4 ms·
Well, Apple G13 series are excellent rasterizers. I‘d expect them do very well in games, especially with that massive bandwidth and humongous caches. The proble
by ribit 5y ago
Well, Apple G13 series are excellent rasterizers. I‘d expect them do very well in games, especially with that massive bandwidth and humongous caches. The problem is that not many games run on macOS. But if you are only interested in games with solid Mac support, they will perform very well (especially if it’s a native client like Baldurs Gates 3).
- mhh__ 5y agoWhat is the most intensive game you could actually run? I was going to say Fortnite but I'm guessing that's not the case anymore
- ribit 5y agoBaldurs Gates 3, Metro Last Light, Total War…
- Thaxll 5y ago"very well" 45 fps top at 1080p medium settings https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hROxRQvO-gQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hROxRQvO-gQ You take a 3 years old card you get 2x more fps.
- ribit 5y agoWhich other passively cooled laptop can do it? And what 3 year old card are you comparing it to? Hopefully something with 20W or lower power consumption. 45fps at medium Full HD is not far off a 1650 Max q
- Thaxll 5y agoApple compare themself to a 3080m, the perf from an M1 is not even close to a 3 y/o card. I don't care if it takes 10w if I can't even play at 60fps on "recent'ish" games.
- Toutouxc 5y agoYou may have mistaken last year's M1 (the one in the video, available passively cooled in the MacBook Air) with the new M1 Pro and M1 Max (the ones being compared to the more powerful counterparts).
- TillE 5y agoThat's the M1. Yes, those numbers are superb for something that's competing with integrated graphics. M1 Pro and M1 Max will be legit gaming GPUs.