High-end classic MBP vs. low-end rMBP

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Suno, Sep 10, 2012.

  1. Suno macrumors 6502

    Suno

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2011
    #1
    I have a question regarding the two. For me, the RAM, vRAM/vCard, and the harddrive are all the same (I have my own 256 SSD to replace the classic MBP if I choose to get that).

    The difference lies with the processor and obviously the screen (and mundane things like size/weight). My question is this:

    1. Is there a noticeable difference in the processing power between the 2.3 and 2.6 ghz? Although I don't use the laptop for intensive things like programming or rendering videos, I do occasionally game and I imagine that the retina screen takes more resource to facilitate than a regular MBP screen.

    2. If the resolution of the screen is that large, wouldn't webpages appear tiny? I know more recent websites that utilize modern day techniques wouldn't have any problem rendering the site to be retina-capable, but what about older sites?

    3. With a larger resolution, is there any problem with smoothness? I've only played with the retina for a little bit when it first came out, but one thing that was highly noticeable to me was how botched up scrolling was. There was definitely a noticeable amount of choppiness to it that would otherwise not have been there if it was a regular MBP.
     
  2. haruhiko macrumors 68040

    haruhiko

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2009
    #2
    1. I think the GPU matters more in gaming and there shouldn't be any significant difference solely due to the CPU. For your information the GPU of the rMBP is reported to be overclocked so that it's 'more powerful' than the cMBP.

    2. This is handled by the OS. Website elements should appear in the same size.

    3. Scrolling has problem in certain websites, most likely due to software glitches: some "simpler" websites have more lag than some really complex ones.
     
  3. Suno thread starter macrumors 6502

    Suno

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2011
    #3
    Ugh I can't decide between the two.

    I want the classic-MBP because it's user upgradable and it's tried-and-proven through generations of MBP's before it. I hate the thought of being stuck with the factory shipped RAM and SSD for the Retina. Still, with the cMBP, I get stuck with a soon-to-be outdated chasis, as well as being stuck with a deadweight ODD that I don't need.

    But on the other hand, rMBP is thinner, lighter, and has the retina screen. I can't upgrade anything on my own, but is that worth sacrificing just for a lighter computer with retina screen? Not to mention it's a first gen, it's the "test" generation. I hate the idea of being stuck with 256 SSD and I don't want to spend more money on the high-end model just because of space issue.

    someone please halp and put mah mind at ease...
     
  4. mykelala01, Sep 10, 2012
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2012

    mykelala01 macrumors 6502

    mykelala01

    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    #4
    Don't think just listen to your heart desire. Over thinking cause headache, nausea and some buyers remorse. If you buy, by following your heart it means you gonna love it.

    And one more thing I love my cMBP. But Leo Laporte just upgrade his 256 gb rMBP using OWC 480 GB drive. So you are not totally stuck with 256gb.
     
  5. bogatyr macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    #5
    rMBP with 16GB of RAM is unlikely going to need a RAM upgrade while you own it. I couldn't even find 16GB RAM modules to upgrade a current laptop to 32GB (next step up really, 2x16GB).

    The SSD can be replaced with an OWC drive. So you can upgrade that down the line if you so desire. It will void your warranty (so people say on here), but you can swap back in the factory SSD if you ever need Apple to do work on it - just don't strip the screws!
     

Share This Page