Hi all, I'm a proud new owner of a 2.2 Ghz SR MBP and I love it! I downloaded the UT 2004 demo and was very dissapointed with its performance... I'm guessing it's not a universal binary. Has anyone played UT2004 on a MBP? How does it run? I'd really like to get the game, but only if plays smoothly. Thanks!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
UT 2004 on SR MBP
- Thread starter itshungarian912
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think you are correct about UT2k4 Demo not being a universal binary. I know that the retail UT2k4 is a UB and runs pretty well from what a friend has said, and it better when I can run it very well on my G4. You might want to wait for another reply, but my guess is that you will not run into any problems on the SR MBP.
I constantly play UT2004 on my MBP, it runs excellent, I totally recommend it to you considering that your machine has way better specs than mine. Just make sure to download the UB.
For referece I have a 1.83CD MBP with 2Gb ram and 128v X1600.
For referece I have a 1.83CD MBP with 2Gb ram and 128v X1600.
runs fine on my ibook g4. i had to lower the resolution to 800 and do some .ini tweaks though
there's a lot of stuff on how to increase ut2004 performance that is for both pcs and macs out there. and there are a lot of good trade offs in terms of sacrificing quality for performance.
for better fun, try only using the touchpad, and no mouse. i can play against adept bots that way
if you want the game, get it and install the universal binary patch. the performance will be increased a lot, and it will play smooth.
there's a lot of stuff on how to increase ut2004 performance that is for both pcs and macs out there. and there are a lot of good trade offs in terms of sacrificing quality for performance.
for better fun, try only using the touchpad, and no mouse. i can play against adept bots that way
if you want the game, get it and install the universal binary patch. the performance will be increased a lot, and it will play smooth.
yeah i've been getting the same problem with UT2004 demo, as well as a variety of other game demos for OSX, like COD2, and Halo1 demo. bottom line is they all run like crap, i.e. under 20fps, which is inexplicable by the hardware that we're running them on. i read somewehre it's because the demo versions are not universal binary? but why not? if i was downloading them witht he intention of buying the game in the end, i certainly wouldn't buy it after getting performance like that.. so why wouldn't they make the demo representative of what you'd actually get....??? doesn't that make more sense?
it's kind of reassuring that the fps difference goes from 20 on lowest settings to about 10-15 on highest settings with all the games... so i was quite sure it wasn't to do with the machine... because of the inproportionate difference in performance
it's kind of reassuring that the fps difference goes from 20 on lowest settings to about 10-15 on highest settings with all the games... so i was quite sure it wasn't to do with the machine... because of the inproportionate difference in performance
It wouldn't make financial sense to devote personnel resources to re-release a demo as UB, when the full versions are less than 20 dollars (Canadian dollars at that - I got UT2004 for 10 dollars) at most retailers.
Look above, these games run fine on G4s. The full version will run at full speed on an intel with the respective UB patch. Old shooters don't need a demo because anyone willing to buy the game, will know what they are getting themselves into.
wait a second...
if the UT2004 demo wasn't universal binary then why does it say universal binary on the apple website download page... -_-"????
same with the cod2 demo and the ut2003 demo...
really bizzare
if the UT2004 demo wasn't universal binary then why does it say universal binary on the apple website download page... -_-"????
same with the cod2 demo and the ut2003 demo...
really bizzare
Because the game is a UB.
To the OP: just get it, I can assure you it will run perfectly. Seriously.
The demo was made before Universal Binary code came out (before the Intel transition). The game has since been updated, but the demo hasn't because nobody pays for a demo.
OMG! You are the greatest, i am downloading the demo now, will see it when i get back 2morrow morning, will let you know how things worked out! Thanks a lot in advance
It is not working (yet) I get an error when i open the application, will try again in the evening.
Screenshot attached, which sais, You cannot open Unreal Tournament 2004.app because it is possibly damaged or incomplete.
Greetz
Step 5. Rename the alias
I neglected this important part. In addition to renaming the .app to "Unreal Tournament 2004" from "Unreal Tournament 2004 Demo", you have to do the same to an alias within the .app package. So go ahead and navigate inside the Unreal Tournament 2004.app and go to /Contents/MacOS folder. There will be a file there. It is an alias for the actual executable which is /system/ut-2004-bin. Remove the "Demo" from the end of the name of the alias. It should now just say "Unreal Tournament 2004", just like the .app file. All should work fine and run by now. At this point, you really are done.
If you do not rename this alias, you'll get a message saying:
You cannot open the application "Unreal Tournament 2004.app" because it may be damaged or incomplete.
The demo was playable in Rosetta for my Mac mini, the UB runs quite well on my Mac mini Intel Duo. If I can run it with my evil GMA 950, your fancy Nvidia/ATi can run it
I have a 2.2 SR MBP, and I bought the Unreal Tournament 2004 retail version, and downloaded the universal binary patch.
I have all settings turned up to max I think, and when there aren't enemies around, it's around 150-200 fps, and with a lot of enemies running around, it's in the 70-100 fps range. Pretty decent I'd say.
I have all settings turned up to max I think, and when there aren't enemies around, it's around 150-200 fps, and with a lot of enemies running around, it's in the 70-100 fps range. Pretty decent I'd say.
Why would you want a QX6800 when you have Quad or Octo Xeons?
About the 8800 though, I agree
I'd take a desktop processor anyday, but the Xeons are ideal for what the Mac Pro has to do. (Don't you need FB-DIMMs for Xeons?)
QX6850 <3 even a Q6600 and OC the hell out of it
FB-DIMMs aside a Xeon will beat a Core 2 Quad in terms of performance, reliability and overclocking. Sure you always have to use FB-DIMMs with Xeons but the performance difference is not so big in memory performance (at least not big enough to be dreaming about having another processor), as far as CPU performance alone goes though, I'll pick a Xeon over any Core 2 any day.
Why do you think socket 939 Opterons were such a bomb among enthusiasts? Because they could be used with regular consumer memory and were a much better choice than an Athlon for the same price.