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

BlockEight88

macrumors regular
Original poster
Mar 20, 2013
217
32
This question isn't even subjective. Why discuss something that is proven?

rMBP has the best/newest screen. Air comes in 2nd, followed by cMBP.

But rMBP is light years ahead of the Air.

Whether some people can tell the difference or not, it doesn't change the scientific properties. For example, if you can't tell the difference between a polyester-cotton blend shirt, and a 100% cotton shirt... it doesn't mean the difference isn't there.

Are you saying the MBA screen is better than the regular MBP? Even with color gamut? The retina is a no brainer, of course. But I didn't think the regular MBP's screen was less than the current Air.
 

DarwinOSX

macrumors 68000
Nov 3, 2009
1,636
183
I think you are way off and this is bad advice.
8 GB should be the minimum for the Airs as it is for retina MBP's. I routinely use 5 to 6 GB of ram out of 8. The gpu alone uses 1 GB leaving only 3 GB for common tasks.
The i7 is far more than a 10% increase in performance. I don't know where you get 10% but there is actual data showing much different numbers.
You can find it here;
http://www.anandtech.com/print/7113/2013-macbook-air-core-i5-4250u-vs-core-i7-4650u
For $150 retail or 4141 student or corporate discount (that's hefty?) you get a faster cpu, clock, rate, and more cache which is especially important. A lot of people fail to understand how much of an increase the additional cache represents. All of that combined is 30% better than the i5.
So we see the following performance improvements from an i7.
27% increase in single threaded performance
17% increase in multithreaded performance
25% reduction in import and export times for video editing accounting for a performance improvement in over 20% over the i5
Over 20% improvement in photo and video editing.
Over 20% improvement in Xcode performance.
You do get better battery life with the i5 so if that and cost are a major concern then that would be the only reason to go with an i5.
There is no point in comparing the current Air to the current retina since we all know new retinas are weeks away. The new retinas will start at 8 GB of ram, have faster prods than the Airs, faster gpu's, the same faster sad of the Airs, and a much much better screen.
The cost difference between an upgrade Air and a base retina will be minimal.
the new retina are expected to be a little thiner but they are already pretty close to an Air in weight and thickness and actually have a smaller circumference.
Jumping to a 15" retina which costs much more and will be heavier and bulkier makes little sense.
The current 13" retina has far from lackluster performance. It sounds like you are just saying that to back up your claims because you won't be able to find data showing that. The Anandtech data I provided above shows the opposite in fact.




Imo the Mac which has the best performance/price right now is MBA 13" (i5, 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD). Why?

First of all, having owned an MBP 2008 and MBA 2011, I'd say that at least 256GB of storage is no-brainer. You shouldn't make do with an ext HDD and install apps on them, making them running slower than usual. If you need bootcamp or VMWare, Parallel etc. then 128GB won't cut it. About RAM, 4GB is enough for most of casual users but 8GB will ensure that the machine will stay for 3-5 years. It'll also help when you need to run virtualisation programs which demand much RAM. i7 IMO is not needed because it provides an extra 10% or so of performance, for a hefty price of $150, and you'll run into a risk of slightly compromising the battery life. If you want power, then consider an iMac or rMBP 15" instead.

Now, I'm going to compare the said MBA model ($1399) with rMBP 13" (i5, 8GB RAM, 256GB, $1699).

The only selling point of the rMBP 13" is its gorgeous retina display. Its performance is weak for such a pricey laptop. The rMBP 2012 model is weaker than the MBA 2013 according to some trusted benchmarks, and I doubt the rMBP 2013 will be significantly more powerful than the MBA. If anything, powerhouse users will need the quad core chip and dGPU of rMBP 15", not the lacklustre performance of the rMBP 13", and for casuals like me the MBA will suffice.

Back to the point about the retina display, I think it is without a doubt beautiful, but so is the display on the MBA. Whilst 1440x900 looks awful lot on paper, it's actually quite nice in reality. In addition, not so many applications right now support the retina display, so the only retina resolution you'll stare at is the desktop wallpaper, Apple-made apps and a few others. Even in a few more months, more retina-supported apps will be released, I don't think rMBP 13" can run them decently (especially games).

The MBA on the other hand, is thinner and lighter, has an amazing battery life and costs $300 less. I could have buy the 2TB WD ext HDD for $129.99 (on sale), a mouse and a nice sleeve, and still have $100 left to invest in applications. Or in my lunch for a whole month.

To sum up, I think the rMBP 13" is quite a waste of money for the performance you get. MBA 2013 and iMac/rMBP 15" is the way to go for casual and heavy users, respectively.

Nick :)


----------

You might make a good point or two, however, you only mention the pixels on the MBA. I wasn't so concerned about. I was more concerned the color gamut versus the retina MBP 13". Side by side, there is somewhat of a difference.

You make the 13" MBA sound pretty good lol.

Yeah. It's too bad pretty much everything he said is wrong.
 

magbarn

macrumors 68030
Oct 25, 2008
2,956
2,253
I think you are way off and this is bad advice.
8 GB should be the minimum for the Airs as it is for retina MBP's. I routinely use 5 to 6 GB of ram out of 8. The gpu alone uses 1 GB leaving only 3 GB for common tasks.
The current 13" retina has far from lackluster performance. It sounds like you are just saying that to back up your claims because you won't be able to find data showing that. The Anandtech data I provided above shows the opposite in fact.

