Doubt. Starcraft 2 iMac 27 runs at maximum setting?

Joined
Jun 16, 2011
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
1
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.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Messages
7,163
Reaction score
275
Points
83
Location
UK
Your Mac's Specs
Mac Mini i5 (2014 High Sierra), iPhone X, Apple Watch, iPad Pro 12.9, AppleTV (4)
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.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
223
Reaction score
2
Points
18
Location
NYC
Your Mac's Specs
2011 27in iMac i5 3.1GHz, AMD 6970, iPhone 4, Wi-Fi iPad 2
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.
 
OP
F
Joined
Jun 16, 2011
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
1
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!!!!!

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.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
223
Reaction score
2
Points
18
Location
NYC
Your Mac's Specs
2011 27in iMac i5 3.1GHz, AMD 6970, iPhone 4, Wi-Fi iPad 2
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.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
223
Reaction score
2
Points
18
Location
NYC
Your Mac's Specs
2011 27in iMac i5 3.1GHz, AMD 6970, iPhone 4, Wi-Fi iPad 2
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.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
13
Reaction score
1
Points
3
Location
California
Your Mac's Specs
MacBook Pro 13.3 2.4Ghz C2D 8GB Corsair X128 128GB SSD, iBook G4 1.2Ghz 1.25GB RAM
iMac 27" 6770m

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.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
223
Reaction score
2
Points
18
Location
NYC
Your Mac's Specs
2011 27in iMac i5 3.1GHz, AMD 6970, iPhone 4, Wi-Fi iPad 2
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.
 
OP
F
Joined
Jun 16, 2011
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
1
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.!
 
OP
F
Joined
Jun 16, 2011
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
1
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.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
223
Reaction score
2
Points
18
Location
NYC
Your Mac's Specs
2011 27in iMac i5 3.1GHz, AMD 6970, iPhone 4, Wi-Fi iPad 2
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.
 
Joined
May 14, 2011
Messages
76
Reaction score
1
Points
8
Location
Iowa
Your Mac's Specs
2010 27 iMac 2.93
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.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
223
Reaction score
2
Points
18
Location
NYC
Your Mac's Specs
2011 27in iMac i5 3.1GHz, AMD 6970, iPhone 4, Wi-Fi iPad 2
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.
 

chscag

Well-known member
Staff member
Admin
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Messages
65,248
Reaction score
1,833
Points
113
Location
Keller, Texas
Your Mac's Specs
2017 27" iMac, 10.5" iPad Pro, iPhone 8, iPhone 11, iPhone 12 Mini, Numerous iPods, Monterey
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.
 

Shop Amazon


Shop for your Apple, Mac, iPhone and other computer products on Amazon.
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.
Top