13-Inch Retina MacBook Pro Shows Up in Benchmarks

[gnasher729]

Unless the 13" rMBP is priced at $1199, I doubt very many 2012 13" MBP purchasers, including myself, will be upset at all.

The 13" MBP sells at either $1199 or $1499 (without any build-to-order extras). I would speculate that Apple could build a 13" MBP that is unchanged except for the Retina display, and the optical drive swapped for battery space, at the same price. And in that case, they would first offer the $1499 model only, and the $1199 model later when more displays are available.

 

[JacobMarley]

Clearly, if in five years time someone said "I bought this MBP 5 years ago, and it is still totally up-to-date", that wouldn't be good news. If Apple shows a MBP next week that makes todays MBP look totally outdated, that would be excellent news.

----------



There are plenty of applications that will have no issues at all with a 2560x1600 display and the latest integrated graphics. Sure, if you are into playing computer games, that's something else, but that's not what I use a computer for.

go ahead and try to run MAYA on the high end 13" macbook pro for 30 minutes . You will see it bloats up and gets very slow cause it has dedicated graphics card. Nvidia and ATI make graphic cards for consumers using their computer for graphics related assignments. Being a gamer and being an apple user are two irrelevant topics. I am a 3d editor and I would want to have a 13" macbook pro with a dedicated GPU than spending money on horrendously expensive macbook pro either with retina or without retina display. They better make the new macbook pro 13" with a dedicated graphics card. They claim the new ivy bridge processor along with intel hd 4000 integrated card intertwined for perfection is a big pseudo.

 

[gnasher729]

At 2560x1600 native there is no issue, but making that into a 1280x800 configuration requires heavy computing in the GPU. Hence why the iPad got a quad GPU in it (up from a dual).

That doesn't make the slightest difference. Displaying a screen full of 12pt text on a 1280 x 800 Retina display takes exactly the same amount of GPU power as displaying a screen full of 24pt text on a 2560 x 1600 native display.

go ahead and try to run MAYA on the high end 13" macbook pro for 30 minutes . You will see it bloats up and gets very slow cause it has dedicated graphics card. Nvidia and ATI make graphic cards for consumers using their computer for graphics related assignments. Being a gamer and being an apple user are two irrelevant topics. I am a 3d editor and I would want to have a 13" macbook pro with a dedicated GPU than spending money on horrendously expensive macbook pro either with retina or without retina display. They better make the new macbook pro 13" with a dedicated graphics card. They claim the new ivy bridge processor along with intel hd 4000 integrated card intertwined for perfection is a big pseudo.

Here we go. You say you need a dedicated graphics card. I say I don't.

 

[diamond.g]

However, we are not using a 2560x1600 display are we? We are using that pixel amount to make a 1280x800 emulation with "retina" graphics. In other words, we are driving 4x pixels to make pictures look sharper, smoother and crisper.

At 2560x1600 native there is no issue, but making that into a 1280x800 configuration requires heavy computing in the GPU. Hence why the iPad got a quad GPU in it (up from a dual).

The HD 4000 is a 16 core GPU. That should be more than enough to keep up with the resolution (Assuming core count matters).

 

[JacobMarley]

That doesn't make the slightest difference. Displaying a screen full of 12pt text on a 1280 x 800 Retina display takes exactly the same amount of GPU power as displaying a screen full of 24pt text on a 2560 x 1600 native display.

I think we are not on the same page here. It is nothing to do with the resolution of the screen but the flow power of the graphics card. Streaming a 3D application on a undedicated and dedicated graphics card computers differ at a great scale. 3d rendering applications require dedicated graphics card on the worked computer or they do not support their customers. If you end up calling the proprietor for any failure or imminent failure they ask you the specs of the laptop you work. There is no difference between a ultrabook and macbook pro 13" if that macbook pro doesnt have the dedicated graphics card. thats my point

 

[modular]

"Pro" means people use it professionally, to make money. I don't need a fast GPU to make money.

pro is just a way to separate the lineup. I'm sure there are plenty of people making money on airs as there are college students with 13"/15" mbp.

my point is, there needs to be something else to it besides the name that differentiates the lineup. the gpu should be it. I'm not talking about games, i'm talking about creative professionals that could really benefit from a dedicated gpu. Having a 13" Air with the HD4000 and a 13"MBP with the HD4000 just seems like a waste of macbook pro.

