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

Discussion in 'Mac Blog Discussion' started by MacRumors, Oct 25, 2012.

  1. CausticPuppy macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    #26
    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.
     
  2. Delegator macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    #27
    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.
     
  3. jsl20 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 9, 2011
    #28
    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!
     
  4. jjhoekstra macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    #29
    SWEEEET!!!

    (and I am pretty sure I will be happy with my 15" retina till than...)
     
  5. Steve.P.JobsFan macrumors 6502a

    Steve.P.JobsFan

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Location:
    Cincinnati
    #30
    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. :D
     
  6. CausticPuppy macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    #31
    Just wait until 2020 when the Cabbage chips are released. (in 2019, Intel will switch to a leafy-green-vegetable naming scheme)
     
  7. cbizzle102, Oct 28, 2012
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2012

    cbizzle102 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2012
    #32
    rMBP13

    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
     
  8. Simmias macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2010
    #33
    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?
     
  9. intz2nu macrumors 6502

    intz2nu

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2012
    #34
    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.
     
  10. maccompatible macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2012
    #35
    0.04" thicker, but a pound lighter, so who cares?
     
  11. cbizzle102 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2012
    #36
    Yeah you are right im just a n00b at externals
     
  12. Simmias macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2010
    #37
    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.
     
  13. kokako, Oct 29, 2012
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2012

    kokako macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    #38
    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.
     
  14. Moshu macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2012
    #39
    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 :( )
     
  15. dblissmn macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2002
    #40
    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.
     
  16. surf4peace macrumors newbie

    surf4peace

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    #41
    how about discrete graphics AND a quad-core... in a 13 in footprint?
     
  17. Delegator macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    #42
    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.
     
  18. yusukeaoki macrumors 68030

    yusukeaoki

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    Location:
    Tokyo, Japan
    #43
    Only HD4000 pushing the retina display, this is what you get.
     
  19. CGagnon, Oct 31, 2012
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2012

    CGagnon macrumors regular

    CGagnon

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    #44
    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)
     
  20. jowie macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2004
    Location:
    London ish
    #45
    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!

    ----------

    There are still a few differences:
    • HDMI port
    • extra Thunderbolt port
    • anti-glare display
    • quieter fans
    • better speakers


    ----------

    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).
     
  21. gabrielscindian macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2012
    #46
    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.
     

Share This Page