Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

pmontanarella

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Oct 12, 2012
321
7
Vancouver, Canada
Hi all,

I've read plenty of reviews of the new 13" Retina MBP and they all seem to say one thing in common: the 13" rMBP is underpowered and overall can't cope with all the pixels it needs to drive. I was wondering if any owner of the retina MBP could share their opinion? Does it lag noticeably? I am looking to buy a new laptop however, after reading about this issue I'm looking more to the non-Retina MBP than to its Retina counterpart.

Thanks in advance,

Pietro
 
Hey -

I've been using mine for just over a week and I've had no problems. Been surfing the web and streaming music via Spotify constantly, mixed with running some stats programs, word, powerpoint and some basic graphics editing. All in "best for retina" mode.

Things are running as smoothly as the day I got it - I've not had to turn it off once (apart from the odd software upgrade on day 1).

As for supposed scroll lag on the web I can't say I've noticed any - Safari is very smooth.

Of course it will depend what you plan on using it for. I'm sure I don't use anywhere near what it is capable of.
 
Hi all,

I've read plenty of reviews of the new 13" Retina MBP and they all seem to say one thing in common: the 13" rMBP is underpowered and overall can't cope with all the pixels it needs to drive. I was wondering if any owner of the retina MBP could share their opinion? Does it lag noticeably? I am looking to buy a new laptop however, after reading about this issue I'm looking more to the non-Retina MBP than to its Retina counterpart.

Thanks in advance,

Pietro

The non-retina/current gen 13" MBP has the same i5 processor, half the RAM, and a slow as hell 5400rpm 500GB hard drive...and it still can power itself and an external display of up to 2560x1600.

That said, why would the 13" rMBP be underpowered when it has twice the RAM (8GB) and a super-fast 128GB SSD pushing the same exact resolution that the non-retina model can push to an external display?

It's only considered "underpowered" because a bunch of people on these forums (including myself at one point) got the notion that the 13" would share the same specs as the 15" in a smaller form factor (dedicated GPU, quad-core, larger SSD)...when this wasn't the case on the previous gen either. The 13" rMBP is $500 less than the 15" and makes some sacrifices to do so. I own one and am very happy so far as I don't do anything that requires the 15"'s specs.
 
Hey -

I've been using mine for just over a week and I've had no problems. Been surfing the web and streaming music via Spotify constantly, mixed with running some stats programs, word, powerpoint and some basic graphics editing. All in "best for retina" mode.

Things are running as smoothly as the day I got it - I've not had to turn it off once (apart from the odd software upgrade on day 1).

As for supposed scroll lag on the web I can't say I've noticed any - Safari is very smooth.

Of course it will depend what you plan on using it for. I'm sure I don't use anywhere near what it is capable of.

I'll be using it mostly for browsing, email, word (for school) and powerpoint. I will probably also be doing some light video and photo editing (with iMovie).
I don't think that will be a problem.

Thanks,
Pietro
 
That said, why would the 13" rMBP be underpowered when it has twice the RAM (8GB) and a super-fast 128GB SSD pushing the same exact resolution that the non-retina model can push to an external display?

The 13" Retina MBP is doing more than just "pushing pixels to a high res display" ... It has to resample everything that is happening on the screen so that it shows an effective resolution of 1200 x 800 / 1440 x 900 / or 1680 x 1050. That is what slows the computer down.

In your example, the regular 13" MBP is pushing pixels to a 2560 x 1600 display where pixels are being displayed on a 1 to 1 basis.
 
I believe it to be mostly driver related, for my 15"rPro at least, give Apple some time to release some updates.
 
The 13" Retina MBP is doing more than just "pushing pixels to a high res display" ... It has to resample everything that is happening on the screen so that it shows an effective resolution of 1200 x 800 / 1440 x 900 / or 1680 x 1050. That is what slows the computer down.

In your example, the regular 13" MBP is pushing pixels to a 2560 x 1600 display where pixels are being displayed on a 1 to 1 basis.

I think the "Best for Retina" resolution is not using scaling which is why it does not provide a disclaimer saying it will affect performance. If it were, wouldn't the iPad be "underpowered" as well given the same process with the 1024x768 resolution doubling?
 
I think the "Best for Retina" resolution is not using scaling which is why it does not provide a disclaimer saying it will affect performance. If it were, wouldn't the iPad be "underpowered" as well given the same process with the 1024x768 resolution doubling?

Pretty much all of this is wrong and irrelevant.
 
I think the "Best for Retina" resolution is not using scaling which is why it does not provide a disclaimer saying it will affect performance. If it were, wouldn't the iPad be "underpowered" as well given the same process with the 1024x768 resolution doubling?

Correction: Looks like it does do the scaling at all resolutions. What is the most taxing on? The integrated GPU of the 13" or the processor?

Either way, I haven't had any issues thus far and have a hard time believing Apple would release a $1,700 product that cannot handle itself. Seems like the issues lay in the minds of "spec-heads" versus actual real-world usage.;)
 
I've had mine for a few days and it's an awesome little machine. I'm selling my MBA in exchange.
 
I think the "Best for Retina" resolution is not using scaling which is why it does not provide a disclaimer saying it will affect performance. If it were, wouldn't the iPad be "underpowered" as well given the same process with the 1024x768 resolution doubling?

The "best for retina" option screen is also scaled. And lets not forget that the 15" is also using the HD4000 most of the time, unless you use some "demanding" software, and that screen has even more pixels to handle. I can notice some slight lag on my 15" from time to time (very rarely, luckily), but mostly it's as smooth as butter, and i seriously believe it´s a driver problem.

I don´t think the 13" is underpowered, its easily on par with other 13 inches out there, and when you go for that size, you have to sacrifice something else. plain and simple. I can´t believe people had hopes for a 13" with the 15" power. It just isn´t possible.
 
I don´t think the 13" is underpowered, its easily on par with other 13 inches out there, and when you go for that size, you have to sacrifice something else. plain and simple. I can´t believe people had hopes for a 13" with the 15" power. It just isn´t possible.

At least not at the $1,699 price point, which was critical for them to reach to bring retina Macs to the masses.
 
I haven't noticed any "underperformance" from my new 13"rMBP. I had the 2010 MBA before. This machine weighs a little more. But the CPU is way faster and the display is tons better. I have watched videos and do a lot of web surfing and programming. Have noticed any 'lag' yet. The animations all look smooth to me.

I do not use the machine for serious gaming. If you want a gaming laptop, there are probably other better choices.
 
If you travel and need something light, go with the rMBP or MBA 13". If you need more power, go with the 15" rMBP. On a daily usage, such as surfing, writing, and basic graphic design (photoshop) - you won't see any difference between the 13" and 15" rMBP. If you start to edit video and deal with extra large image files, then it would be wise to get the 15" rMBP.
Is the 13" rMBP overpriced? probably, but if you have the money and it satisfies your needs, why waiting?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.