I think there are a ton of people that would jump on a 13" macbook pro with dedicated gpu. And if you don't want the gpu, then get the Air and save some weight.

lets get dedicated gpu's in all pro machines please apple!

 

[jav6454]

That doesn't make the slightest difference. Displaying a screen full of 12pt text on a 1280 x 800 Retina display takes exactly the same amount of GPU power as displaying a screen full of 24pt text on a 2560 x 1600 native display.

Beyond nonsense. There are several factors at play. Using 24 pt at 2560 will still yield the same squared results.

The HD 4000 is a 16 core GPU. That should be more than enough to keep up with the resolution (Assuming core count matters).

No it doesn't mean squat. There are other aspects of it.

 

[JacobMarley]

pro is just a way to separate the lineup. I'm sure there are plenty of people making money on airs as there are college students with 13"/15" mbp.

my point is, there needs to be something else to it besides the name that differentiates the lineup. the gpu should be it. I'm not talking about games, i'm talking about creative professionals that could really benefit from a dedicated gpu. Having a 13" Air with the HD4000 and a 13"MBP with the HD4000 just seems like a waste of macbook pro.

lets get dedicated gpu's in all pro machines please apple!

that's my point . Folks here still postulate the resolution power of the retina display paired with intel hd 4000. Intel Hd 4000 can only support the demanded picture resolution output but cant be enough to edit video applications. I think macbook pro and macbook air with not dedicated graphics card(intel) should be deemed in the same line of series other than separating these two as macbook pro and macbook air . What I would understand is if the name macbook pro is for a strong laptop I would first ask for the graphics card on it than the display features. I bought a 13" i7 macbook pro last year and I was going berserk trying to edit 3d images on it . I could actually edit the 3d image but I could not flow the picture at all. Graphics card is a must on the upcoming 13" macbook pro. I bought a 15" macbook pro with i7 2.0ghz processor and upgraded it to 8 gb and it runs anything I want but I cant lug around the big hefty 15" macbook pro so I need the 13" one with the dedicated graphics. I wont buy otherwise.

 

[malman89]

The Sony Vaio S 13.3" laptops are basic consumer laptops for around a grand with the NVIDIA 640M LE (1GB and 2GB varieties) - a low clock/low power GPU built for thin laptops. I see no reason why It can't be a BTO or higher model option. I really doubt there's going to be anything better than that, if that, included.

 

[JacobMarley]

The 13" MBP sells at either $1199 or $1499 (without any build-to-order extras). I would speculate that Apple could build a 13" MBP that is unchanged except for the Retina display, and the optical drive swapped for battery space, at the same price. And in that case, they would first offer the $1499 model only, and the $1199 model later when more displays are available.

If Apple revamps the Apple sign on the lid with a better light or motley colors people would still take it as a great innovation . I think retina display is just an eye candy and conscience fodder for those who were innovation trackers since the end of 2011 and Apple came up with the so-called retina display. It may be a great innovation for people who are into photography to see the very details they work on the photos they edit but is not something Apple should take a great pride in . They got rid of the dvd rom drive for what ? to make it sleek in look or they wanted to find an air passage to flow the air inside out the unit to cool it down ? I am very frustrated with the new macbook pro and I am afraid very same thing will also do on the 13" macbook pro. What i cant compromise on the new macbook pro 13" is the dedicated graphics card and the dvd rom drive. I would still accept to buy it without the dvd rom drive if they revamp it with a dedicated graphics card. Period

 

[MehApple]

I am continually surprised at how crazy popular the 13-inch MBPs are. I mean for me, the 15-inch is only just adequate, and I use it almost exclusively with an external monitor. The 13-inch seems so small. Also, without a discreet GPU, ouch.

Why do people love the 13-inch so much?

People love the 11' MBA too. If you have never had a laptop with a huge screen it is a luxury IMHO.

 

[JacobMarley]

The Sony Vaio S 13.3" laptops are basic consumer laptops for around a grand with the NVIDIA 640M LE (1GB and 2GB varieties) - a low clock/low power GPU built for thin laptops. I see no reason why It can't be a BTO or higher model option. I really doubt there's going to be anything better than that, if that, included.

Yes you are right and a lot of people are obsessed with Apple although they don't benefit from that to cater to their needs but have it just to have what mainstream people want to have. I would never ever own a macbook pro if the applications I use were available on pc standards. There are a lot faster computers than current macbook pro models in the market but i am personally restrained to own Apple macbook pro or imac to work on my 3d projects.

