13-Inch Retina MacBook Pro Benchmarks Confirm Late June Result Posting

[CausticPuppy]

Originally Posted by SteveyAppleSeed

I won't buy a rMBP (15") until at least Haswell. If the 13" will only ever have IGP, I would recommend waiting for the Broadwell version.

Yeah, the 2014 models will be SWEEEEET!

I'm holding out for the 2017 models though. They will make the Broadwell chips seem absolutely pokey by comparison.

[Delegator]

I can't see a justification for buying a 13" Retina MBP. The non-Retina edition with an after-market SSD and an upgrade to 16GB RAM will cost you $500 less than the 8GB RAM Retina version. Oh, and if you really want to lose the superdrive, you can double the SSD storage with third-party upgrades. The lack of upgradability of the Retina MBPs is pretty limiting.

And then you have integrated graphics driving 4 times as many pixels in the Retina version...sounds like a recipe for slower gaming and video performance to me.

With such a high price point, I just don't see where the 13" Retina MBP fits.

[jsl20]

Originally Posted by Delegator

With such a high price point, I just don't see where the 13" Retina MBP fits.

if you want to a 13 rMBP with a 256GB SSD its only £100 less than the base 15" rMBP. So for £100 you get a quad core CPU, dGPU and you can run at 1920x1080, if you want. Its just too closely priced to the 15" with a much worse spec.

the 15" version looks like a bargain now!

[jjhoekstra]

Originally Posted by CausticPuppy

Yeah, the 2014 models will be SWEEEEET!

I'm holding out for the 2017 models though. They will make the Broadwell chips seem absolutely pokey by comparison.

SWEEEET!!!

(and I am pretty sure I will be happy with my 15" retina till than...)

[Steve.P.JobsFan]

Originally Posted by CausticPuppy

Yeah, the 2014 models will be SWEEEEET!

I'm holding out for the 2017 models though. They will make the Broadwell chips seem absolutely pokey by comparison.

Yeah. When we have Skylake chips in 2017, and Skymont in 2018, it's going to be amazing. I just bought my Sandy Bridge iMac in February. I'm going to use it until I graduate high school in 2017. Then, I'm going to buy a Skylake-based Mac in 2017, and compare my 2017 Skylake iMac with my Mid-2011 Sandy Bridge iMac.

[CausticPuppy]

Originally Posted by Steve.P.JobsFan

Yeah. When we have Skylake chips in 2017, and Skymont in 2018, it's going to be amazing. I just bought my Sandy Bridge iMac in February. I'm going to use it until I graduate high school in 2017. Then, I'm going to buy a Skylake-based Mac in 2017, and compare my 2017 Skylake iMac with my Mid-2011 Sandy Bridge iMac.

Just wait until 2020 when the Cabbage chips are released. (in 2019, Intel will switch to a leafy-green-vegetable naming scheme)

[cbizzle102]

The specs in comparison to the 15inch are kind of weak in terms of discrete gpu and quad core. That being said, I was in the apple store today and IMHO the overall look of the 13 inch is much more sleek. Most people will not notice the speed differences with the apps they are running. Everybody in this forum seems to think only professional graphic and video editors purchase macs. Go take an intro to business course and you will understand the economics behind the price points. The 13 inch will without a doubt outsell the 15inch rMBP from November and on.
The macbook air does have amazing apple value, but the screen clarity difference between the two computers is quite astonishing. You dont need to be a graphics designer to appreciate the difference....just open up a pdf document online side by side and try reading both
And for all of those saying wait for the next model - when you go to buy that one, there will be a new breed of people telling you to wait for the next model after that.
If you need or want the computer, dont be a pus and pull the trigger...technology is always changing welcome to 2012

[Simmias]

Originally Posted by cbizzle102

To be honest I always considered it a waste of money to upgrade the hard drive. Why pay 200 more for 128gb of flash it makes no sense. Buy an external hard drive. If you have anything important on your computer you should be backing it up anyways.

I just don't understand this argument. If you want to store data such as your music or photo libraries on an external drive, then you really need TWO external drives - a primary copy and a backup copy. So now you need something like a Thunderbolt RAID drive, which start around $500-$600. And then you have to connect to an external drive to access your data and manage multiple libraries. It seems easier and not a whole lot more expensive to just upgrade the internal drive, or am I missing something?

