Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by nlr, Jul 18, 2012.
I was wondering on what everyone genuinely think is better for gaming?
Is this really necessary to ask? It's obvious the rMBP is superior in every single way. It is CHEAPER, more ELEGANT, and PERFORMS far better than that piece of crap unit. If you compare the two computers specs side by side, you can clearly identify the rMBP outclasses it because the razer blade uses previous generation GPU and CPU. The only feature I want that the razer blade has is the kensington lock, otherwise it is just paper weight in my opinion.
GT 650m > GT 555m by a landslide.
Pssst... PC's are better for gaming.
Not in this case, look at the specs before talking.
For just gaming I prefer the Razor Blade.
This would be normal computer vs gaming computer.
The specs do seem higher on MBP, but if you wait till the next refresh.
Its GT555M < GT660M but I want to see how the 2GB on 555 works.
But buying a computer for 2800USD?
Build your own gaming PC.
Much cheaper and more high spec.
The MBP will be cheaper and more powerful.
The Razer has a last generation dual-core i7 and its graphics card is going to be slightly weaker as well. Slightly slower RAM, SSD, less battery and bad speakers, thicker body and of course a far worse display. However with the Razer you get a small secondary screen in the trackpad and configurable keys over it.
At the price it sells for (2800$), I don't think anyone should consider the Razer Blade. There is simply no competition for the rMBP considering its specs, form factor and price. It would seem crazy to me to pay that kind of premium just to get a gimmicky little screen in your trackpad instead of better specs and a Retina Display.
If you want a laptop that's considerably more powerful for gaming than a rMBP you're going to have to look at those heavy 1.5"+ laptops, or consider building a separate dedicated gaming desktop.
After years of playing WoW in 25 man raids I have come to see the term "gaming laptop" as something of an oxymoron.
Inadequate cooling or space for expansion limits the lifespan and reliability of such machines.
The guild I raid with has had numerous laptop raiders, all of whom have been let down by their equipment due to overheating after prolonged use or obsolescence due to lower powered GFX cards. My GF's son used to raid with his MBP 2007 (GT8600m) in a guild called Zero FPS because they all had serious performance issues when in Lichking raids. At least they saw the funny side of it.
I would consider any laptop of limited/casual gaming use because of this. Even a top spec one today will not last the course of development for more than a couple of years.
By comparison we have desktop users with upgraded towers that were bought in 2008 and still manage perfectly well today.
So, which would I choose? The desktop one.... no, wait....
Youre comparing a laptop to a desktop in terms of price, you cant build your own laptop, and people buying a gaming laptop need the mobility, so therefore its not the greatest argument to build your own gaming rig.
People like you are the reason we get a bad rap. You can have an opinion without being a condescending douchebag.
Depends whether you want a 15" screen or 17" screen. The 660M in the Razer Blade is only 10-15% faster than the Retina MacBook Pro, so that's a very small difference if you're looking for better performance. For load times, the RMBP will dominate the Blade with its flash memory. On that account, the RMBP is 10% thinner. Honestly I'd go with the Retina MacBook Pro since it's $600 cheaper and it has flash memory so you're getting more for the price. Older games will run at Retina resolution too so they will look spectacular.
You sir, are seriously misinformed. The they haven't announced what specific CPU they are using but its a quad core ivy bridge i7, it has a GTX660m as well as 1600mhz ram.
Do you even have to ask? The rMBP is cheaper and lighter then the new-gen Blade, it has a vastly better screen and maybe even the marginally faster GPU (don't forget that the 650m in the rMBP is clocked faster than your usual GTX660m).
As a side note: The Razer Blade's display is actually statistically better than the Retina, although the Retina's resolution push will show a more significant difference. The Blade is also matte, if that matters to you. So it will probably look better for games you have to play at 1080p.
You sir, didn't bother reading the date at which I posted this. We aren't even talking about the same computer.
The new one sucks even more considering the time at which it's released though.
Unless the GTX660 is OCed, the rMBP still has a better GPU and most likely the same CPU configuration options. Basically with the new Razer, you pay more to get a thicker plastic body, a mechanical hard drive (on a $2.5k laptop from 2012??), crappy TN screen with much worse pixel density and viewing angles, worse speakers, no thunderbolt and a smaller battery.
But hey you still get that gimmicky screen trackpad. Totally worth it. /s
This should be priced around $800 less to sell.
It is going to use a "not yet released" Ivy variant. Presumably the i7-3840QM. 2.8GHz Quad 45W TDP, Turbo All cores @3.6GHz, 3.7GHzx2, 3.8GHzx1. But big deal even with the i7-3615 @2.3GHz your most likely GPU bound. Laptop gaming is silly for your main rig anyway. I'd get the phenomenally better built and better screened rMBP as well. + it is cheaper even with CPU upgrades if you wanted. The Blade only ships with 64GB SSD + 500GB 7200 RPM. Rather have that 500GB in pure flash. I mean it is great for the PC folks who don't use OS X. But a MBP is very competitive right now even on price.
I am not sure but it seems like this is your primary concern. You're going to want to look at the GPU initially amongst other internal hardware such as processing power and adequate RAM. I don't really think peripherals matter that much personally, just make sure you can run whatever game it is that you are trying to run efficiently and use a display that you are comfortable with.
The rMBP beats it. The oc'd 650m is faster than the gtx 660m
Considering the pricing of the last 17" I'd say the price is reasonable. The only reason it doesn't seem like it is because there's no apple stamped on it. If the Razer blade were a 17" cMBP it would be a good one.
Well we still don't know a lot about the revised hardware. Let's assume the CPU is in the 2.3-2.6GHz range and comparable to the new MacBooks. The GPU is tricky because Apple messed around with theirs, but overclocking is pretty easy to accomplish in Windows. Double VRAM in the Blade as well. Same amount of RAM in the standard configuration at the same speed. The trackpads are completely different and we are all familiar with the merits of Apple's solution. If the last generation is anything to go by, the Blade is also lacking in the battery department- at least when compared to a Mac. Superior colour reproduction for Razer on a matte 17" display but obviously without the 'Retina'. Operating system, etc. What really separates the Blade from the new MacBook Pro (and I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this) is the use of some standard components like RAM and HDD in the former, so it retains some upgradability.
They're similar enough but not really at all. You kind of have to decide what you'll be doing with it, since they are both very attractive.
Please have in mind that the Geforce GT 650M in the MacBook Pro with retina display is clocked higher than the Geforce GT 660M.
AnandTech calls it The King of All Notebook Displays, despite having lower color gamut and color accuracy than the Razer Blade display (do note that the MacBook Pro has better white and contrast levels).
You can always oc the 660 in the Blade as well.
You can always OC the GPU in the rMBP as well...
See what I did there? BTW, there are threads on rMBP OC here, with some impressive results.
I'd honestly say that there's really not enough between them to bother picking based on which is better for gaming. Given the huge OCing potential of the 650m, the 660m isn't that far ahead of it so the performance difference you notice will be fairly minor depending on how you've OC'd the GPUs. It's probably better to pick the one which suits your needs outside of gaming since you likely won't notice that great a difference. I'd consider other factors - do you want the Retina display or a matte 17"? Do you want the rMBP's trackpad or the Blade's one? Does upgradability bother you? Do you want an SSD out of the box (iirc the Blade doesn't have one)? And of course, the obvious, do you want a Mac for when you're not gaming? Although if you're after pure gaming machine, it begs the question, why not build a desktop?
I know you can, since I'm the one who started one of the threads with OCing the 650m and benchmarks.
I was just saying you can oc the 660 because he said an oced 650m is better than the 660.