New To Mac-Forums?

Welcome to our community! Join the discussion today by registering your FREE account. If you have any problems with the registration process, please contact us!

Get your questions answered by community gurus Advice and insight from world-class Apple enthusiasts Exclusive access to members-only contests, giveaways and deals

Join today!

 
Start a Discussion
 

Mac-Forums Brief

Subscribe to Mac-Forums Brief to receive special offers from Mac-Forums partners and sponsors

Join the conversation RSS
Apple Desktops Discussion of Apple's desktop machines including Mac Pro, iMac, Power Mac, and mini

Doubt. Starcraft 2 iMac 27 runs at maximum setting?


Post Reply New Thread Subscribe

 
Thread Tools
Faiska

 
Member Since: Jun 16, 2011
Posts: 4
Faiska is on a distinguished road

Faiska is offline
I am looking to migrate from PC to Mac, but my big question is whether the iMac 27" with the AMD Radeon HD 6770M 512MB GDDR5, Starcraft 2 will run at maximum setting. Why is my PC currently has a Nvidia GTX 460 1GB DDR5 and with it I can run starcraft 2 at maximum setting with no lag in online mode. I'll be able to play Starcraft 2 in the maximum configuration with this iMac? I really appreciate if someone can help.
QUOTE Thanks
mrplow

 
mrplow's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 01, 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 6,701
mrplow has a reputation beyond reputemrplow has a reputation beyond reputemrplow has a reputation beyond reputemrplow has a reputation beyond reputemrplow has a reputation beyond reputemrplow has a reputation beyond reputemrplow has a reputation beyond reputemrplow has a reputation beyond reputemrplow has a reputation beyond reputemrplow has a reputation beyond reputemrplow has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 27" iMac i7 (2011) 10.9, iPhone5s, iPad Air, AppleTV2

mrplow is offline
That really depends on the resolution you intend to run at and what you have been using on the PC.

The 27" iMac has a native res of 2560x1440. I suspect that's way over what you've been running your PC screen at.

External hard disk acquisition addict - but admitting the problem is the first step to a robust backup

Please use the reputation system if you think you've been helped - top right of this post
QUOTE Thanks
StMFA

 
Member Since: Jun 06, 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 223
StMFA will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: 2011 27in iMac i5 3.1GHz, AMD 6970, iPhone 4, Wi-Fi iPad 2

StMFA is offline
I actually was having a similar issue myself. Here are some benchmarks.

AMD Radeon HD 6770M - Notebookcheck.net Tech

Larger list here:
Mobile Graphics Cards - Benchmark List - Notebookcheck.net Tech

My advice: I would honestly just go with the 21.5 in iMac unless you want the 27 in screen, in which case I suggest bumping up to the 1999 model that has the 6970m in it.
I just bought the 1999 model yesterday, and I can honestly say I spent about 2 weeks looking at every aspect of all the different iMacs.

Here's what I've basically come away with. The 6770m probably could do it at max settings, but probably not at native res. The real thing bogging the card down is the RAM, its only 512mb. Most PC's packing this card come with 1gb RAM. And recommended specs, according to the SC2 auto settings are that it should only be rendering high instead of ultra quality textures if theres only 512mb RAM on the card.

I haven't had a chance to install SC2 on it yet, but I likely will install it today and see how it goes. In the mean time I would poke around these forums and google/youtube, there's a lot out there on the gaming capabilities of these things.
QUOTE Thanks
Faiska

 
Member Since: Jun 16, 2011
Posts: 4
Faiska is on a distinguished road

Faiska is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrplow View Post
That really depends on the resolution you intend to run at and what you have been using on the PC.

The 27" iMac has a native res of 2560x1440. I suspect that's way over what you've been running your PC screen at.
Thank you, I believe that with the resolution 2556x1440 Starcraft 2 does not run at max settings with a 512MB Video card, which would be the 1GB version.

The specifications that I want to buy is:
Quad-Core 2.7GHz Intel Core i5
2560 x 1440 resolution
4GB (two 2GB) memory
1TB hard Drive1
AMD Radeon HD 6770M with 512MB

Thank you for helping me!!!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by StMFA View Post
I actually was having a similar issue myself. Here are some benchmarks.