----------

People love the 11' MBA too. If you have never had a laptop with a huge screen it is a luxury IMHO.

lugging along 15" macbook pro everyday can become a chore after a while so 13" macbook pro can be a bit convenience. The point here is the demand of dedicated graphics card on the 13" models

 

[MehApple]

These new 13" Retina MacBook Pros will reshape the entire computer industry. Marco Arment is right, if you're a web developer or designer you have to own one of these and start building for the future of computing.

I hope you are right, but no google chrome support yet for retina.

 

[28monkeys]

I would drool over if 13" macbook pro with retina display + powerful gfx card!

 

[JacobMarley]

I hope you are right, but no google chrome support yet for retina.

There is no website available to offer retina screen compatible images and i think website admins wont really revamp their websites for people who have 15" macbook pro with retina display. I think Apple can add some zebra or horse pictures compatible with retina view.

 

[MehApple]

I think it will ultimately be

11" rMBA
13" rMBP
15" rMBP

----------



I prefer the size MUCH more than my 15in mbp at work

Retina is the direction of all Apple displays. You are joking about preferring the 13 over the 15 right? Smaller is more portable, but that would be the only reason to have something smaller unless I am missing something.

----------

I prefer the size, I'd even go smaller if the specs are good enough. I will buy a retina MBP I want a 13 inch, if the GPU not a crap integrated one. If not I am going to end up buying a 15 inch rMBP.

Personally I can't believe so many people want 15, 17 or even larger laptops. Just like you can't believe people want smaller ones.

Are your preferences for smaller displays based on price and portability? What am I missing about the smaller displays?

----------

Well ...
Image

good stuff

 

[JacobMarley]

Retina is the direction of all Apple displays. You are joking about preferring the 13 over the 15 right? Smaller is more portable, but that would be the only reason to have something smaller unless I am missing something.

If you are a stationary person you might not worry about a smaller size macbook pro. I am a portable person per se. I commute from client to client and most of the time I may end up at a starbucks to add or extract something off my assignments. Carrying the big 15" macbook pro in my backpack and taking it out the sleeve and in all the time would be a chore after a while. It is what I have been complaining about . If 13" macbook pro came with discreet graphics I would absolutely downgrade to the 13" one . I really do not care the retina flock

----------

Retina is the direction of all Apple displays. You are joking about preferring the 13 over the 15 right? Smaller is more portable, but that would be the only reason to have something smaller unless I am missing something.

----------



Are your preferences for smaller displays based on price and portability? What am I missing about the smaller displays?

----------



good stuff

I actually would want it a bit bigger If I had to deal with a bigger one lol

----------

If you are a stationary person you might not worry about a smaller size macbook pro. I am a portable person per se. I commute from client to client and most of the time I may end up at a starbucks to add or extract something off my assignments. Carrying the big 15" macbook pro in my backpack and taking it out the sleeve and in all the time would be a chore after a while. It is what I have been complaining about . If 13" macbook pro came with discreet graphics I would absolutely downgrade to the 13" one . I really do not care the retina flock

----------



I actually would want it a bit bigger If I had to deal with a bigger one lol

Mehapple: You are not missing anything here. I have a 15" macbook pro with i7 processor and it has 1gb graphics card on it and it is what is helping me with my work but it is hard to lug it around so I would die to switch to macbook pro 13" if the graphics card was dedicated. There is absolutely no way for me to buy a 13" macbook pro even if they gave the retina feature free unless they give it with undedicated graphics card. Do you now get my point ?

 

[Digital Skunk]

Yeah, I am on the edge between a 13" MacBook Air or the base 15" MacBook Pro. My current MacBook is on its last legs. I do not want to buy another battery for it.

That's a tricky decision if weight isn't a major concern. Both machines are rather portable, the 15" giving you much more power and a dedicated GPU, the Air giving you one of Apple's sleekest designs.

Depending on what you intend to use it for, you may want to consider the Air over the 15" unless you need FW800 and a dedicated GPU.

 

[zzLZHzz]

Did somebody actually buy the 13" Pro at this refresh? It was underwhelming to say the least.
(Written as a 13" Pro owner)

it is definitely underwhelming. i would take the mba 13" refresh over 13" Pro.

it is a different story if it comes with retina. then again if the form factor follows rMBP 15", then what is the point of mba except that mba would be whole lot cheaper.

