduction" map. This is a great indication of the Graphics cards speed...
Introduction Screenshot
I get 47fps.

The second is taken from the map "Arena Gate" and is a good indication of both CPU and GPU speeds...
Arena gate Screenshot
Here I get 148 fps.

And the 3rd screenshot is taken from "Q3DM7" and is a great indication of your CPU speed...
Q3DM7 ScreenShot
Here I get 114fps.

It'd be great if owners of the 17" could post their results in the same areas in Quake 3. The same could go for other TiBook owners.
Later I'll do the same in RTCW, and any other games people wish me to benchmark such as JK2, MOHAA, UT etc...
have fun benchmarking!....
( Last edited by Tom Rudderham; Mar 26, 2003 at 09:53 AM. )
Tom,
http://www.taranimationstudios.com/
1 Ghz TiBook (15")
     
Wet Jimmy
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sydney, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 09:43 AM
 
What's with the corruption through the middle of each shot? Oh, and the third picture leads to a dead link.
     
Tom Rudderham  (op)
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 09:49 AM
 
Just fixing the 3rd link, saved it as a .pict and labelled it .jpg by accident. Give me 2 mins...
I used ScreenSnapz Pro to take the pictures. If I press Comand Shift 3 the computer crashes! Damn OS9! Quake 3 seems to corrupt the centre of the picture. Can't fix that
Tom,
http://www.taranimationstudios.com/
1 Ghz TiBook (15")
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 09:54 AM
 
This method of testing is not reliable. The speed fluctuates wildly depending on the scene.

Can you run a demo?
     
Tom Rudderham  (op)
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 10:44 AM
 
If someone can point me towards the demos to download than yeah sure!
I always get the same fps in those scenes. Just make sure no bots are playing and stand in the same positions as in the pics.
It's much more accuarate than someone just saying "I get 70fps - 90fps in RTCW!"
Tom,
http://www.taranimationstudios.com/
1 Ghz TiBook (15")
     
RooneyX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 11:13 AM
 
PEECEE laptops are hitting over 200FPS in Quake III. This is not good enough. I feel the need for speed and not just for Quartz Extreme.
     
badnewsblair
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Richmond! VA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 11:21 AM
 
Originally posted by RooneyX:
PEECEE laptops are hitting over 200FPS in Quake III. This is not good enough. I feel the need for speed and not just for Quartz Extreme.
It's good enough for me! Now, where's my Powerbook!
[ 15 inch Macbook Pro 2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo ][ 20 inch Intel iMac 2 GB RAM / 256 MB ATI XT 1600 ][ iPhone OG (3GS on Reservation)][ White iPod 5th Gen. 60GB ]
     
AaronHD
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ct. USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 11:21 AM
 
My guess would be that the 15" is faster if it has the Ati R9000 card because the R9000 has built in shaders (pixel and vertex) while the Invidia card does not to my understanding.

AaronHD


Originally posted by Tom Rudderham:
It's not yet clear if the new AluBook 17" is faster than the 15" when it comes to games.
So it's time to settle the argument!
First up is Quake 3. I've captured 3 screenshots, at a setting of...
1024 by 768 / 32 bit / High Textures / High Geometry / Trilinear / and LightMap lighting.
I was using a TiBook 1Ghz, and OS9. Later I'll do the same in OSX 10.2.4 for a comparison.

The first screenshot is of the mirrored room in the "Introduction" map. This is a great indication of the Graphics cards speed...
Introduction Screenshot
I get 47fps.

The second is taken from the map "Arena Gate" and is a good indication of both CPU and GPU speeds...
Arena gate Screenshot
Here I get 148 fps.

And the 3rd screenshot is taken from "Q3DM7" and is a great indication of your CPU speed...
Q3DM7 ScreenShot
Here I get 114fps.

It'd be great if owners of the 17" could post their results in the same areas in Quake 3. The same could go for other TiBook owners.
Later I'll do the same in RTCW, and any other games people wish me to benchmark such as JK2, MOHAA, UT etc...
have fun benchmarking!....
     
Pfhor
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: France
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 11:50 AM
 
and how can you see your fps in a game ??!!
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 12:23 PM
 
Originally posted by RooneyX:
PEECEE laptops are hitting over 200FPS in Quake III. This is not good enough. I feel the need for speed and not just for Quartz Extreme.
Speed is needed for other games, but 200 fps in QIII is unnecessary.

If you want a true gaming laptop, no Mac laptop will satisfy your needs. Indeed, a high end gaming laptop will beat the vast majority of Mac desktops for games too.
     