AMD Radeon HD 6770M - Notebookcheck.net Tech

Larger list here:
Mobile Graphics Cards - Benchmark List - Notebookcheck.net Tech

My advice: I would honestly just go with the 21.5 in iMac unless you want the 27 in screen, in which case I suggest bumping up to the 1999 model that has the 6970m in it.
I just bought the 1999 model yesterday, and I can honestly say I spent about 2 weeks looking at every aspect of all the different iMacs.

Here's what I've basically come away with. The 6770m probably could do it at max settings, but probably not at native res. The real thing bogging the card down is the RAM, its only 512mb. Most PC's packing this card come with 1gb RAM. And recommended specs, according to the SC2 auto settings are that it should only be rendering high instead of ultra quality textures if theres only 512mb RAM on the card.

I haven't had a chance to install SC2 on it yet, but I likely will install it today and see how it goes. In the mean time I would poke around these forums and google/youtube, there's a lot out there on the gaming capabilities of these things.
Thank you for helping me, looked at the sites indicated by statistics I think that stands at a high level, but the ultra is in doubt it = / If you install the game please post here your gaming experience, what settings the game runs fine and what does not rotate. I live in Brazil and here the iMAC 27 "is sold for U.S. $ 3524.00. I have to think hard on which machine to invest and if it's worth.



Thank you so much. Looking at the statistics sites show that it is a good video card, but will work iff ultra setup that is still a doubt, even just watching to be sure. I'd like to buy the version of U $ 1,999.00, but I live here in Brazil and an iMAC 27 is not sold for less than R $ 3,500.00
So I have to search much, if you can install Starcraft 2 post here your gaming experience, which resolutions and settings that you used and what were the results.

I'll be waiting for your reply.

Thank you.
QUOTE Thanks
StMFA

 
Member Since: Jun 06, 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 223
StMFA will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: 2011 27in iMac i5 3.1GHz, AMD 6970, iPhone 4, Wi-Fi iPad 2

StMFA is offline
Will do. Although in the meantime I can say this. My old rig was an AMD Athlon X2 2.5GHz with an Nvidia 8800gt 512mb, 4gb RAM playing on a 1680x1050 monitor. That ran the campaign flawlessly at native res on all high settings at approximately 30-40 fps in Windows 7. I will see how it performs on the 6970, but my guess is that on the 6770m the res and the texture setting may be the only things that you'd have to turn down, but if you get the 21.5 in iMac with the exact same specs you may eliminate the res problem.
QUOTE Thanks
StMFA

 
Member Since: Jun 06, 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 223
StMFA will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: 2011 27in iMac i5 3.1GHz, AMD 6970, iPhone 4, Wi-Fi iPad 2

StMFA is offline
So I just tried out SC2 on my mac, running everything maxed out and at native res. Played a campaign game at 30+ fps. One thing I did notice was that the hyperion cinematics and going between the lab,armory, etc. only rendered at about 20fps. Any other questions feel free to fire away.
QUOTE Thanks
lonewolf

 
lonewolf's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 06, 2011
Location: California
Posts: 11
lonewolf is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: MacBook Pro 13.3 2.4Ghz C2D 8GB Corsair X128 128GB SSD, iBook G4 1.2Ghz 1.25GB RAM

lonewolf is offline
I've been a bit curious about this too. The problem with SC 2 benchmarks is that everyone has their own replay file. The use of a replay file may skew the bench results anyway, simply due to the fact that the CPU isn't having to actually calculate pathing and such.

That said, I ran some tests at native res on a 27" 2011 6770m (2560x1440) with 12GB of RAM. I did shut down any misc programs running, but I didn't go so far as to shut down any 'extra' stuff I have that always runs, like bonjour or plex media manager.

With extreme and ultra settings on a replay at 2x speed, which gave an FPS of 18-21. It didn't seem to make a lot of different how much was going on on the screen, and there was no discerenable difference between ultra and extreme.

At High settings native res, it was slightly faster. I was running between 19 and 22 fps.

At Medium suddenly the FPS stayed at 29 most of the time, with a range of 27-31. This was perfectly smooth gameplay imo.

None of these are really 'unplayable' for an RTS type game, but I think the medium / native 2580x1440 res or dropping down to 1920x1080 at the ultra settings yields the best gameplay on this particular iMac. To be honest, I cannot see much difference between 1920x1080 and 2580x1440 within the game. The difference is startling on the OS X desktop though.

