After spec bump of 15 rMBP: buy now or wait to Haswell?

[msim20]

As I see it, if you can afford the computer (sorry to sound like a broken record, but this seems to be is a big deal for some people), then go for it now.

And here's how the current rMBP work with a 3840 x 2400 display:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfBd5q_OZ7Q

If a 27" Retina display comes out, I suspect it'll run at about the same resolution. In which case, the current rMBP should handle it just fine.

Thanks bill-p for the link! I guess rMBP is capable enough then.
So I will see how my ssd in 2009 does (since it is already delivered) - if that is satisfactory then I will wait some.

 

[maxosx]

Wait, this minor spec bump is rather inconsequential. Certainly not worth buying unless you absolutely must buy a computer immediately. There's better models on the horizon.

 

[msim20]

Yeah Skylake is still a couple of years away but I think will be a much better upgrade for you than Haswell. I have a SSD in my old Sony VAIO laptop with a core 2 duo 2.2ghz processor. For browsing the net and checking email it feels just as fast as my retina macbook pro. The only difference is doing things like video editing where I actually see a difference.

If you upgrade your 2009 Macbook Pro with an SSD you will see a huge increase in your computer's overall performance. Its amazing how much of a difference it makes. That should hold you off until 2015 unless there is something you can't do with your current machine now of course.

That is very encouraging - a direct comparison of Sony Vaio C2D with ssd and rMBP. I do not really do video editing - at least not yet.

So, who knows, may be able to hold out without missing the new processing power. Will update how it feels after the ssd upgrade.

Thanks for chiming in!

 

[charpi]

IMO, if you we're to decide to buy, it would not be for the spec bump, but rather for either the price, or that from the timing of this spec bump - Haswell may take a little longer than expected.

 

[Ploki]

Not fast enough it would seem.

Look mate, you're comparing running a 2D GUI that renders only the portion that changes to rendering handful of 3D models.

Even the old 27" iMac which had a GFX card worse than the HD4000 could run its screen without lag.

It's not the hardware, it's software.

If you don't believe me, run it @2880*1800 and try doing what you are doing..

Also, for some reason you are claiming that rendering 1080p is more pixels on the retina.

 

[BJNY]

This update didn't get new flavor of 802 wireless, correct?

 

[Ploki]

Wait, this minor spec bump is rather inconsequential. Certainly not worth buying unless you absolutely must buy a computer immediately. There's better models on the horizon.

There are always better models on the horizon.

This update didn't get new flavor of 802 wireless, correct?

nope, only CPU bump.

 

[Liquinn]

Hmmm, tempting to sell my 2012 13" cMBP and buy a 2012 rMBP 15" now that the 2012 models are cheaper.

I might wait until Haswell though.

 

[Macman45]

I think I'll wait for Haswell or maybe Broadwell. The 15" rMBP might get cheaper with the next refresh, it's a never ending cycle with tech isn't it?

Same here, I sold my 17" cMBP in anticipation of replacing it with the maxed out 15" rMBP but it makes sense to wait for the new Haswell...If it was 6 months off I guess I'd probably buy now, but it's pretty close, and I have my MBA to tide me over laptop wise.

 

[iDutchman]

High-end model was 2.7/16/768.

Of course I meant the standard high end version.

 

[alphaod]

...anyone care to convince me to go out and spend ANOTHER $300?

Yeah the new higher channel configuration an even better deal now.

And it's $650 to go up to next level and yes I would

 

[Asuriyan]

Yeah the new higher channel configuration an even better deal now.

And it's $650 to go up to next level and yes I would

Thinking about it. That extra space would be great for BootCamp.

 

[demosthenes80]

Look mate, you're comparing running a 2D GUI that renders only the portion that changes to rendering handful of 3D models.

Even the old 27" iMac which had a GFX card worse than the HD4000 could run its screen without lag.

It's not the hardware, it's software.

If you don't believe me, run it @2880*1800 and try doing what you are doing..

Also, for some reason you are claiming that rendering 1080p is more pixels on the retina.

