That's Anand's interpretation of it. Of course, Anand doesn't have the first clue about GPU pipelines, how they work and how fed data can be optimized at a software level to get extra performance out of the hardware or how it can be left unoptimized and plainly "tax" the hardware for nothing.
For raw pixel count, the hardware has been capable of Retina like fill-rates for close to a decade. Apple could be using multi-pass rendering (ie, rendering all the CALayers fully with no hidden surface removal), instead of using opaque on the front most layer to hide pixels beneath it. They could be blending at every pass too (each Layer getting blended with the previous ones independantly, regardless if the eventual pixels its blending will get hidden away by an upper layer).
There are many ways to optimize GPU pipelines. It's quite evident also that Apple's OpenGL drivers are lacking. Just running in Bootcamp, you can easily see this as the hardware performs better on Windows using the Windows drivers.
But again, I don't expect Anand to delve deeper than "it's slow, must be hardware! These synthetic benchmarks I ran and have no understanding of show it". That's what he is, just a guy like you or me that gets free hardware, runs a bunch of tests and writes a blog. Don't put too much faith in his analysis.
THANK YOU!
Who said anything about un-usable, I own one and like it but there are issues. I not too big fanboy to tell others the truth.
Generalization much? If we're talking fanboy, I'm not the one that went out and bought a retina 15" MacBook Pro; I will be buying a 15" MacBook Pro in the very near future and it won't be retina. I'm not trying to speak in defense of Apple; I don't need you to agree with or understand what I like about their products, and really, if we're going to be honest here, I only really give a rat's ass about three of them anyway.
Get YOUR FACTs straight. Personally I don't care is power 15 27' HiFi TVs.. That's totally totally irrelevant.
Man, get YOUR facts straight!
Fact 1: The problems that article is reporting on is the taxation of GPU resources.
Fact 2: All the GPU is having to do is push more pixels (2880x1800), pixels per inch is irrelevant to the GPU.
Fact 3: That GPU (both of them, actually) are capable of driving, on their own, two 27" Apple Thunderbolt displays each carrying 2560x1440, without having the problems that you have on your rMBP.
Fact 4: (2560x1440) x 2 + (1680x1050) > (2880x1800). Yes, I'm taking a high-end non-retina 15" MacBook Pro's native resolution and adding the resolutions of two thunderbolt displays. Compared to a lone rMBP, the former is able to push 2 million more pixels without breaking a sweat.
Fact 5: Anandtech, in a review of the 2012 non-retina MacBook Pros (published AFTER the article that you're citing here as gospel), would indicate that my needs are better served by a Retina MacBook Pro than a non-retina MacBook Pro (regardless of what those needs actually are). And yes, I read that same article. They cite speculation, whereas the facts I have presented here are exactly that...facts. Refute them while citing that article all you want.
Hardware.. wanted faster CPU and more importantly on-board GPU.
Not sure how much more blatant they put it
Hardware is over taxed
They aren't saying there pushing the limations of the software or the software over time will resolve the issue.. because.. because.. it WONT.. i don't want lie people have believe it will..
And surprise the resolving.. hmm.. let me guess.. maybe hmmmm.. HARDWARE
I don't think you have a solid idea of how the hardware is supposed to work. Both GPUs can support the output of well over 7 million pixels compared to the 5 million on that retina display. The problem is very clearly related to OS X's handling of the HiDPI graphics. That is the only logical explanation, I'm sorry.
Again you don't own a rMBP and nor do you have extensive experience with it and I do.. and GT 650M is called quite a bit..
So every article I've read on the thing would lead me to believe. That doesn't mean that the integrated graphics card shouldn't be capable of handing that high of a pixel count output. Again, I'm not saying that your problems don't exist. I'm saying that your problems are not caused by what you think they are. You know that there's a difference between those, right?
Even with 13' inch rMBP having less pixels they need a external video card and that was my point. THEY WILL NOT RELEASE A rMBP w/o GT 650 unless they wait until next year with haswell CPU with better onboard GPU. Why because the current 15' rMBP is slightly unpowered. That was the point I was trying to make all along.
I see the point you were trying to make all along and I've seen it all along, but that doesn't mean that I agree with it and you citing an article like it's the third testament of the bible doesn't really do much to help there either. If the Intel HD 4000 can pump out over 7 million pixels, and if the retina 15" rMBP has only around 5 million, AND if the would-be 13" rMBP has a smaller pixel count, then there's no reason why it isn't possible today. Will they likely wait until Haswell? It's very possible. Is this necessarily the reason? Nothing you or that article has to say would leave me to believe that it is.
But people like yourself and others can't stand any criticism of the current 15' rMBP and have give people false hope that software update will resolve hardware limitations. Come 6 to 12 months from now we see who's right.
Man, how much you love to presume things you clearly have no knowledge of. I actually am usually the one dishing out the criticism of the retina MacBook Pro. I absolutely hate its design. You can't open the machine up without voiding the warranty; you can't replace the battery (or trackpad) without replacing the whole top-case/unibody/frame; no built-in optical drive; no common-form-factor boot drives; proprietary five-pointed screws; and a display that makes the 2% of Mac apps out there look fantastic while making the other 98% (as well as non-vectorized web-content) look like crap. Gee, I must really love this computer. Again, given the above (plus the cheaper price-points), I'm going to buy a maxed out 15" non-retina MacBook Pro. Before you say such stupid things about my supposed love of the retina machine, please consider who you're talking to.
That being said I never buy a non-retina 15' like you are thinking about. At that price point I buy rMBP. Then get external drive or cloud for extra storage.
Right because on a laptop, a machine designed to be an all-in-one on the go, I totally want to be tethered to additional external drives! Also cloud storage is expensive and completely non-viable once you start dealing with storage in the three-digit gigabyte range unless you're the one hosting it, and at that point, why spend all of that money? Just so I don't have to have a laptop with a hard drive? Get real, man.