13" rMBP or ?

[Barhen]

I dont get the logic in adding 2 inches making something so much less portable...

My previous laptop was a gateway gaming laptop so it was big, and bulky. When i got the RMBP 15" I was in awe how much smaller, thinner, and lighter it was... and plus the retina screen I was in shock how clear the screen was and my eyes doesnt even tire anymore when looking at it for prolonged periods...

 

[robvas]

I can't find any comparisons between the i7 dual vs i7 quad to see just how huge the difference is.

Compare the 13" Retina to the 15" Retina - the quad beats the pants off it

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6409/13inch-retina-macbook-pro-review/9

 

[Mr MM]

The chip set virtualizes the cores, so the OS sees 4 virtual cores. In the 15" MBP there are 8 virtual cores because of this technology. It works well enough but all things being equal we're still talking about 2 physical cores on the 13" MBP vs. 4 physical cores on the 15"

its actually the cpu in the pipeline that virtualize that

 

[ssn637]

I upgraded from a 13" 2010 MacBook Pro to the 15" Retina late last year and was also concerned about portability. But my new machine is as light as my old, and working with it daily on the train or in the office is a pleasure. Whenever I switch back to the 13" I feel that the display is too small for road work. And the extra power is available when you need it, especially when casually gaming or working with virtual machines. The 15" rMBP is hands-down the better model and you're free to find out for yourself during the first 14 days of use.

 

[Augustine864]

Compare the 13" Retina to the 15" Retina - the quad beats the pants off it

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6409/13inch-retina-macbook-pro-review/9

Seems like the multithreaded 3D rendering and Final Cut Pro importing are the only two places it gets its ass handed to it. The 15" obviously is always the performance leader but those two areas have the largest gaps. Otherwise it seems like standard expectations.

Thanks for the link.

----------

I upgraded from a 13" 2010 MacBook Pro to the 15" Retina late last year and was also concerned about portability. But my new machine is as light as my old, and working with it daily on the train or in the office is a pleasure. Whenever I switch back to the 13" I feel that the display is too small for road work. And the extra power is available when you need it, especially when casually gaming or working with virtual machines. The 15" rMBP is hands-down the better model and you're free to find out for yourself during the first 14 days of use.

I may very well have to use that 14 day period,though I don't know how much I'll be able to determine on that amount of time.

The 15" is obviously superior and intended to be, I'm just trying to determine if I will actively suffer with the 13" and feel like I'm missing out. If it will feel slow at times,etc. I don't do any heavy computation stuff but occasionally I'll play a reasonably up to date rts to pass time, (but that is very infrequent).

Are the graphics capabilities a step back here (on the 13)? Not compared to the 15, because that is obvious, but compared to other on-board chips? Should I be able to handle a decent and recent RTS for example. That is the most is ask of it.

Also, I suppose no matter which route i take it will feel infinitely faster and smoother than my 2008 dell studio 15 core 2 duo.

 

[fatlardo]

I agree with most here, the 15 is still super slim and very easy and light to carry. I think the HD4000 is underpowered imo for retina displays for certain tasks.

 

[Augustine864]

Here is a good resource for comparing the graphics capabilities as it relates to gaming FPS: http://www.notebookcheck.net/Computer-Games-on-Laptop-Graphic-Cards.13849.0.html

You can select different cards and different games and hit "restrict" to make it easy to look at. I restricted my view to the Intel HD Graphics 4000 (13") and the GeForce GT 640M (15").

I'm surprised to see SimCity getting such low FPS on the card that is in the 15". It almost seems like I wouldn't really be gaining much as far as gaming ability if I went with the 15" and its dedicated graphics card. I could be missing something though.

I took a screenshot of the comparison and attempted to upload but PhotoBucket is not behaving..

 

[Asuriyan]

Here is a good resource for comparing the graphics capabilities as it relates to gaming FPS: http://www.notebookcheck.net/Computer-Games-on-Laptop-Graphic-Cards.13849.0.html

You can select different cards and different games and hit "restrict" to make it easy to look at. I restricted my view to the Intel HD Graphics 4000 (13") and the GeForce GT 640M (15").

I'm surprised to see SimCity getting such low FPS on the card that is in the 15". It almost seems like I wouldn't really be gaining much as far as gaming ability if I went with the 15" and its dedicated graphics card. I could be missing something though.

I took a screenshot of the comparison and attempted to upload but PhotoBucket is not behaving..