Agreed, the 15 watt TDP on the MBA HD5000 seriously hampers it's performance to barely above the HD4000 in real life usage. The MBA has to be upgraded to i7 to match the CPU performance of the base 2012 rMBP 2.5 i5. By the time you add the upgraded CPU/8gb RAM to the MBA it's basically priced on par with the base rMBP 13. This rMBP 13 with 2.5/8gb ram/256gb SSD is cheaper than a 2013 MBA 13 with i7/8gb/256gb SSD

Haswell will fix the GPU shortcomings of the rMBP 13 as it will have a true Iris HD5100 GPU that has a full 28 watt TDP budget. Of course better battery life, faster SSD, and AC wifi will also be added.
 

BlockEight88

macrumors regular
Original poster
Mar 20, 2013
217
32
Agreed, the 15 watt TDP on the MBA HD5000 seriously hampers it's performance to barely above the HD4000 in real life usage. The MBA has to be upgraded to i7 to match the CPU performance of the base 2012 rMBP 2.5 i5. By the time you add the upgraded CPU/8gb RAM to the MBA it's basically priced on par with the base rMBP 13. This rMBP 13 with 2.5/8gb ram/256gb SSD is cheaper than a 2013 MBA 13 with i7/8gb/256gb SSD

Haswell will fix the GPU shortcomings of the rMBP 13 as it will have a true Iris HD5100 GPU that has a full 28 watt TDP budget. Of course better battery life, faster SSD, and AC wifi will also be added.

I didn't know that. So the current haswell processors in the MBA's are just as good as the current retina MBP processors, maybe a tad bit better?

Then I am sure the haswell processors Apple puts in the 13" RMBP will be much better than the haswell processors in the air?
 

magbarn

macrumors 68030
Oct 25, 2008
2,956
2,253
I didn't know that. So the current haswell processors in the MBA's are just as good as the current retina MBP processors, maybe a tad bit better?

Then I am sure the haswell processors Apple puts in the 13" RMBP will be much better than the haswell processors in the air?

The base Haswell i5 is slower than the base i5 in the rMBP, the MBA i7 is mostly the same as the base rMBP i5 and of course the HD5000 is roughly 16% faster than the HD4000.
 

AXs

macrumors 6502a
Sep 7, 2009
515
2
Andddd has twice the SSD speed, and twice the battery life. The i7 Air is faster than the i7 Retina 13" (all around), and the i5s are mostly the same.

Source: Anandtech Comparison.
 

magbarn

macrumors 68030
Oct 25, 2008
2,956
2,253
56097.png


56099.png


56100.png


56103.png


56102.png


56104.png


The above test show otherwise... Yes, the MBA has the better battery life and the MBA i7 is slightly faster than the rMBP 13 i5, but in many cases the 2013 MBA i5 is - slower - than last year's 2012 MBA i5 1.8.

I should know as I have both machines, my wife's 2012 rMBP 13 is just a little slower in processing lightroom pics than my 2013 MBA i7, but it was quicker than the i5/8/256 I returned earlier.

Yes, the 2013 MBA will boot and load apps faster, but that doesn't constitute overall faster performance as the i7 rMBP 13 CPU is even much faster than the i5 version in the above graphs.

Will the user notice the difference? Depends if you're going to pegging out the CPU like I do when processing 80+ MB DSLR RAW images from my D800. (I use my MBA 11 for this on the road as the rMBP 15 stays at home much of the time due to it's weight)
 
Last edited:

BlockEight88

macrumors regular
Original poster
Mar 20, 2013
217
32
Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

The above test show otherwise... Yes, the MBA has the better battery life and the MBA i7 is slightly faster than the rMBP 13 i5, but in many cases the 2013 MBA i5 is - slower - than last year's 2012 MBA i5 1.8.

Thanks for providing all of that. So looking at those benchmarks, once can conclude the i7 in the MBA is just a tad bit better than the core i5 in the RMBP.


Its more than obvious which is the better buy here. As many have already indicated, the maxed out Air puts you on level with the introductory 13" RMBP. I was going for the core i7 2.9 Ghz in the RMBP anyway. Only thing that is killing it for me is the Intel HD 4000 graphics.
 

magbarn

macrumors 68030
Oct 25, 2008
2,956
2,253
Thanks for providing all of that. So looking at those benchmarks, once can conclude the i7 in the MBA is just a tad bit better than the core i5 in the RMBP.


Its more than obvious which is the better buy here. As many have already indicated, the maxed out Air puts you on level with the introductory 13" RMBP. I was going for the core i7 2.9 Ghz in the RMBP anyway. Only thing that is killing it for me is the Intel HD 4000 graphics.

Just wait a bit more for haswell. It's almost there. It'll fix the majority if the shortcomings... The only advantage the 2013 MBA 13 will have over the haswell rMBP 13 is the battery life (most likely 9 vs 12 hours) and a measly 0.5 lb difference.
 

BlockEight88

macrumors regular
Original poster
Mar 20, 2013
217
32
So I was at another Best Buy this morning and really got to play with the new Air and rMBP. This is completely subjective, but I'll voice my opinion anyway lol. I found the Air to feel cheap, kind of like it can break or crack on the edges. I found the rMBP to be of much better build quality. Obviously its their top of the line notebooks. But I was rather shocked with the Air's build quality. Perhaps I'm over thinking it?

I cranked up brightness on both laptops to max and the Air's screen looked so washed out it wasn't even funny. While the color gamut and clarity of the text was quite impressing on the 13" rMBP and even 15" rMBP, I wasn't blown away by it. However, I'll still be picking up the 13" rMBP once haswell hits.

Someone else said that the June 2013 MBA's screen was better than the 2012 MBP, well I did not find that to be true at all either. But getting back to the Air, I'd rather have a notebook that feels more firm and solid like the rMBP.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.