[intz2nu]

Has anyone here noticed that the new 13" RMBP's are just a few percent thicker than the 15" models? seen it mentioned in the specs. Made me feel a little better about my full-spec 13" 2012 MBA purchase. Though I would love a RMBA if it was available.

[maccompatible]

Originally Posted by intz2nu

Has anyone here noticed that the new 13" RMBP's are just a few percent thicker than the 15" models? seen it mentioned in the specs. Made me feel a little better about my full-spec 13" 2012 MBA purchase. Though I would love a RMBA if it was available.

0.04" thicker, but a pound lighter, so who cares?

[cbizzle102]

Originally Posted by Simmias

I just don't understand this argument. If you want to store data such as your music or photo libraries on an external drive, then you really need TWO external drives - a primary copy and a backup copy. So now you need something like a Thunderbolt RAID drive, which start around $500-$600. And then you have to connect to an external drive to access your data and manage multiple libraries. It seems easier and not a whole lot more expensive to just upgrade the internal drive, or am I missing something?

Yeah you are right im just a n00b at externals

[Simmias]

Originally Posted by cbizzle102

Yeah you are right im just a n00b at externals

Not my point at all. You may be right that upgrading internal storage beyond 128GB or so is a waste of money for most people. Given that my music and photo libraries take up almost 128GB by themselves, I'm trying to understand how externals can easily replace internal storage.

It seems like the alternative to upgrading internal storage is to manage two or more external drives. This seems complicated to me. If there's a simple way to do this that eliminates the need for a bigger internal drive, I'd love to know and avoid having to pay a lot for a bigger internal SSD.

[kokako]

Good on you if you bought one of these because I'm sure it'll be a great mac!
But I was really hoping for similar specs to a 15" rMBP, dual instead of quad core is a bummer and that 8gb ram limitation is a bit of a let down, so the new 2012 MAC Mini is more of a powerhorse than this pro, for less than half the price too - then again it doesn't come with a screen .

I just dont see the Retina MACBOOK PROS as portable anymore too much weight. I'm fit, push weights and this is too much weight to be bothered to carry around all day.

People go on and on about how great their 13" MBA is and I'd believe it but if you haven't tried the 11" MBA for portability then you aint lived, thats the future because when you're not at home and on the move you want small and discrete which is why this 7" iPad Mini will be a bigger hit that the original 10".

11 and 13 MBA are where the MBP form factor needs to go,hopefully moving more toward the 11" MBA size but specwise it'll be awhile before they can get more power in that form factor.

[Moshu]

Originally Posted by kokako

Good on you if you bought one of these because I'm sure it'll be a great mac!
But I was really hoping for similar specs to a 15" rMBP, dual instead of quad core is a bummer and that 8gb ram limitation is a bit of a let down, so the new 2012 MAC Mini is more of a powerhorse than this pro, for less than half the price too - then again it doesn't come with a screen .

I just dont see the Retina MACBOOK PROS as portable anymore too much weight. I'm fit, push weights and this is too much weight to be bothered to carry around all day.

People go on and on about how great their 13" MBA is and I'd believe it but if you haven't tried the 11" MBA for portability then you aint lived, thats the future because when you're not at home and on the move you want small and discrete which is why this 7" iPad Mini will be a bigger hit that the original 10".

11 and 13 MBA are where the MBP form factor needs to go,hopefully moving more toward the 11" MBA size but specwise it'll be awhile before they can get more power in that form factor.

Too hard to work on a 13" for long periods... the 15" shall stay for a while.

To be honest I was looking at the 15" Retina MacBook Pro but then I realized it's the 1st iteration, there were not enough apps in July to take advantage of the Retina so i just went 13" air, as the standard Pro was too big and bulky.

But I have to say, my next laptop will be a 15" Retina MacBook (not sooner than 2014 though )

[dblissmn]

I don't think there's going to be that much difference going forward on the 15-inch models, other than that Apple will surely drop the arbitrary firmware preventing you from running external displays with integrated graphics. Maybe with each new update they'll run cooler and therefore put less wear and tear on your lap, your hands, the battery, etc.