It's not the 640m, it's the 650m. Dramatic difference. Also, the Retina's 650m is clocked about 15% higher than the base configuration, and can be pushed another 10% beyond that without any issues that I've found. Out of the box it benches like a GTX660m.

 

[Augustine864]

It's not the 640m, it's the 650m. Dramatic difference. Also, the Retina's 650m is clocked about 15% higher than the base configuration, and can be pushed another 10% beyond that without any issues that I've found. Out of the box it benches like a GTX660m.

Ah, good catch, sir! Thanks. Though, that additional "15%" must account for a lot because looking at the the FPS numbers at least, there isn't a dramatic difference between the 640 and the 650. Well, depends on the game I suppose. SimCity on medium only bumps from 21 to 25 fps. Certainly a larger boost in other games though.

Nevertheless, I'm glad you corrected me.

Part of me wonders if I should buy the 13" to deliberate disallow myself the ability to play games and avoid the distraction all together.

 

[Asuriyan]

Ah, good catch, sir! Thanks. Though, that additional "15%" must account for a lot because looking at the the FPS numbers at least, there isn't a dramatic difference between the 640 and the 650. Well, depends on the game I suppose. SimCity on medium only bumps from 21 to 25 fps. Certainly a larger boost in other games though.

Nevertheless, I'm glad you corrected me.

Part of me wonders if I should buy the 13" to deliberate disallow myself the ability to play games and avoid the distraction all together.

A lot of those benchmarks aren't quite up to what they *should* be because of that whole always-on DRM thing. It was barely playable the first few days and has improved since then, both in terms of server stability and performance. Shows how stupid their DRM scheme is.

I'd wait a while before trusting any SimCity benchmarks, but I'd also wait a while before buying SimCity.

 

[chrisrosemusic1]

I'm a long time Apple enthusiast that enjoys the first hand experience that ownership provides. I have lots of different usage scenarios. I do 97% of all my work, as well as personal record keeping digitally, I'm nearly paper free. I enjoy using a nice laptop so much, and must have variety, that I have lots of Macs.

In addition I travel rather frequently for work. When I'm not using one of my larger MBP's in the engineering lab, I take the 13" MBPr, or my 13" MBA on the plane, as most of my travel is long international flights.

If I buy a new model that I either don't like or don't use much I give it to a family member. It's a nice gesture they appreciate, and that way I don't have to maintain anything but Macs for them.

Tried an 11" MBA, but the display at 16:9 just didn't work for me. Too little.

I'll join your family for a pass off

----------

A lot of those benchmarks aren't quite up to what they *should* be because of that whole always-on DRM thing. It was barely playable the first few days and has improved since then, both in terms of server stability and performance. Shows how stupid their DRM scheme is.

I'd wait a while before trusting any SimCity benchmarks, but I'd also wait a while before buying SimCity.[/QUOTE]

This ^ Its a damn mess atm!

 

[Sp71Supra]

Im glad I seen this thread as I was going to start one on this same issue. If you think im hi-jacking I appologize, but if I started a new thread I would get yelled at too! Its a rough world now a days

I have a 06 MBP (almost a 3k laptop at the time) and has lasted me until last week when my dog decided to spill a large coffee on it.. its non repairable.. but its ok because it was at the end of its life span anyways. I talked myself into getting a MBA and I have had it for 3 days now and its just not gonna cut it. I wanted to downside purely because of the cost.. now im on my own and own a house, etc.. and 3k is not feasible for a laptop right now. I noticed the 13 inch is hurting my eyes a little.. I NEVER travel with the laptop, its dedicated to my couch and my coffee table, lol.. so portability is not an issue at all.

My choices are between the following..

New 13inch rMBP or a June 2012 refurb 15 inch rMBP.

From what I read it seems there really was no difference except a .1 ghz processor between the 2012 and 2013 15"rMBP's. Is it true that the 2012's do not have hyper threading and the 2013's do? Also I know they had issues with the early rMBP's with the retina display, then they switched to a Samsung screen.. im hoping the refurb I would get would be because they swapped out to the new screen? Im not worried about .1 ghz difference, I am however concerned with the screen. I cant see paying $1600 for the 13 and not buying a refurb 15 for $1800.

Opinions?