Phanguye
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Umbrella Research Center
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 12:40 PM
 
Originally posted by Wet Jimmy:
What's with the corruption through the middle of each shot?
vertical desyncing aka screen tear... there should be an option to turn on forced vertical sync but you will take a performance hit
     
Tom Rudderham  (op)
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 12:58 PM
 
So thats what it is!
BTW To get the fps counter up, type /cg_drawfps 1 in the console (press the ` key for the console) Change the 1 to a 0 to get rid of it.
I'll go and try to find the demos to download. No one's posted their 17" comparisons yet!
Tom,
http://www.taranimationstudios.com/
1 Ghz TiBook (15")
     
Tom Rudderham  (op)
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 01:10 PM
 
I did the same in OSX 10.2.4
I get the same fps in the Introduction and Arena maps. But in Q3DM7 I get 102 fps.
12 less than OS9! I restarted and tried again, still the same.
Tom,
http://www.taranimationstudios.com/
1 Ghz TiBook (15")
     
RooneyX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 02:24 PM
 
Originally posted by Eug:
Speed is needed for other games, but 200 fps in QIII is unnecessary.

You're missing the point. If a PeeCee is hitting 200FPS at the standard benchmark res of 1024x768 then it still has power to run games at higher res. It will also be future proof enough to run whatever games come out for the next two years. That's the kind of power one wants when making an investment of the kind it takes to buy a Mac. I'd love to have the security of knowing a Powerbook will not only run future versions of OSX very nicely for a long time but also be able to entertain me with games.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 03:30 PM
 
Originally posted by RooneyX:
You're missing the point. If a PeeCee is hitting 200FPS at the standard benchmark res of 1024x768 then it still has power to run games at higher res.
The point (as was stated several times in that previous thread) is that the forte of Macs is not gaming. If you want a hard-core gaming laptop, the Mac is about the last thing you should be looking at.

The rest of us weigh the advantages and disadvantages of Macs and then make our decision. If hard-core gaming is a necessity for you, then you shouldn't be buying a Mac, plain and simple.

I bought my Mac for everything else it can do. I do play a few games on it (like Quake III), but I don't expect it to run Unreal Tournament 2003 as well as a PC laptop. If you think this is unacceptable, then you don't have to spend the money on it.

It will also be future proof enough to run whatever games come out for the next two years. That's the kind of power one wants when making an investment of the kind it takes to buy a Mac. I'd love to have the security of knowing a Powerbook will not only run future versions of OSX very nicely for a long time but also be able to entertain me with games.
There are very few laptops on the market today that will be able to run Doom III truly adequately. That is a game that will be out this year.

The only ones that would be really tolerable would be the PC laptops with the nVidia Geforce 4 Go 4200. However, most of those laptops so far have been heavy ultra-bulky beasts, with short battery life. The 9600 and FX Go will change that, but don't expect to buy one today.
     
Leonard
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 04:17 PM
 
Originally posted by Eug:
The point (as was stated several times in that previous thread) is that the forte of Macs is not gaming. If you want a hard-core gaming laptop, the Mac is about the last thing you should be looking at.

The rest of us weigh the advantages and disadvantages of Macs and then make our decision. If hard-core gaming is a necessity for you, then you shouldn't be buying a Mac, plain and simple.
If your a hard-core gamer, you shouldn't be buying a laptop either. A desktop is a better gaming machine.
Mac Pro Dual 3.0 Dual-Core
MacBook Pro
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 04:31 PM
 
Originally posted by Leonard:
If your a hard-core gamer, you shouldn't be buying a laptop either. A desktop is a better gaming machine.
I agree, but nonetheless I guess the hard core gamers like some laptops because it's easier to deal with for the LAN parties, etc.
     
GlobalNomad
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 05:49 PM
 
I had to add my $ 0.02 .

I have a 12" PowerBook. I am a casual gamer. (Unreal Tournament, Jedi Knight II, Tactical-Ops (UT mod), Warcraft 3).

Of cource laptops will never be able to be up to par with the noisy PeeCee gamer machines, with there huge power supplys and noisy fans .

However I can play Tactical-Ops (haven't had time to play any other games, mid-symester tests) at 35-40 fps, every thing on high quality and resolution at the native resolution of the screen. The strange thing is if i drop the resolution and the quality to like 800*600 and lowest setting for everything I can't get above 40 fps (on average, sure you can get 80+ (can get like 120 or something if its all black) if you stand and look at the wall).

I have a PowerMac Digital-Audio 733 Geforce 2 MX 32 mb, and this PowerBook runs UT better than it can (only slightly when you turn every thing up to high caulity).

In conclusion Desktop Machines are like 2-3 years ahead of laptops in the gamming sector (if not in all sectors)... But how cool is it to rock up to a LAN game with a 12" PowerBook and waist your friends on there PeeCee Boxes. Oh the humiliation.

