PDA

View Full Version : 9400m and gaming

GnomeWizardd
8 Sep 2009, 9:54pm
Was wondering if my 9400M in my macbook would play starcraft II and Diablo III ok any idea?
Thrax
8 Sep 2009, 9:55pm
Maybe on super low settings.
ardichoke
8 Sep 2009, 9:56pm
It should play Diablo II on more than super low settings. Diablo III on the other hand...
Obsidian
8 Sep 2009, 9:57pm
It will run Diablo 2 nicely but good luck with Starcraft 2.
ardichoke
8 Sep 2009, 10:11pm
I can say this, My laptop has a 9300M GS. L4D and TF2 do not treat it well even on low settings. Then again, I was running it through wine which isn't exactly ideal. The native Linux NWN client, however, runs beautifully!
Gargoyle
8 Sep 2009, 10:17pm
G-Dub, I'd say that they'll play, but not well enough to enjoy. You still have a desktop? 'Cuz you'll probably be playing them there.

I can say this, My laptop has a 9300M GS. L4D and TF2 do not treat it well even on low settings. Then again, I was running it through wine which isn't exactly ideal. The native Linux NWN client, however, runs beautifully!

My guess is that even in Windows you'd have to run TF2 at less than native res (which to me is okay given the cartoony textures in TF2 don't show stretching as bad).
GnomeWizardd
8 Sep 2009, 10:23pm
Yea I have my desktop for the time being, but its about to go up for sale soo. I will be picking up a Macbook soon also, I will be picking one up witha 9600gt and a 9400m in it so Ill be ok on my end but I was wondering about my wifes

I am Hoping that when the update the 13inch macbook Pro models they give it atleast a 9600gt
ardichoke
8 Sep 2009, 10:30pm
Gawd... are the mobile chipsets really THAT bad? I mean, I only have an 8600 GTS in my desktop and it runs L4D and TF2 at full (1680x1050) resolution with no problems. I guess I just never understood the GeForce numbering scheme (extra emphasis on scheme, as in plot, and an evil one at that) for the 7, 8 and 9 series. It doesn't make sense to me that a 9 series card would be less powerful than an 8 series card. If it is... it should be dubbed an 8 series card!
Snarkasm
8 Sep 2009, 10:32pm
But a 9300M is still better than an 8300M. The numbering schemes make sense within their tiers.
Obsidian
8 Sep 2009, 10:33pm
The second number is often more important than the first in terms of performance, it's the same with ATI.
ardichoke
8 Sep 2009, 10:40pm
Ah... well I guess that makes sense if only in a weird fucked up marketing sense. I still say they should just use bloody consecutive numbers that are related to performance or the card and drop the whole "oh... compare the 2nd number then the series which is the first number then the stupid letters and sacrifice three chickens and a fatted calf then the relative performance will be revealed to you in a spirit quest."
Gargoyle
8 Sep 2009, 10:46pm
Gawd... are the mobile chipsets really THAT bad? I mean, I only have an 8600 GTS in my desktop and it runs L4D and TF2 at full (1680x1050) resolution with no problems.

The 9400M is a bit better for TF2, managing mid 30s FPS (link (http://www.mac-forums.com/forums/os-x-applications-games/127153-unofficial-macbook-gaming-thread-late-2008-models.html), post #10). I'm just incorporating a fudge factor for your 9300 that I'm not really familiar with. But yeah, mobile chipsets tend to have less shaders and slower frequencies. My 7600GT in my desktop is older tech, but outperforms my mobile card by a moderate amount.

The 8600M GT in my laptop can play TF2 at 1440x900, but I sometimes bump it down a notch for a more dependable experience on busy servers.
shwaip
8 Sep 2009, 11:05pm
i have the quadro fx570m in my laptop (basically an 8600M, 2.5 C2D), and it'll run tf2 just about as well as my desktop (8800gts, 3.2 C2D), both at 1920x1200, provided that I give it enough ventilation.
GnomeWizardd
9 Sep 2009, 1:30am
well i jsut Dl and installed quake 4 demo and ran it on high everything, i dont think a RTS game would tax it more that
Basil
9 Sep 2009, 3:03am
Notebookcheck.net (http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-9400M-G.11949.0.html) is the place to look for anything related to laptop GPU's.
The 9400M isn't a bad card at all (for a laptop) so hopefully you'll get enough performance from it for playable framerates without killing the eye candy all together.
ardichoke
9 Sep 2009, 3:09am
Harumph.... notebookcheck.net says the Crysis: Warhead is playable on my 9300M GS. This should mean that L4D and TF2 would be playable. It's gotta be Wine. Maybe I'll dual-boot my laptop after all =/
Obsidian
9 Sep 2009, 10:52am
well i jsut Dl and installed quake 4 demo and ran it on high everything, i dont think a RTS game would tax it more that
Why not? The graphics in Starcraft 2 already look much better than Quake 4 IMO. Just because it's really shiny and doesn't look very realistic doesn't mean it won't be taxing on your GPU.
Basil
9 Sep 2009, 12:38pm
Harumph.... notebookcheck.net says the Crysis: Warhead is playable on my 9300M GS. This should mean that L4D and TF2 would be playable. It's gotta be Wine. Maybe I'll dual-boot my laptop after all =/
Two uni friends of mine can play source based games on their laptops (8400G and a x1250). It's not pretty but still playable on lowish settings.

I'd just set up a dual boot for games, lots of games run well under WINE but the last time I tried little niggles like no steam chat or Ventrilo convinced me it was easier just to dual boot.
ardichoke
9 Sep 2009, 11:44pm
Yeah, I think I'm stuck doing that. The only reason I was even setting these up was for ICOK since I don't want to haul my desktop out there. Other than that, I have no interest in playing games on my laptop really. I was hoping it would be smoother though since L4D is rated Platinum on winehq.org and TF2 is gold. Oh well... Guess I'll just throw the Win7 RC on a 30G partition for the duration of ICOK.