20 réponses à ce sujet

[daem3an]

Now that the mac version has been out for a while, I'd love to hear some feedback on how well it runs using the minimum specs that were posted (seeing as there were no 'recommended' specs).

Just curious, post your mac's specs here if you have a sec, what monitor resolution and settings you're running at and how well the game runs for you.

[garlic23]

Hi there,

I run the game on a slightly oldish MacBook Pro (2.5 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2 GB Ram, GeForce 8600M GT).

The video settings are: 

Resolution: 1024 x 768
Graphic-Detail: High
Anti-Aliasing: 2x
Texture-Detail: High
Framebuffer Effects On

The game is well playable with these settings as long as I'm outside of cities. Framerates get particulary miserable on Denerim Market Place when playing in third person view. 

[mandtmac]

This is somewhat related to your post:



http://www.macworld....ge_origins.html



In the article, the reviewer gives the specs on the machine he is using, as well as the game's performance on that system.

[daem3an]

Thanks for the link, he's running a MacBook Pro 2.66GHz (The article was decent, too).

[Dogmatic Atheist]

Mac Pro Dual Dual Core 2.66Ghz

8GB RAM

ATI Radeon 4870 512MB RAM



1920x1080 resolution, everything maxed out, 2XAA



Runs like a charm.

[RDustinC]

iMac 3.06 Core 2, 4gb Ram, NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS



Runs well enough I'd say. I thought it ran better than it was before I put the FPS counter on for sure! I get about 14-24 fps depending on if I'm in a town or dungeon.



Generally run at maxed out res for a 24" monitor (1900X1200 something or the like) and I have it on 2x ant, high textures and graphics, frame buffer on. If I turn off frame buffer I get almost a 10 fps boost, but the muddy color isn't worth it to me.



I generally don't see much difference if I max out everything given where I am (though I haven't played long enough on max settins), I will see a difference if I lower everything though, the FPS goes into the 20 range consistently . I'm not yet sure though how accurate the FPS counter is honestly.

[Bratt1204]

iMac8,1 / Intel Core Duo / 2.4 GHz / 3GB RAM / ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT.



Runs beautifully; no probs.



Going to add more RAM soon - just want to MAX it out

[Marvin_Arnold]

MacBook Pro Unibody, Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4 Ghz NVidia 9600M GT, everything maxed out except Graphics quality: High and 2x FSAA. High textures and Framebuffer.
Either on laptop monitor at 1440x900 or with 23'' Cinema Display at 1600x1000 (strange enough, runs smoother on external display...)
Framerate drops in Denerim Market, but is comfortable elsewhere.

Modifié par Marvin_Arnold, 05 mars 2010 - 10:03 .

[GirlyNerd]

I have an old early 2006 17" imac 1.83 GHz Intel Core Duo/ ATY,RadeonX1600/ 2 GB RAM

AKA one old ass mac.

I'm below the recommended stats. I have it on mostly the lower settings, and some scenes are choppy (for some reason the outdoor speaking scenes are the choppiest). The game is totally playable, I've already finished one play through and I'm working on a second. One of these days I'll shell out some $ and get me a better computer.

[mpat_]

iMac Core i7, Radeon 4850. Runs well with everything maxed at 2560*1440.



But then I guess it should.

[jkiller2]

macbook pro A1150 2.6Ghz w/ 2gig RAM and ATI X1600. Game ONLY works on lowest settings and it's unplayable at eye level when the characters are outside (i.e. only the top-down view works).

As it's basically the same age as GirlyNerd's comp but it's the laptop and not the imac, I'm interested to know why it's crappier on this unit. Granted the computer is at the very lowest end of the tech requirements, I think the game code could have still used a bit better wrapping before they ported it to the mac. Combine that with the lack of news, patches and DLC and I'm regretting the investment in the mac version.

Modifié par jkiller2, 14 février 2010 - 04:48 .

[RDustinC]

There is a rumored Snow Leopard update coming at any time now, so it will be interesting to see if there are any improvements with it. There is said to be a good deal of OpenGL tweaks, but I doubt they'll help DragonAge. Still, perhaps some new graphic drivers overall might.

[Supersirlink]

I have a mid 09 MBP 2.33GHz w/ 4 GB ram & GeForce 9400m and it runs ok at 1280x800 with the settings all the way down. Would seem to me that it should run better.

[Bicoid]

I'm playing DA on a Macbook Pro from 2006 (roughly six generations back, according to MacTracker!): 2.33 GHz C2D w/ 3 GB RAM, ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 w/256 MB RAM.



However, I run the game on the bare minimum setting: 1440x900 (native), both "details" set on low, anti-aliasing off, buffer effects (sadly) off. But the game's VERY playable, and I'm quite enjoying it.

[macdude22]

GirlyNerd wrote...

I have an old early 2006 17" imac 1.83 GHz Intel Core Duo/ ATY,RadeonX1600/ 2 GB RAM
AKA one old ass mac.
I'm below the recommended stats. I have it on mostly the lower settings, and some scenes are choppy (for some reason the outdoor speaking scenes are the choppiest). The game is totally playable, I've already finished one play through and I'm working on a second. One of these days I'll shell out some $ and get me a better computer.

I'm on a similar machine. I have the game on xBox but since Direct2Drive was running 50% off right now I bit the bullet to support Mac Games. It was a little of a shock to me how different the two versions play.

I've got a iMac
2.16 Ghz Core 2 Duo
128 MB x1600 (I think not having the 256 meg card is my limiting factor)
20" 1680x1050

I've been running it at 1280x800 on low settings and for the most part it's pretty smooth. Some more intense parts are defiantly chopping out but it's relatively playable.

I was going to install it on my MacBookPro but I've heard there are issues right now with DA and the 9400M

Aside from the performance. I think I enjoy the tactical capacity of the PC version more than the action oriented controls of the xBox version. But there is something "visceral" about the console builds. I'm not unhappy to have both versions now.

[Supersirlink]

How do you show the fps counter?

[Sandracat]

Model Name: Mac Pro

Model Identifier: MacPro1,1

Processor Name: Dual-Core Intel Xeon

Processor Speed: 2.66 GHz

Number Of Processors: 2

Total Number Of Cores: 4

L2 Cache (per processor): 4 MB

Memory: 5 GB



video card:ATI Radeon HD 4870



I have all the settings maxed, and it runs smooth, the graphics are beautiful.

[Supersirlink]

Anyone know how it runs on a geforce 120?

[Supersirlink]

I just got a MacPro with a GT120, have to say I'm not too impressed with this card's performance... Looks like I will be upgrading to at least the 4870...

[macdude22]

Supersirlink wrote...

I just got a MacPro with a GT120, have to say I'm not too impressed with this card's performance... Looks like I will be upgrading to at least the 4870...

Doesn't the 120 only have like 32 Stream Processors? I don't proport to know if that's good or not, other than the radeon 4770 in my winblows box has 640 stream processing units. My more video card savvy friend tells me more is better.

[Supersirlink]

Dont know. But I am looking to upgrade to a 4870 or gtx285.