The next two chip updates are going to be a big deal for those looking for computers with integrated graphics only, because that's where most of the performance gains are going to be concentrated. By Broadwell, you'll have something not far off today's discrete chip performance, but with integrated's battery life, low heat output and light weight.

[surf4peace]

how about discrete graphics AND a quad-core... in a 13 in footprint?

[Delegator]

It's really about expectations. I think that many of us had expected/hoped that the 13" Retina MBP would have specs that were a notch above those of the base 13" MBP -- either discrete graphics, or a larger available RAM, or a better CPU.

But, looking at it objectively I don't know why I or anybody else would have thought that. It's still the same small footprint, made thinner by removing the optical drive. There just may not be room for anything else.

I guess that maybe the reason I had hope for better specs was that the 15" Retina has a higher RAM configuration available than does the non-Retina. That's probably to compensate for the inability to upgrade the RAM in those systems. One could make the argument that the 13" Retina, with no discrete graphics and just 2 CPU cores, is not likely to be useful for anything that requires more than 8GB RAM. It might make more sense to ask why the non-Retina MBP can't be configured with 16GB RAM like the Retina can.

[yusukeaoki]

Only HD4000 pushing the retina display, this is what you get.

[CGagnon]

Originally Posted by derbothaus

Ha ha. Funny thing about perception...

Compared to the rMBP I think I chose the perfect word to describe the previous MB design. I have both laptops and my MB feels like a ton of bricks compared to my rMBP (and looking at the screen is like watching sports in standard definition instead of HD)

[jowie]

Originally Posted by Rudy69

And the discrete video card?

And the maximum 8 GB RAM, which limits the life of the 13-inch machine. I'm another one who is relieved to have made the correct choice with the 15-inch!

----------

Originally Posted by thedarkhorse

I think he's talking about the non retina 13" and the retina 13" being guts-wise the same machine. Not the 15" with dedicated gpu

There are still a few differences:

• HDMI port
• extra Thunderbolt port
• anti-glare display
• quieter fans
• better speakers

----------

Originally Posted by Simmias

Not my point at all. You may be right that upgrading internal storage beyond 128GB or so is a waste of money for most people. Given that my music and photo libraries take up almost 128GB by themselves, I'm trying to understand how externals can easily replace internal storage.

iTunes Match does a great deal to sort out this problem. It is a bit expensive using up internal flash storage on an iTunes collection on a portable device that is mostly connected to the Internet. I would love iCloud to provide a similar service for iPhoto. Then the only files I need to keep on my laptop are ones I am constantly using (work files etc).

[gabrielscindian]

Originally Posted by MacRumors

Image


In a new blog post today, Primate Labs summarizes the Geekbench 2 results for the new 13-inch Retina MacBook Pro hitting the company's database, unsurprisingly finding that the machines' performance is on par with that of the non-Retina models released in June. Benchmark scores for both stock models of the new 13-inch Retina MacBook Pro register within 0.5% of the scores seen for the corresponding non-Retina models.

Image

It is interesting to note that these new benchmarks also appear to confirm an early Geekbench result that appeared in the database in late June. Aside from that machine having an older BIOS identifier and carrying only 4 GB of RAM while the released models all carry 8 GB of RAM, other details such as the processor, motherboard identifier, and the benchmark results themselves all line up with the production model.

As always, it's important to note that Geekbench testing focuses on processor and memory performance, providing comparisons of raw power between machines but only telling part of the story. Notably, as with the non-Retina 13-inch MacBook Pro, the new Retina models do not offer a discrete graphics chip, instead relying on the integrated Intel HD 4000 graphics packaged with Ivy Bridge even with the increased demands from the Retina display. Real-world performance is of course also affected by drive speeds, with the Retina models' all-flash storage topping the traditional hard drive options found in the non-Retina models, although the non-Retina models also have flash storage options available.

Article Link: 13-Inch Retina MacBook Pro Benchmarks Confirm Late June Result Posting

My 2012 Mac Mini Server does 11655 on Geekbench thanks to my OWC upgrades. Runs RED 4k footage on an Apple 30 inch monitor @ 1/8 and 1/4 res realtime and 1/2 res after buffering. I'm still waiting on my MAGMA ExpressBox 3T for 8x pcie 2.0 goodness.