 

[maxosx]

Im glad I seen this thread as I was going to start one on this same issue. If you think im hi-jacking I appologize, but if I started a new thread I would get yelled at too! Its a rough world now a days

I have a 06 MBP (almost a 3k laptop at the time) and has lasted me until last week when my dog decided to spill a large coffee on it.. its non repairable.. but its ok because it was at the end of its life span anyways. I talked myself into getting a MBA and I have had it for 3 days now and its just not gonna cut it. I wanted to downside purely because of the cost.. now im on my own and own a house, etc.. and 3k is not feasible for a laptop right now. I noticed the 13 inch is hurting my eyes a little.. I NEVER travel with the laptop, its dedicated to my couch and my coffee table, lol.. so portability is not an issue at all.

My choices are between the following..

New 13inch rMBP or a June 2012 refurb 15 inch rMBP.

From what I read it seems there really was no difference except a .1 ghz processor between the 2012 and 2013 15"rMBP's. Is it true that the 2012's do not have hyper threading and the 2013's do? Also I know they had issues with the early rMBP's with the retina display, then they switched to a Samsung screen.. im hoping the refurb I would get would be because they swapped out to the new screen? Im not worried about .1 ghz difference, I am however concerned with the screen. I cant see paying $1600 for the 13 and not buying a refurb 15 for $1800.

Opinions?

I'll clarify a few things for you. 2012 & 2013 all have hyper threading. Apple rarely uses only one supplier for any components where more than one manufacturer exists. Thus they chose to use _both_ LG & Samsung for the displays on retina MBP's, and they are still using both.

There's always a lot of rumors, reports, and false reports about new models no matter if its Apple or whomever. Therefore some of what you read must be taken with a grain of salt.

I've had three 15" MBP retina models a few months apart since the first one I preordered upon release. Yes they had issues, some centered around LG displays, however they haven't stopped using LG, they have done what they usually do which is to work with the manufacturer to eliminate the issues as soon as possible.

Unfortunately Apple is not only a closed locked down eco-system, they are also a company that's famous for not communicating much of anything when problems arise. Most of the time a fix, or update simply appears. Then MacRumors or the other sites report on it once it's out.

So if you buy a refurb you may very well get an LG display. Or you may not, it's always a gamble with Apple.

That said I don't know of a better company when it comes to doing a great job on refurbs and I endorse them without hesitation. One person I know always buys refurbs from Apple. I've seen them, and I could not tell, they look & operate like new machines.

Honestly, I'd strongly advise you to get the 15" size it's a great computer.

 

[Robster3]

I have a 15" refurb on the way delivering today, was $300 more than i could of got a new 13" for on sale. Will try it out over easter.
also just found out i can gt a 15" for 10% off so a 2013 one would be $246 more than the refurb, will see what the refurb is like first.
Just read someone got a 15" refurb with 0 battery cycle so was brand new.

Mine just came and has 4 battery cycles, not easy looking at my 09 27 imac after looking at the retina.

 

[fireedo]

It's not the 640m, it's the 650m. Dramatic difference. Also, the Retina's 650m is clocked about 15% higher than the base configuration, and can be pushed another 10% beyond that without any issues that I've found. Out of the box it benches like a GTX660m.

that's why a lot overheating issue arise, apple doin' some OC to the base 650m to compensate retina display
well i hope they will do something on the next release

 

[Asuriyan]

that's why a lot overheating issue arise, apple doin' some OC to the base 650m to compensate retina display
well i hope they will do something on the next release

While I don't doubt that the GPU is somehow related to the problems, the rMBP runs the coolest by far of any laptop I've ever had, whether gaming or not. If yours isn't, then I would venture a guess that it's defective.

 

[emptysoul]

The specs of the 15" in the 13" form factor would have been my perfect laptop.

 

[Ladybug]

I just picked up a 13" rMBP 2.6 w/8g ram w/256g SSD. I absolutely love it. I'm coming from a 15" MBP 2011 model with discreet graphics that I upgraded ram to 8g and installed a 256g SSD drive. I passed my 15" down to my son and I couldn't be happier. When I bought the 15 I was sure I'd game on it from time to time but never really did. I have a PC at home that I game on and my rMBP is for everything else. The retina screen is fantastic and I don't regret downsizing. Anyway, I think it really all depends on what you want to use your laptop for. I didn't need the screen real estate and the 13" just seems to suit my needs better. Best of luck with whichever MBP you decide on.

 

[Mackan]

The specs of the 15" in the 13" form factor would have been my perfect laptop.

Agree. Finally seeing a quad-core CPU in the 13'', together with a dedicated graphics card, would have been a dream laptop. Sadly, I don't think it will with the next refresh either. Looks like it will still be stuck with a dual core.

