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

MacBook Pro Retina vs Razor Blade

playsontheleft said:
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?
Click to expand...

I call my windows partition my Xbox partition because it is 100% for gaming. Mac is for everything else. I would never own a restricted windows only pc.
 
Pressure said:
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).
Click to expand...

There is no debate that the MacBook Pro Retina's Display is inferior, I never meant to imply it would be for general use. It is far superior thanks to its pixel density though the statistics I was referencing were how blacks were tested to be about 20% deeper on it and more importantly, a higher gamut of color can be displayed. The Retina Display is in a class of its own, although if you're going to be mainly gaming then the Blade will look a little better at 1080p, especially since that's its native resolution and the Retina's 650M will be lucky to push a 2880 resolution in most newer games.
 
Unless you plan on driving an external display, the rMPB's high resolution may choke the 650m on modern DX11 games.
Apple really should have included 2GB of VRAM to help with the higher resolution.
 
gentlefury said:
macuserx86 said:
Unless you plan on driving an external display, the rMPB's high resolution may choke the 650m on modern DX11 games.
Apple really should have included 2GB of VRAM to help with the higher resolution.
Click to expand...

it doesn't
Click to expand...

This.



Personally, I'll be buying a Gigabyte U2442N, and enjoy the $1000 I save while getting better framerates in a more portable machine.
 
Last edited:
MICHAELSD said:
...and more importantly, a higher gamut of color can be displayed. The Retina Display is in a class of its own, although if you're going to be mainly gaming then the Blade will look a little better at 1080p, especially since that's its native resolution and the Retina's 650M will be lucky to push a 2880 resolution in most newer games.
Click to expand...

Again dude. Higher gamut means games will look more wrong. Not better. Games even more than print are severely color palette limited. Meaning they ain't going Wide anytime soon. It's like over compressing audio. It just is not the creative vision the artist wanted you to have. Why is no one talking about response times and input lag if we are going to compare gaming screens? Color is a worthless topic as most games replace your color at launch. You get good ol' native and on a laptop screen that is a certain blue crap. The IPS laptop screen is pretty fast for a mobile panel. Most laptops screen test over 20ms with ungodly amounts of input lag.
What is fairly funny is the fact that Razer is selling this as a "Best Gaming" laptop and it is a pubic hair shy of being a Macbook Pro I bought for under $2000.00 which is NEVER seen as a gaming laptop. Very similar specs. Same RAM, Even more limited storage options. Same GPU just rebranded and clocked slightly higher + memory you may not need at 1080p (1024MB is fine with DDR5). CPU doesn't matter at 2.6 vs 2.8, 6MB L3 or 8MB makes no real difference but your e-peen. GTX can usually take more punishment than GT so you may extend it further still but at 0.88" you ain't going too far. Also there is the dreaded Razer build quality. No thanks. Razer is an "Everything beta forever" type of company. It will be discontinued in a few years. If not sooner.
 
Last edited:
gentlefury said:
Hey! They have an asian guy, not a british guy...and everything is black and green! Totally different!
Click to expand...

...and now...Asian Ive!
"See what we've done is paint a Macbook chassis black and add a tiny screen feature that will require a million firmware updates to get right, if ever".
 
Hi everyone. I've been following this great forum for a while, but making my first post now.

It seems that the new Razer Blade's CPU is Intel i7-3632QM. Does anyone know how it performs compared to i7-3820QM?

Cheers!
 
A187 said:
Hi everyone. I've been following this great forum for a while, but making my first post now.

It seems that the new Razer Blade's CPU is Intel i7-3632QM. Does anyone know how it performs compared to i7-3820QM?

Cheers!
Click to expand...

Quite a bit slower. i7-3632QM is 2.2GHz (3.2GHz Turbo) 4-core/ 8-thread 6MB L3. A base spec Macbook 15" of any kind is faster @2.3GHz. That's a bummer Razer. Inferior. Probably more than necessary for gaming but Macbooks are killing you. 3820QM is 2.7GHz (3.7GHz Turbo) 4-core/ 8-thread 8MB L3.
 
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