I do have a firend that uses a 2 year old Toshiba laptop to go to LAN games. It gets about 25 fps on low quality and 800*600 in UT, and he is able to OWN people that are running P4 3 Ghz, geforce 4 ti (and what not).

If what i wrote above makes no sence what so ever, i appologise, I am in a rush and must get to a lecture
     
Mr Creosote
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 06:13 PM
 
As a gamer, and someone seriously thinking of getting a 17inch pb some of this is a little worrying.

You should be hitting 200+ fps on timedemo with a modern grphics card at 1024 with in-game graphic options maxed.
If it ever slips below 100 then its almost certain that it will NOT be able to play the upcoming games such as Doom 3.

If you wish to properly test fps then do a timedemo test.

Go into Q3 console with the key then type
/timedemo 1 hit enter
/demo xxxx hit enter
where xxxx is the version demo you get depending on which Q3 version you are running - on Point Release 1.32 that will be "four" without the quoutes, on the original game "one" or "two" and versions in between I cant recall offhand.

The demo will then run as fast as it can.
When it ends enter console again and it will display the average fps during the demo.
You should be getting 200+ at 1024 res
     
raveng
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 08:56 PM
 
Hey Global, how does War3 run on the 12" PB?

Just curious cuz I'm really interested in the 12" but I also like playing games every now and then. Either way, I gotta keep saving up for one (maybe by which time the rev. 2 of the 12" PB will be out )
     
webb3201
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Dallas, Texas
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 10:30 PM
 
Gamers, we have said it before...lets chant again...if you need a gaming machine...buy a gaming machine.

First, a Powerbook regardless of how cool is not a gaming machine. You can game, but that is not its reason for being.

Second, Any laptop you buy today will be behind the curve next year. Don't buy a laptop if that is an issue. Stick to an upgradeable form factor or do as I do, keep a peecee for gaming only and do all else on the powerbook.

Third, high FPS on a quake demo does not mean you will be able to play the next generation of games. Hardware changes so rapidly that your 200 fps card this year may be as useless as a 20fps card as new bells and whistles are added.
Read my MacWebb column and other great Mac articles at Lowendmac.com

Owner of a MacBook Pro and various other Macs.
     
asilagy
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2003, 11:08 PM
 
Originally posted by raveng:
Hey Global, how does War3 run on the 12" PB?

Just curious cuz I'm really interested in the 12" but I also like playing games every now and then. Either way, I gotta keep saving up for one (maybe by which time the rev. 2 of the 12" PB will be out )
This I need to know as well.
     
RooneyX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 27, 2003, 05:10 AM
 
Originally posted by Leonard:
If your a hard-core gamer, you shouldn't be buying a laptop either. A desktop is a better gaming machine.
So let's demand that Apple forget about all fancy technologies and 3D cards and mega-wire and Airport 3000 and go back to using OS 7.5.

If Intel came out with a WLAN card that had gigabit transfer speeds would you turn around and say you don't need more than 11MBPs for connecting to the net, ignoring everyone else out there with different needs?

Stop making excuses for Apple's failure to deliver fast hardware at a competitive price in other words.
     
RooneyX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 27, 2003, 05:15 AM
 
Originally posted by webb3201:

Third, high FPS on a quake demo does not mean you will be able to play the next generation of games. Hardware changes so rapidly that your 200 fps card this year may be as useless as a 20fps card as new bells and whistles are added.
Care to give an example of a graphics card that lost it's value by ten times in just a year?

Hang on, everyone saying it's OK to have old graphics chips, wasn't QE supposed to get faster with the latest and fastest graphics chips?
     
GlobalNomad
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 27, 2003, 06:00 AM
 
Originally posted by raveng:
Hey Global, how does War3 run on the 12" PB?

Just curious cuz I'm really interested in the 12" but I also like playing games every now and then. Either way, I gotta keep saving up for one (maybe by which time the rev. 2 of the 12" PB will be out )
I'll try it out this weekend.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 27, 2003, 08:57 AM
 
Originally posted by RooneyX:
If Intel came out with a WLAN card that had gigabit transfer speeds would you turn around and say you don't need more than 11MBPs for connecting to the net, ignoring everyone else out there with different needs?
No, instead of complaining that brand B didn't have it (and never buy any machine), I'd probably buy the Intel one (if I absolutely needed/wanted Gigabit transfer speeds).
     
Tom Rudderham  (op)
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 27, 2003, 11:15 AM
 
So no one with a 17" has Quake 3?
Tom,
http://www.taranimationstudios.com/
1 Ghz TiBook (15")
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:46 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,