World of Warcraft Concerns

[BuCkDoG]

Hello everyone. I recently purchased a Retina MacBook Pro (Early 2013) with the 2.7 Quad i7, 16GB RAM, and 512 SSD (SanDisk). I am curious as to how it runs on World of Warcraft. I would really like to know how the expected performance is at Retina Resolution (2880x1800), the expected CPU and GPU temps, a comparison in Mac as compared to Windows, and as well as the stability of the game running on the GT 650M. Seeing how the GT 650M is over clocked by default, I am anticipating that it should run fine, however much of that GT 650M is spent driving the Retina resolution. If anyone has any information that would be willing the lend and hand and assist me this would be wonderful.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Well... I don't have WoW installed on my rMBP. However, Kerbal Space Program (my favorite!) and the other games I have on here don't "see" the 2560x1600 display, but rather recognize a "1280x800" display that the OS pretends it has. (I guess applications have to be "retina aware" or something.)

I'd assume it'd be the same for WoW - the game would simply operate at pixel-doubled 1440x900 under default circumstances. Kinda like when you run an older app on a Retina iPad. It automatically pixel-doubles and doesn't look any different.

If you've used SwitchResX to enable native resolution, or if you're gaming in Windows, then you'd have the option of ultra-high-res gaming. But I probably wouldn't bother with that. There are a few complaints in the Apple forums about stuttery gameplay and overheating. And I've had some... uncomfortableness while running my rMBP at full-tilt, 100% load too. (Even just the CPU.)

 

[joshhedge]

Dave, I have found some games, such as Borderlands 2 and Tropico 3 only allow you to play at the maximum resolution that you have set as your resolution for the panel through settings. Could be why you're having issues with the "1280x800", as I'm able to play KSP at "1920x1200".

I've had a friend play WoW on my rPro off his external drive, and it runs perfectly fine at maximum settings at "1920x1200" within 30-60FPS. Didn't notice any significant slow downs in raids. Hope that helps.

 

[BuCkDoG]

Dave, I have found some games, such as Borderlands 2 and Tropico 3 only allow you to play at the maximum resolution that you have set as your resolution for the panel through settings. Could be why you're having issues with the "1280x800", as I'm able to play KSP at "1920x1200".

I've had a friend play WoW on my rPro off his external drive, and it runs perfectly fine at maximum settings at "1920x1200" within 30-60FPS. Didn't notice any significant slow downs in raids. Hope that helps.

Thanks Josh I appreciate it!

 

[ChAoTiCpInOy]

What do you mean 512GB Sandisk? Did you upgrade the SSD yourself?

 

[UaVaj]

with a 650m
at native 2880x1800 (5.2MP). it will be a turtle. unless you like low/medium setting.
at pixelated/interpolated 1440 x 900 (1.2MP). it will do ultra setting with playable fps.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-650M.71887.0.html

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Apple-MacBook-Pro-15-Retina-2-3-GHz-Mid-2012.78959.0.html

 

[BuCkDoG]

What do you mean 512GB Sandisk? Did you upgrade the SSD yourself?

First off, you can upgrade the SSD yourself. Various 3rd party vendors e.g.(OWC) makes a 480GB SSD for the rMBP. All you need to do is disconnect a couple connectors and slide the new one in. Its actually very simple. Everything else though, unfortunately is soldered onto the Logic Board so your hands are tied everywhere else. The reason why I mention SanDisk though is because the 1st generation of Retina MacBook Pros (Mid 2012) were shipping with a SamSung SSD (PM 830). Since the Early 2013 refresh, Apple make the move to SanDisk SSD's. They are slightly slower than the SamSung and the Firmware isn't as good under OSX as the SamSung, so thats why I felt the need to mention it to let people aware of what the hardware is.

@UaVaj: So after downloading and doing some testing on the 650M, I can honestly say that it handles the game pretty nicely, especially under OSX. During regular gameplay on good settings on 2880x1800, I would get a consistent 40-60 FPS. In my opinion, thats very good for that type of performance. Even in a 25 man raid, with the same settings, depending on the scenario, I am able to get a consistent 30 FPS although some cinematic heavy scenes drop it down to 20 but will climb back up to around 30. If I try to crack up the settings to High or Ultra, Forget it. You're looking at 20FPS or Lower. Its about a 10 FPS drop per upgrade in GPU settings. If you crank down the Resolution though, you can easily run those High and Ultra Settings without a question. You just cannot get the best of both worlds yet unfortunately. Overall though, Im pretty impressed for this type of performance from a Mid Level mobile GPU.

 

[Mushkins]

@UaVaj: So after downloading and doing some testing on the 650M, I can honestly say that it handles the game pretty nicely, especially under OSX. During regular gameplay on good settings on 2880x1800, I would get a consistent 40-60 FPS. In my opinion, thats very good for that type of performance. Even in a 25 man raid, with the same settings, depending on the scenario, I am able to get a consistent 30 FPS although some cinematic heavy scenes drop it down to 20 but will climb back up to around 30. If I try to crack up the settings to High or Ultra, Forget it. You're looking at 20FPS or Lower. Its about a 10 FPS drop per upgrade in GPU settings. If you crank down the Resolution though, you can easily run those High and Ultra Settings without a question. You just cannot get the best of both worlds yet unfortunately. Overall though, Im pretty impressed for this type of performance from a Mid Level mobile GPU.