-------------------------------------
MacBook Pro 13.3 2.4Ghz C2D 8GB RAM
Corsair X128 128GB SSD
iMac 2011 27" i5 2.7Ghz 12GB Ram 1TB HDD
QUOTE Thanks
StMFA

 
Member Since: Jun 06, 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 223
StMFA will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: 2011 27in iMac i5 3.1GHz, AMD 6970, iPhone 4, Wi-Fi iPad 2

StMFA is offline
I have to say that all i did was a shortcut (cmd shft f) and it displayed the fps rate in the top right. For me it was typically in the range of 40-55 when static, dropping down to about 33 when I moved the cursor or when there was a ton of action going.
QUOTE Thanks
Faiska

 
Member Since: Jun 16, 2011
Posts: 4
Faiska is on a distinguished road

Faiska is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by StMFA View Post
Will do. Although in the meantime I can say this. My old rig was an AMD Athlon X2 2.5GHz with an Nvidia 8800gt 512mb, 4gb RAM playing on a 1680x1050 monitor. That ran the campaign flawlessly at native res on all high settings at approximately 30-40 fps in Windows 7. I will see how it performs on the 6970, but my guess is that on the 6770m the res and the texture setting may be the only things that you'd have to turn down, but if you get the 21.5 in iMac with the exact same specs you may eliminate the res problem.
I understood, I believe it will work the way I'm imagining. Thank you. But it does not work in the SC2 Ultra Settings believe it worth buying an iMAC 27 "design is fantastic and it is also apple.!
QUOTE Thanks
Faiska

 
Member Since: Jun 16, 2011
Posts: 4
Faiska is on a distinguished road

Faiska is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by lonewolf View Post
I've been a bit curious about this too. The problem with SC 2 benchmarks is that everyone has their own replay file. The use of a replay file may skew the bench results anyway, simply due to the fact that the CPU isn't having to actually calculate pathing and such.

That said, I ran some tests at native res on a 27" 2011 6770m (2560x1440) with 12GB of RAM. I did shut down any misc programs running, but I didn't go so far as to shut down any 'extra' stuff I have that always runs, like bonjour or plex media manager.

With extreme and ultra settings on a replay at 2x speed, which gave an FPS of 18-21. It didn't seem to make a lot of different how much was going on on the screen, and there was no discerenable difference between ultra and extreme.

At High settings native res, it was slightly faster. I was running between 19 and 22 fps.

At Medium suddenly the FPS stayed at 29 most of the time, with a range of 27-31. This was perfectly smooth gameplay imo.

None of these are really 'unplayable' for an RTS type game, but I think the medium / native 2580x1440 res or dropping down to 1920x1080 at the ultra settings yields the best gameplay on this particular iMac. To be honest, I cannot see much difference between 1920x1080 and 2580x1440 within the game. The difference is startling on the OS X desktop though.
Guys want to thank everyone for their cooperation in helping me. I do not mind playing at 2556x1440, 1900x1080 believe it's good to play, you were not the first to tell me that it makes no difference in the game in 2556x1440 resolution.

Currently my PC is:

I5 760 2.8 Ghz
Kingston 8 GB DDR 3
GTX 460 1GB DDR 5
1TB HD
Monitor 23 "E2350 - LG

My only fear is to replace my PC which is great for me and I invested only R$2,380 (U$ 1.190 ) on another computer that is much more expensive R$7399,00 ( U$3699,00) and does not meet my expectations.

These prices is because I live here in Brazil and unfortunately due to the high taxes it is much more expensive.

But I think it's worth buying the iMac 27 ". I will work twice as hard to buy one. It's more than one need is a desire.

Thanks Again.
QUOTE Thanks
StMFA

 
Member Since: Jun 06, 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 223
StMFA will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: 2011 27in iMac i5 3.1GHz, AMD 6970, iPhone 4, Wi-Fi iPad 2

StMFA is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by lonewolf View Post
I've been a bit curious about this too. The problem with SC 2 benchmarks is that everyone has their own replay file. The use of a replay file may skew the bench results anyway, simply due to the fact that the CPU isn't having to actually calculate pathing and such.

That said, I ran some tests at native res on a 27" 2011 6770m (2560x1440) with 12GB of RAM. I did shut down any misc programs running, but I didn't go so far as to shut down any 'extra' stuff I have that always runs, like bonjour or plex media manager.