 

[JacobMarley]

That's a tricky decision if weight isn't a major concern. Both machines are rather portable, the 15" giving you much more power and a dedicated GPU, the Air giving you one of Apple's sleekest designs.

Depending on what you intend to use it for, you may want to consider the Air over the 15" unless you need FW800 and a dedicated GPU.

I can state you really would not want to shell out your money on the 15" macbook pro if you have the sleek macbook air 13". The retina display innovation is just a fodder for those who are tech freaks and waste their money on everything manufacturers offer. You would even regret it after buying it cause it is very expensive and not worth the $. I would tell you to buy a regular 15" macbook pro if you are going to benefit from it's hardware features like using the graphics card to work on stuff etc.. other than that it is a waste of money to spend .

 

[Jynto]

I can't wait! Hopefully the graphics of the computer will be able to handle that screen resolution.

The graphics of the non-retina Macbook Pro can already handle that screen resolution. Make no mistake about it, they could have built a non-retina Macbook Pro with a retina display (if that makes sense).

 

[deconstruct60]

T I would speculate that Apple could build a 13" MBP that is unchanged except for the Retina display, and the optical drive swapped for battery space, at the same price.

Everything about the MBPr 15" model says that is unlikely. The display and additional batteries are going to cost more money than the DVD drive ( perhaps $70) that is being dropped. That means the costs will go up.

the other problem is that there already is a logjam at MBP 13" prices because they are MBA 13" prices. MBA + MBP + MBPr all priced the same. Not.

Also similar to the MBPr 15" is is likely they'll dump the HDD for a more expensive SSD and also use that space for battery. Again battery + more expensive part will likely increase costs.

They'll need the additional battery space because likely to "throw away" some of the DVD space saved by making the MBPr 13" thinner than the MBP ( dropping 0.2" in height). If they didn't chop the height then perhaps they could put a discrete GPU +VRAM + cooler/fan in but by tossing the so-DIMMs and placing the memory horizontal on the motherboard there won't be room for the GPU and the associated VRAM. Both of which need horizontal board space.

They'll likely layer the MBPr 13" models on top of some of the MBP 15" prices. Since soldered RAM will start at 8GB (instead of the 4GB for the non-retina MBPs ). Again raising prices.

 

[Digital Skunk]

I can state you really would not want to shell out your money on the 15" macbook pro if you have the sleek macbook air 13". The retina display innovation is just a fodder for those who are tech freaks and waste their money on everything manufacturers offer. You would even regret it after buying it cause it is very expensive and not worth the $. I would tell you to buy a regular 15" macbook pro if you are going to benefit from it's hardware features like using the graphics card to work on stuff etc.. other than that it is a waste of money to spend .

I was perfectly fine with it until the GPU issues started to trickle in. It's one thing to offer Retina on a 15" machine that's super thin yet packs the CPU of a full sized MBP, it's another to discontinue the 17" for it, but it's just awful when the GPU on this attempt at a 17" replacement isn't even up to snuff for running the base screen at the standard resolution.

 

[deconstruct60]

it is definitely underwhelming. i would take the mba 13" refresh over 13" Pro.

Out of box, maybe ( if don't value being able to use FW , upgradable RAM at non-Apple prices , upgradable standard storage, more CPU and GPU performance ).

Put on equal footing with SSD in both then there are definitely system performance differences. If don't need those and willing to stick to fixed RAM size and have a relatively high priority on system weight then the MBA can come out on top.

it is a different story if it comes with retina. then again if the form factor follows rMBP 15", then what is the point of mba except that mba would be whole lot cheaper.

The MBA will likely still be lighter. Less batteries and smaller case will likely equate to less weight. Less expensive as well.

There is somewhat decent chance will have longer battery life on MBA 13" as well. The MBPr 13" may drop a small but substantive amount below 7 hours charge on battery if they cut too much volume from the case. It wouldn't be surprising to see them drop to 6.5 hours and loose 30 mins just so that the height was the same as the 15" retina model.

 

[shurcooL]

13" Retina MBP doesn't make sense.

How would it differ from the 13" MBA?

The 13" rMBP wouldn't have an optical drive, so the only differentiating factor would have to be the CPU and GPU. So far the 13" MBPs had the same graphics as MBAs.

The CPU? This one gets just under 8000, while the 13" MBA gets 7000.

So tell me, what would set the 13" Retina MBP apart from 13" MBA?