When it come up to gaming on the Mac , a really vainglorious chunk of Apple ’s Mac vendee get left out of the closed circuit . I ’m babble out about the multitude of consumer — moms , dads , college kids , occupation people — who have buy MacBooks ( and , to a lesser academic degree , the Mac mini ) . Because aright now , MacBooks stink for games . And the deplorable thing is , it does n’t have to be that way .
There ’s no denying the MacBook ’s popularity . Since the start of 2007 , Apple has sold about 5.7 million laptop computer , and while the caller does n’t break down sales by model , it would be safe to bear that MacBooks make up a pregnant pct of that total . I ca n’t walk into a Starbucks or turn on the TV without reckon a MacBook — or , for that matter , the new MacBook Air , which shares some common design ingredient , including incorporated graphics .
And that ’s where the problem consist from a gaming perspective . Unlike other Mac system of rules that boast a graphics card with dedicated memory board , the GPU in the MacBook ( as well as the miniskirt and the MacBook Air ) share its memory with the sleep of the scheme .
Now , I understand why Apple used Intel incorporate graphics on the MacBook . It helps keep the element cost scummy than it would if Apple had buy a bit from ATI or Nvidia . It use less power . I ’m sure that fabrication costs are a bit lower because of the integrated aim , too . And every centime Apple saves tally on the bottom lineage when you ’re sing about loudness products like MacBooks .
I also understand that desegregate graphics also limits how well the MacBook handles games when compared to machines with dedicated graphics . Consider the Macworld science laboratory trial run for the most late MacBook update . While the MacBooks power by Penryn - base Core 2 Duo chips liken somewhat favourably to the most late MacBook Pros in many tests , the one involving 3 - D games are n’t among them . In the Lab ’s Unreal Tournament 2004 psychometric test , the 2.4GHz MacBook Core 2 couple nock 27.6 frames per second — that compares to73.4frames per second in a MacBook Pro with the same processor clock amphetamine .
Now , I ’m not expecting Apple to suddenly get religious belief and discharge some eminent - remainder graphics accelerator in the MacBook or the MacBook Air . That ’d just be featherbrained , although it might be cool in the same agency that Subaru’sImpreza WRXis cool — an econo - loge tricked out as a performance fomite .
A modest upgrade would be wonderful . I ca n’t severalize you how many conversation I ’ve had with Mac game developer — ever since the MacBook was first introduced in 2006 — where they ’ve moaned and groaned about the organisation ’s inability to scarper the game they ’ve arise or have in the works . Even a low - closing discrete art chip from ATI or Nvidia would be a welcome change — it would represent a huge upsurge in the number of Mac systems on the market place that could be dependent for new games .
The problem is n’t just with integrate computer graphic in general . I ’ve speak with Mac secret plan developer who have looked at the computer hardware and how its performance and feature liken to GMA X3100 organisation running on Windows , and the Mac equipment driver execution always comes up short . That ’s why you see so many games that make it a degree to exclude GMA graphics from the listing of supported hardware — game that often have PC counterparts that draw on GMA hardware .
Certainly the GMA X3100 that ’s in currently ship MacBooks is n’t optimum for gaming . Almost every PC benchmark I ’ve ever study shows that the incorporate graphics processor run out of gas fast and ca n’t handle in high spirits resolutions or high levels of detail . But getting the GMA X3100 to function at the same level as it does on the PC side would be a great place to bulge out , at the very least .
