|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#226 |
|
I don't think the reason for no quad core in the 13" retina is cooling. It is just a slightly small system than that found in the 15" retina. I think the reason for no quad core is battery power. There is a lot less batter capacity in the 13 compared to the 15". As someone pointed out earlier there does seem to be a bit of extra room for more battery in the 13" retina and perhaps if the take advantage of this we could get a quad core.
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
#227 | |
|
Quote:
Last edited by SandboxGeneral; May 17, 2013 at 04:35 PM. Reason: Cleaned up quoted text |
||
|
|
0
|
|
|
#228 | |
|
Quote:
The 15" actually gets close to an hour more battery life on the rMBP than the 13". But people who do basic tasks are going to gravitate towards the MBA, which due to its ULV processor gets close to 7.5 hours. With the Quad core processor being put to work as well as the GPU, the 15" gets 2.5 hours and the MBP gets 3.5. |
||
|
|
0
|
|
|
#229 |
|
really? gpu + cpu will consume more battery on the fly than a dual core cpu. news to me...
the problem here is that we do basic tasks on the fly, otherwise we dont get the advertised battery life (which I usually get more). and just because you have a pro named pc, you stop using the internet? reading texts? writing? table creation? we can only use CS? since apparently thats the only use for apple notebooks. you shall be punished if you use the pro named machines for table making! |
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
#230 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
13-inch MacBook 2.4 GHz (early 2008) | 32 GB new iPad wi-fi + cellular | 16 GB iPhone 4S | 32 GB iPod Touch (1st gen) | 16 GB iPod nano (6th gen) |
||
|
|
0
|
![]() |
|
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:30 AM.







Linear Mode
