Bought the pro 13" macbook, what kind of performance can i expect

hi mac chads i see a bit on the air but has anyone tried the pro and seen how that does

i just ordered one

sorry if someone posted about it already
i heard about mini and air but not macbook pro

I have the M1 pro 13’’. I play wow on max graphics with 60fps, personally.

kewl, is that native resolution? or nah

How did you turn off the 30FPS lock? I’m running a 13" MBP M1 and can’t go above 30. I already ran /console maxFPSBk 30 and /console maxFPS 60… but nothing seems to have changed.

I’ve got mine now too
it ran uncapped fps out of the box for me

1 Like

What frame rates are you seeing? At first I heard a lot of good responses, but now seeing worse reports.

Just kinda trying to see what’s really going on. I am playing on. Mac mini with an eGPU so either way, it would probably be a side grade move for me. But trading in my tablet and my Mac would cover most of the cost for a MacBook Air…

i know this is the easy answer but “it varies”
you can run native rez fairly well on medium settings but as expected the raids and such are going to drop it. probably better to go to 1080p for rock solid 60 fps

1 Like

ok I have to say after playing a while I get worse results
the mb seems to throttle after a while and can’t maintain 60

I have the mini and I keep my settings on Good, with maximum ground clutter (I love it). I have my frame rate capped at 60FPS as there’s no point in having it higher.

I get very good, steady FPS at 2048x1152 full screen. The game looks gorgeous. And the mini gets barely warm. I mean BARELY while I’m playing.

You will love it. I’m very happy with my mini and the game.

1 Like

Change your settings to cap FPS at 60. Adjust the other graphics settings to a level that doesn’t make it throttle.

Okay guys, here are my graphics settings. I’m on the M1 Mac mini and I get very consistent 60 FPS all the time.

2048x1152 full screen

Graphics Quality: 6

Anti-Aliasing: Off
Vertical Sync: Enabled

Texture resolution: High
Spell Density: Dynamic
Projected Textures: Enabled

View Distance: 5
Environmental Detail: 5
Ground Clutter: 10

Shadow Quality: Good
Liquid Detail: Good
Sunshafts: Disabled
Particle Density: Good
SSAO: Good
Depth Effects: Good
Outline Mode: Disabled.

When you say “2k” resolution, are you talking about 2560 x 1440 or 3440 x 1440?

4k is 8,294,400 pixels.
3440 x 1440 is 4,953,600 pixels.
2560 x 1440 is 3,686,400 pixels.
2560 * 1080 is 2,764,800 pixels.

I’m running 3440 x 1440 on a hackintosh and am figuring out if I want to grab a mini and eliminate some of the hassle, but there’s a big difference between these in terms of pixels needing to be pushed.

2048x1152 full screen.

Remember that you can always return the mini within 14 days if you don’t like it.

OK that’s less than half the pixels I’m pushing. Thanks for letting me know.

No problem, you are very welcome. Good luck with whatever you decide.

BTW, just for the heck of it, I changed the resolution to 3840 x 2160 and the frame rate I was getting with the settings listed above was around 28 FPS.

I hope that helps give you a better idea of what to expect. I did not try lowering any of the settings, but you could probably get a higher rate with less stuff on the ground, etc.

Edit: I turned off SSAO and the frame rate jumped to around 40 FPS. So that made a big difference.

Edit 2: With SSAO off, I can run it at 3008 x 1692 and get around 60 FPS while I was in Agthia’s Repose.

Edit 3: So you can see from this info that if you get a mini, you won’t be able to run WOW with all graphics maxed out, but you can still get a very good experience. The way I see it, this computer cost 700 bucks, and I’ll probably sell or trade it in when the new one comes out in 2022. Between now and then I get a very good WOW play experience, with little to no configuration or maintenance headaches.

Yeah I’m thinking the same. I’m either making some upgrades to my hackintosh or getting a mini. Literally the cost of components for my hack are going to cost far more than a mini (but run at ultra) and suck a ton of juice in comparison.

I just wish Apple would add egpu support to the m1, and it would be a no brainer.

I don’t blame you, I would not want to be bothered with a Hackintosh though I love the idea. I don’t have the patience for it.

I have read that the mini can see the EGPU but can’t load it because it needs a driver or something like that. Check the MacRumors forum or just do a general DDG search. So I believe it might be supported in the future though I have no idea when.

But if you can get by with the settings the mini can run, you will enjoy it. Plus I’m sure we’ll see an upgrade coming at some point too. For 700 bucks, it’s a cheap and easy way to run WOW.

Incidentally, you will also be able to run some iPadOS apps too. That is still early, but eventually you might be running those games on your Mac mini too.

Edit: Found this:

" [As iDownloadBlog reported]) a few days ago, the new Apple Silicon-powered M1 Macs do not support external GPUs (eGPU), but that could be a temporary hiccup. That’s because macOS Big Sur has bee discovered to detect a connected eGPU over Thunderbolt 3, although it’s not exposed to the user or actually accessible for compute and graphics tasks.

According to tests conducted by [Mac4Ever], corroborated by [AppleInsider], the latest M1 MacBook Air, MacBook Pro and Mac mini models running macOS 11 Big Sur appear to detect both the connected eGPU enclosure along with the PCI-E card inside."

AppleInsider has more:

In plugging a Pro Display XDR into a Blackmagic eGPU inserted into a Thunderbolt 3 port, it was found the eGPU enclosure was still detected and functions. The display communicates with the MacBook Pro as normal, complete with video playback.

Additionally, AppleInsider has seen the Razer Core X and the Sonnet eGFX Breakaway Box identify itself properly to macOS with an assortment of cards, including the RX 590, Vega 64 and Radeon VII.

However, monitors connected directly the cards do nothing.

The Radeon 580 GPU included in the above enclosure isn’t actively being used for graphics acceleration, nor are any of the cards we’ve been testing. A lack of drivers is the most obvious reason for the lack of support, but oddities in how Apple has implemented Thunderbolt or external PCI-E addressing may also be contributing factors.

All of the above could be interpreted as a sign that although eGPU functionality is omitted from the initial Big Sur release, support may be coming in the future as an update to Big Sur.

Unless, of course, this is something that requires chip-level support, in which case a new M-series chip may be needed to enable eGPU support on future Apple Silicon Macs. Big Sur continues to support eGPUs on Intel-based Macs.