I just got mine on Friday and trying to figure out the best looking display settings without taking much of a performance hit.
I always have mine running on 1680x1050 (13" rMBP) just because I like having the extra screen real estate. When I'm doing work that requires a lot of windows, I turn it up to 1920x1200 (I used a trial of SwitchResX to create this custom resolution)...which makes things a tad bit too small, but it's useful nonetheless.
I haven't seen any performance hits from using either of these two resolutions; HOWEVER, I have "reduce transparency" checked in System Preferences which helps A LOT in reducing UI lag. 1680x1050 is alright without the reduce transparency setting, but 1920x1200 becomes noticeably laggy. Battery life is also fine when using these two resolutions.
EDIT: I have a 2014 rMBP, so your 2015 model should fare even better than mine!
Thank you very much! What does the reducing transparency do?
Thank you very much! What does the reducing transparency do?
I used to have mine set at "Looks like 1680x1050", but at this setting it's not possible to use Windows in a virtual machine at the Mac's native 2880x1800 resolution so it looks blurry no matter which resolution the VM's set at. Lag is also noticeable at this setting when scrolling in, say, Maps in full screen. Now I use the default native retina setting. Apple is right when they say "Using a scaled resolution may affect performance", because the Mac actually renders the display at what that resolution "looks like".I just got mine on Friday and trying to figure out the best looking display settings without taking much of a performance hit.
I just got mine on Friday and trying to figure out the best looking display settings without taking much of a performance hit.
I run mine at the 1440x900 scaled setting. The 1680x1050 setting is little too small for me.
I ran mine at 1680x1050 for a long time but for comparability reasons I set it to 1440x900 when I was using a rMB and I have decided that I prefer the 1440x900 setting.