WoW is not a very graphically intensive game, it's all about the CPU. Even with all the graphical updates over the years, it's still very much a 10 year old game when it comes to graphics. Low poly count models, low res textures, etc. The real graphical hit is the skill effects that have been made mostly current, which is why even a crappy PC will fly through town with 200 people on screen, but chug to a crawl when 25 people in a closed space start spamming spells on a boss. I've run WoW on laptops with old Intel 2000 integrated graphics that literally give the "you dont meet the system requirements" warning on install and still configured it to be reasonably playable even in a raid. The better your CPU, the more tolerant the game is even with crappy graphics, its all gamestates and netcode really.

 

[BuCkDoG]

WoW is not a very graphically intensive game, it's all about the CPU. Even with all the graphical updates over the years, it's still very much a 10 year old game when it comes to graphics. Low poly count models, low res textures, etc. The real graphical hit is the skill effects that have been made mostly current, which is why even a crappy PC will fly through town with 200 people on screen, but chug to a crawl when 25 people in a closed space start spamming spells on a boss. I've run WoW on laptops with old Intel 2000 integrated graphics that literally give the "you dont meet the system requirements" warning on install and still configured it to be reasonably playable even in a raid. The better your CPU, the more tolerant the game is even with crappy graphics, its all gamestates and netcode really.

Thanks for the input. I find that interesting. I understand your logic behind that and it makes sense. However, I typically find my 2.7 quad i7 running around only 10-15 total CPU usage for wow period which includes add-ons. If it is was such a huge CPU intensive game, why wouldn't it use more of the CPU to allocate for the mid level GPU? I mean i do get where you are coming from but I'm curious as to why thats the case.

 

[UaVaj]

WoW is not a very graphically intensive game, it's all about the CPU. Even with all the graphical updates over the years, it's still very much a 10 year old game when it comes to graphics. Low poly count models, low res textures, etc. The real graphical hit is the skill effects that have been made mostly current, which is why even a crappy PC will fly through town with 200 people on screen, but chug to a crawl when 25 people in a closed space start spamming spells on a boss. I've run WoW on laptops with old Intel 2000 integrated graphics that literally give the "you dont meet the system requirements" warning on install and still configured it to be reasonably playable even in a raid. The better your CPU, the more tolerant the game is even with crappy graphics, its all gamestates and netcode really.

you are right regarding wow's cpu utilization however you are totally missing the point regarding gpu utilization.

wow's cpu utilization is piss poor and will never fully utilize a multi core (even if blizzard say it is full multicore supported). assuming there is "no" limitation elsewhere. at any give time only 1.5 core is being used. even in 25man+ raid. hard press to see 2.5 core maxed out.

so to have better graphic (high setting and especially ultra setting), that will demand a little more cpu clocks to process those higher textures. limited cpu clocks which must be allocated from those 2.5 cores.

-----

for your explanation. slower cpu and fast enough gpu. with the slower cpu. fps will only drop mimimally regardless of game setting (ultra included) due to the fact that now - the cpu has to process those higher textures. not become unplayable as in the op's senario. gpu is constantly waiting on the cpu.

as for the op situation. fast cpu and slower gpu. given the resolution. the limiting factor here is clearly not the i7. it is the 650m. hence good setting is marginal/playable and high setting is unplayable and ultra out of the question. clearly an indication of gpu limitation. gpu is unable to process the textures sent from the cpu. cpu is constantly waiting on the gpu.

 

[UaVaj]

@UaVaj: So after downloading and doing some testing on the 650M, I can honestly say that it handles the game pretty nicely, especially under OSX. During regular gameplay on good settings on 2880x1800, I would get a consistent 40-60 FPS. In my opinion, thats very good for that type of performance. Even in a 25 man raid, with the same settings, depending on the scenario, I am able to get a consistent 30 FPS although some cinematic heavy scenes drop it down to 20 but will climb back up to around 30. If I try to crack up the settings to High or Ultra, Forget it. You're looking at 20FPS or Lower. Its about a 10 FPS drop per upgrade in GPU settings. If you crank down the Resolution though, you can easily run those High and Ultra Settings without a question. You just cannot get the best of both worlds yet unfortunately. Overall though, Im pretty impressed for this type of performance from a Mid Level mobile GPU.

what matter most is. that performance is acceptable to you. good you are impressed.

to play with ultra setting. simply drop the resolution.

on such a small display (unless you are playing externaly). there is reallie no need for 2880x1880. that is simply apple marketing. not typical every day usage. at desktop/laptop viewing distance, with the exepeption of the few self claimed elite, the normal human eye cannot distinguish below 0.25mm dot pitch.

 

[Mushkins]

Thanks for the input. I find that interesting. I understand your logic behind that and it makes sense. However, I typically find my 2.7 quad i7 running around only 10-15 total CPU usage for wow period which includes add-ons. If it is was such a huge CPU intensive game, why wouldn't it use more of the CPU to allocate for the mid level GPU? I mean i do get where you are coming from but I'm curious as to why thats the case.

There's a couple things going on here. It's not a shared resource pool between the CPU and the GPU, and it can't just send GPU instructions over to unused CPU if its over-utilized. If your graphics are set too high, the CPU is now sitting there twiddling its thumbs while the GPU is struggling to keep up. They don't share tasks, but they both need to be ready to move forward each step of the way and will wait on each other. If one is causing a bottleneck, the other will not be fully utilized just to sit there waiting.

Likewise, if you have any framerate limiting going on (vsync), if you're currently at the framerate cap it's not going to use any more CPU/GPU power than it needs to keep it there.

Most of WoWs engine is also 10 year old code despite the updates, it'll never see real multicore optimizations without a ground-up redesign. This is precisely why intel's strong single-threaded performance has been outshining AMD for gaming performance in recent years. "Moar Cores" does not mean the program is going to put those cores to work in any meaningful way.