With extreme and ultra settings on a replay at 2x speed, which gave an FPS of 18-21. It didn't seem to make a lot of different how much was going on on the screen, and there was no discerenable difference between ultra and extreme.

At High settings native res, it was slightly faster. I was running between 19 and 22 fps.

At Medium suddenly the FPS stayed at 29 most of the time, with a range of 27-31. This was perfectly smooth gameplay imo.

None of these are really 'unplayable' for an RTS type game, but I think the medium / native 2580x1440 res or dropping down to 1920x1080 at the ultra settings yields the best gameplay on this particular iMac. To be honest, I cannot see much difference between 1920x1080 and 2580x1440 within the game. The difference is startling on the OS X desktop though.
If you do a ctrl alt f while in game it brings up an fps counter in the top left corner, that's how I did it. I played through the last quarter of SC2 with that on and it basically played at maxed out settings at 30-50 fps easily. Don't know if that actually makes a dif.
QUOTE Thanks
Housekat

 
Housekat's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 14, 2011
Location: Iowa
Posts: 76
Housekat is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: 2010 27 iMac 2.93

Housekat is offline
Quick question, does your current computer GTX 460 have a mini display port adapter on the card? Technically you can buy the cheapest 27 iMac and plug your current gaming computer into it. You would get both audio and video on your iMac with that setup, than you can just keyboard shortcut back to OSX whenever. So you get the elegance of a iMac and gaming power of a PC all in one.

iMac 2.93 i7 8GB 5750
2010 Macbook 2.4 intel Core 2 Duo 4GB
iPhone 4S 16GB & iPhone 4S 32GB
iPad 16GB
QUOTE Thanks
StMFA

 
Member Since: Jun 06, 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 223
StMFA will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: 2011 27in iMac i5 3.1GHz, AMD 6970, iPhone 4, Wi-Fi iPad 2

StMFA is offline
Actually, you can't. The newest iMacs require a thunderbolt to thunderbolt connection, until the adapters like the Kanex XD and such are updated. However if you got a refurb 2010 iMac that would work.
QUOTE Thanks
chscag

 
chscag's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 23, 2008
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 39,076
chscag has a reputation beyond reputechscag has a reputation beyond reputechscag has a reputation beyond reputechscag has a reputation beyond reputechscag has a reputation beyond reputechscag has a reputation beyond reputechscag has a reputation beyond reputechscag has a reputation beyond reputechscag has a reputation beyond reputechscag has a reputation beyond reputechscag has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 27" iMac i5, 3.2 GHz, iPad 3, iPhone 5c, 3 iPods, OS X Mavericks

chscag is offline
I thought the Thunderbolt port was backward compatible with the mini display port. Going from MDP to MDP should work as well, unless I have been misinformed.
QUOTE Thanks
Housekat

 
Housekat's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 14, 2011
Location: Iowa
Posts: 76
Housekat is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: 2010 27 iMac 2.93

Housekat is offline
Just found the article, guess thats the newest change iMac (Mid 2011): Target Display Mode does not work with Mini DisplayPort cable

iMac 2.93 i7 8GB 5750
2010 Macbook 2.4 intel Core 2 Duo 4GB
iPhone 4S 16GB & iPhone 4S 32GB
iPad 16GB
QUOTE Thanks

Post Reply New Thread Subscribe


« Trouble using the MacPro | Mac pro seems a bit slow »
Thread Tools

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting 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
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Apple Pulls Plug on Original iMac schweb Apple Rumors and Reports 7 09-13-2006 04:38 PM
Is it worth to switch from iMac G4 to iMac G5?? Mainyehc Apple Desktops 12 03-13-2006 06:21 PM
Maximum RAM Size IMac 233 marcbyron Apple Desktops 5 02-17-2004 04:03 PM
setting up imac for airport chris041067 Internet, Networking, and Wireless 0 01-03-2004 01:31 AM
setting up imac for airport chris041067 Internet, Networking, and Wireless 0 01-03-2004 01:29 AM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:54 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
X

Welcome to Mac-Forums.com

Create your username to jump into the discussion!

New members like you have made this community the ultimate source for your Mac since 2003!


(4 digit year)

Already a member?