 

[Queen6]

For me there is absolutely nothing compelling about the 13" MBP other than the size, the 15" Retina absolutely dominates the 13" Retina in every aspect, anyone looking to buy the 13" should think about it very carefully, unless form factor or pricing is paramount.

For those with a requirement for heavy tasks/gaming, It makes little sense to go with the 13" the CPU performance level of the 15' over the 13" in isolation is significant to say the least, anything CPU intensive is simply going to be completed far faster, any app that can take advantage of multicore architecture more so.

GeekBench Results:

• MacBook Pro (15-inch Retina Early 2013) Intel Core i7-3635QM 2400 MHz (4 cores) 11244 (Base Model)
  
• MacBook Pro (13-inch Retina Early 2013) Intel Core i7-3540M 3000 MHz (2 cores) 7800 (High End Model)
  
• MacBook Pro (13-inch Retina) Intel Core i5-3210M 2500 MHz (2 cores) 6657 (Base Model)

My own base Mid 2012 2.3 Retina benchmarks at over 11K systematically (Link: just hit 11040 and 11043 and 11096) and on top of the far higher CPU performance you will have both the HD 4000 and GT 650M GPU`s, superior audio, higher resolutions & scaling of the display. If i was forced to buy the 13" Retina i would be very unhappy to say the least giving up so much, to save so little, and offer only a smaller footprint.

The bottom line is the 13" Retina is still priced far too high, i applaud Apple`s ingenuity and engineering prowess, equally their greed is staggering just when will enough be enough $$$$. The 13" Retina should have a base price range of $1200 - $1300, in general the 13" line is grossly over priced, as fundamentally little to nothing has changed since it`s introduction in 2008 as the Aluminium MacBook; duel core CPU, integrated graphics only, and extremely poor resolution on the standard 13" model. The straight up answer is buy a bigger bag, and you will have all the performance you need at all times

 

[Robster3]

My 15" refurb I got today has a LG display It looks brand new, 4 cycles. Glad I got the 15" the 13" looked cute in the shop but I may use this instead of my over hot 27 iMac. 14 days to test it.

Should I look for screen issues being a LG or just forget it and use it?

Tried to palm my 7 year old pc laptop off onto my 15 year old, he set it up in his room and 30 mins later he was putting it back in my office cupboard lol. He said I don't like PC's.

 

[jafingi]

If you are going to travel a lot, why not try out the 13" Air? It doesn't sound like you need the most powerful machine.

If the Air is not interesting, go for the 13" rMBP.

 

[Robster3]

Am i missing something, Kindle App is not retina?

 

[Sp71Supra]

I'll clarify a few things for you. 2012 & 2013 all have hyper threading. Apple rarely uses only one supplier for any components where more than one manufacturer exists. Thus they chose to use _both_ LG & Samsung for the displays on retina MBP's, and they are still using both.

There's always a lot of rumors, reports, and false reports about new models no matter if its Apple or whomever. Therefore some of what you read must be taken with a grain of salt.

I've had three 15" MBP retina models a few months apart since the first one I preordered upon release. Yes they had issues, some centered around LG displays, however they haven't stopped using LG, they have done what they usually do which is to work with the manufacturer to eliminate the issues as soon as possible.

Unfortunately Apple is not only a closed locked down eco-system, they are also a company that's famous for not communicating much of anything when problems arise. Most of the time a fix, or update simply appears. Then MacRumors or the other sites report on it once it's out.

So if you buy a refurb you may very well get an LG display. Or you may not, it's always a gamble with Apple.

That said I don't know of a better company when it comes to doing a great job on refurbs and I endorse them without hesitation. One person I know always buys refurbs from Apple. I've seen them, and I could not tell, they look & operate like new machines.

Honestly, I'd strongly advise you to get the 15" size it's a great computer.

Thank you for your information, its appreciated. I took a trip to the Apple store last night and im sold on the 15.. just trying to see if saving the money by getting a refurb is worth it or not...

Thanks guys!

PS - the 13 with the 15 specs would be a perfect machine.. as im a couch surfer

 

[Queen6]

My 15" refurb I got today has a LG display It looks brand new, 4 cycles. Glad I got the 15" the 13" looked cute in the shop but I may use this instead of my over hot 27 iMac. 14 days to test it.

Should I look for screen issues being a LG or just forget it and use it?

not another one, in all likelihood the display will be fine, enjoy your Mac and forget about the nonsense, everyone and anyone with a problem gravitates to forums such as this, by far the vast majority are happy with their purchase. Obsessing about you computer is just a downward spiral, Mac`s are meant to be used and abused not venerated...