Awww, you're adorable. You read things that aren't there!

 

[akdj]

2) Upgrade the GPU in the rMBP to one that can actually drive all those pixels efficiently and effectively.

Ridiculous...but already addressed!

Uninformed crap? I beg to differ.

I didn't say it was a CPU issue, but it IS a GPU one. When I had an rMBP, there was noticeable lag during OS-level animations and movement. Now, that same GPU on the regular MBP doesn't have that issue, and can actually perform better in games or programs like Motion because it doesn't have to drive 4x the pixels to display the animation.

You've either A) Never EVER owned or used an rMBP or B) Never EVER used Motion! I would be willing to bet I spent more time last week in 'Motion' and After Effects than you did all year, last year! You've seriously very little grasp on the software!

...

You mean that Motion doesn't use the GPU for previewing or on-the-fly rendering or using particle effects or replicators when building animations at 1080P HD? Hmmm, could have sworn that it did. If it did, you'd see that the GPU on the retina compared to the same GPU on the HiRes Classic MBP is taxed more heavily and therefore is burdened more under heavy animations. Or do you just watch animations and not build them? If so, I understand your confusion.

LOL...who said that the GPU wasn't used? 1080p is 1080p is 1080p. Doesn't matter which or what animations you are building, you're still building them at the same resolution. BTW--The 650 in the rMBP is actually clocked a bit higher than the cMBP---I believe. I own a pair of rMBPs, and a pair of 2011 17" MBPs. We also briefly used a cMBP 15" before trading out for the second rMBP. These laptops are hands down, the very BEST laptop EVER created for video and photo editing. So much so, we've sold off our 2008 and 9 Mac Pros.

I'm seriously doubting you've EVER used an rMBP or done any serious animation work. Your knowledge seems extremely limited on how software and hardware interact when doing 3 dimensional animation in a fixed pixel/resolution environment.

That's adorable, but I'm talking about using it for productivity in GPU-accelerated apps such as Motion. It's like having a V8 engine in a Mustang and then making that same engine drive a semi.

So are we...and that's an absolutely TERRIBLE analogy. The 650 in the rMBP as an extremely good GPU...very efficient, and finally an option for accelerated performance not only in Motion but the very picky Adobe suite.

There is negligible if ANY difference between the two machines discussed when it comes to ACTUAL performance. When it comes to 'looks' though---the rMBP absolutely SMOKES the cMBP and finally provides those of us professionally producing motion or still content an accurate monitor on a portable device. Never before have we had such an accurate combination of all things 'visual' on board a laptop...NEVER. And to compare and actually conclude the panel of the classic is 'better' in ANY way is ignorant.

This. And the fact that GPU power is being diverted to simply drive 2880x1800 whatever stupid number of pixels it has to drive just for displaying my workspace and animation window. That power would be more useful to run my GPU-aware behaviors and particle simulators instead of being wasted on quadruple the pixels on vs. a smaller workspace. It's just like gaming my friend. Games run at a higher framerate when the computer doesn't have to figure out as many pixels than at a higher resolution.

And the OS doesn't just use the CPU for UI, it uses CoreGraphics which utilizes GPU.

Games don't 'figure out resolution'. You do. In settings. I'm not so sure you actually understand how a retina MBP works. GPUs are responsible for driving all UIs as far as I know. It's the graphic processor. Doesn't matter how many 'stupid pixels' are on said monitor. I run a high resolution 27" Apple display with my lowly 2011 MBA--often, with it's lowly Intel 3000. No Lag. I run my rMBP in 1920x1200, all the time. The ONLY lag I see are on poorly coded sites with extremely Over the Top content...and ONLY in Chrome. Safari is fantastic. Using nightly builds...you'll see that the new betas have figured out any sort of lag on these sites...keeping in mind most browsing is being taken care of by the Intel 4000, not the 650.

I'm also very interested in these 'particle simulators' you keep talking about. What is it you're having such an issue with?

Not fast enough it would seem.

it just doesn't end, does it?

Awww, you're adorable. You read things that aren't there!

I guess not!

J