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

Early 2011 Hi Res anti-glare vs. New Retina Display

teerexx52

teerexx52

macrumors 68020
Original poster
May 1, 2005
2,075
184
Florida West Coast
I was wondering if anyone out there has had the opportunity to compare the MacBook Pro 15" Hi Res anti-glare screen to the new MacBook Pro Retina screen? I have both in front of me at this moment and the hi res antiglare really does look good by comparison. Would appreciate input from anyone else. Thanks.
 
teerexx52 said:
I was wondering if anyone out there has had the opportunity to compare the MacBook Pro 15" Hi Res anti-glare screen to the new MacBook Pro Retina screen? I have both in front of me at this moment and the hi res antiglare really does look good by comparison. Would appreciate input from anyone else. Thanks.
Click to expand...

I'm debating the same choice. I'm leaning towards the antiglare along with the ability for user upgrades. SSD's price is dropping like a rock. I can see me having an antiglare MBP with no DVD drive and 2 512gb SSD's along with whatever the unofficial max ram turns out to be. All for substantially less than the maxed rMBP.
 
Last edited:
Also interested - I currently have a 15" hi-res antiglare and thinking about retina. It's all about the screen for my usage.
 
cruggles said:
Also interested - I currently have a 15" hi-res antiglare and thinking about retina. It's all about the screen for my usage.
Click to expand...

i had a anti glare mbp and now have the rmbp. there is no comparison the rmbp clarity is nothing like any computer screen i have seen, it is the best screen i have ever had.
 
Greg M said:
I'm debating the same choice. I'm leaning towards the antiglare along with the ability for user upgrades. SSD's price is dropping like a rock. I can see me having an antiglare MBP with no DVD drive and 2 512gb SSD's along with whatever the unofficial max ram turns out to be. All for substantially less than the maxed rMBP.
Click to expand...

I currently have an early 2011 high end MacBook Pro 15" with the high res anti-glare. I added a Crucial M4 256GB and an OWC data doubler with a 750GB platter drive. I was sure In could not live without the retina screen in this new RMBP. It is indeed beautiful but been doing side by side comparisons all day. The high res really does look very good by comparison. Not better but still very nice screen. Thought I would sell it and keep the RMBP. I just don't need the extra storage and I like the reduced weight so I may still make the switch. Have a few weeks to decide.
 
cruggles said:
Also interested - I currently have a 15" hi-res antiglare and thinking about retina. It's all about the screen for my usage.
Click to expand...

The retina is a shocker! Just drop dead beautiful screen. Side by side as I look at them I guess it is just a matter of preference. The HR anti-glare really does hold its own though in my opinion.
 
Can you take some pictures of the two side-by-side? I have a pre-unibody MacBook Pro now, and I'm curious how glossy the retina MBP is in comparison.
 
It would be great if you could post a photo of the two (hi-res and retina) sitting side by side with a sunlight window or a lamp behind you so we could get an appreciation of the glare.

Thanks in advance
 
It seems like the Retina MBP should win out in terms of detail, viewing angles, contrast, and black levels. If however you really like the antiglare, the RMBP's glass screen can't quite match it.
 
Plus people might like the fact that the antiglare screen is brighter than the retina display ... to each his own.
 
Here you go.


i-tVw2zP8-L.jpg
 
Even from that distance it's not hard to tell which is the superior screen. The retina looks just gorgeous.
 
Although I'll be able to do the very same comparison on Tuesday (when my rMBP arrives), please could you put the rMBP in 1650x1080 mode?
Theoretically this should mean both have the same scale/real estate.
 
RestlessCaviar said:
Thanks for that. How do you find the comparison when in the 1650x1080 mode?
Click to expand...

It is a hard comparison. If you get your nose up to the screen the RMBP is better.Text is razor sharp. At any normal viewing distance it is really hard to tell the difference in the text. The Hi Res MBP has a brighter screen by a bit. The colors on the RMBP pop a bit better. Blacks are blacker, grays are grayer. Of course on the Hi Res anti-glare there is no reflection. The biggest difference to me is glossy vs. anti-glare. That's what I perceive the most. Both screens are outstanding. The retina does not win by a knock out but it does win. Just my opinion with them both sitting in front of me.
 
Just now found this article.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-33620_3-5...a-look-how-much-the-new-macbook-pro-displays/

Has some screenshots to answer just this question.

----------
teerexx52 said:
It is a hard comparison. If you get your nose up to the screen the RMBP is better.Text is razor sharp. At any normal viewing distance it is really hard to tell the difference in the text. The Hi Res MBP has a brighter screen by a bit. The colors on the RMBP pop a bit better. Blacks are blacker, grays are grayer. Of course on the Hi Res anti-glare there is no reflection. The biggest difference to me is glossy vs. anti-glare. That's what I perceive the most. Both screens are outstanding. The retina does not win by a knock out but it does win. Just my opinion with them both sitting in front of me.
Click to expand...

I think for me the best thing is the even higher option of 1920x1200. Tried this in store and it was perfectly usable IMO. As a software dev I find having a more real estate very useful.
 
I didn't have it side by side, but I played with a display model at Best Buy at the 1680x1050 scaled resolution. As a frequent user of hi-res glossy 2010 Macbook Pro, I can say the Retina looked much better. It wasn't the pixel density that won it for me though, it was the color reproduction and viewing angles. Even in your picture posted in this thread, the Retina's colors seem far more vibrant and realistic.
 
My experience is that the Retina (like any IPS) looks really nice, but I find the glare far too distracting. The "less glare" doesn't mean "you will experience glare less often"; it just means "the everpresent glare is not as bright". It's still plenty visible, and if you found it distracting before, it's still distracting. (And still causes eyestrain.)

Basically, if I had to choose between them, I'd take the antiglare screen, but if an IPS matte screen were on offer, I'd take that.
 
therealseebs said:
My experience is that the Retina (like any IPS) looks really nice, but I find the glare far too distracting. The "less glare" doesn't mean "you will experience glare less often"; it just means "the everpresent glare is not as bright". It's still plenty visible, and if you found it distracting before, it's still distracting. (And still causes eyestrain.)

Basically, if I had to choose between them, I'd take the antiglare screen, but if an IPS matte screen were on offer, I'd take that.
Click to expand...

This. I held the two side by side in the brightly lit Apple Store and the reflection/glare was WAY worse on the rMBP. I honestly couldn't tell that it was "less reflective" than the 13" MBP across the table.

The rMBP screen is definitely sharper than the anti-glare high-res, but in terms of glare, the anti-glare high-res is still king by a large margin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back