MBP 15 (2016) vs Razer Blade 1060 (2016)

[Totti10]

I've been working with my new MBP 15" (2.7ghz, 460, 1TB) for a week, and have also been reading as much as I possibly could about the abilities of my machine and those of a comparable PC laptop with these famed Pascal NVIDIA cards.

So, yesterday, while at the Microsoft store, I decided to purchase a brand new Razer Blade 14". Configuration is 16GB of Ram, 512 SSD, 1060GTX card.

I am NOT a benchmarker, I am just a real world user. I proceeded to download adobe creative cloud since my main need for the machine is for video editing.

I then proceeded to use the exact same workflow as I would normally have done on the MBP.

I copied a 20 minute 4K game to the SSD, and then imported into a project on Premiere. Quickly dropped clips on a timeline, and (once I figured out the million windows on Premiere) I exported the file.

On my old 2012 machine, the export took around 15 minutes. On the new MacBook Pro, exporting to the internal SSD took 6 minutes. Exporting to a 7200RPM external took 13 minutes.

So, why is it taking me 35 minutes on the more powerful Razer to do the same?

One thing, which many will say invalidates this test... I use FCPX on Mac OS, but I'd have to switch to Premiere or something comparable if I moved to Windows, so to me the test is still apples to apples...

 

[SoyCapitanSoyCapitan]

Depends on the codec you export with in Media Encoder. Some will be faster on macOS some will be faster on Windows, especially if the codec supports GPU based encoding.

You can also see write speeds were a factor in your test.

 

[sinoka56]

so you're that guy

 

[keysofanxiety]

Thanks for some actual feedback on real-world productive tasks. So many critical reviews from the nMBP are based around being bad for gaming, which is somewhat missing the point.

 

[Totti10]

so you're that guy

???
[doublepost=1480176938][/doublepost]

Thanks for some actual feedback on real-world productive tasks. So many critical reviews from the nMBP are based around being bad for gaming, which is somewhat missing the point.

That's really all I cared about to begin with. I was looking for an upgrade to my current video workflow.

There are other pros and cons. My MBP cost me upwards of $3000, while the Razer was a 1900 dollar machine.

The Razer is well built, but the screen on the MBP is downright gorgeous. Windows blows. It started so many updates that at one point the machine just hung. I had to restart it just to finish and be able to log in the first time.

The Razer does feel quite good compared to all the comparable PC laptops, it is almost a Macbook (old) feel.

I am not a huge fan of the Touchbar. I get what what it is used for, but like most have said, I could easily access real functions that I needed with the keys. Now I spend my time looking for the right icon to mess with. It's inefficient for sure, for day to day stuff.

 

[Ries]

The macbook pro only scored 4273 in geekbench 4 while the razor did 6513 in Fire Strike!

In case you don't get the message, you are doing different types of workload in different programs and think they compare somehow.

 

[Totti10]

The macbook pro only scored 4273 in geekbench 4 while the razor did 6513 in Fire Strike!

In case you don't get the message, you are doing different types of workload in different programs and think they compare somehow.

That's actually not true. I am doing the same task on two different machines, using the same components that the two machines provide. If you want to say that software is different, sure, but the task itself is one and the same on either side.

Carry on...

 

[runner77]

???
[doublepost=1480176938][/doublepost]


There are other pros and cons. My MBP cost me upwards of $3000, while the Razer was a 1900 dollar machine.

Now you know why.

 

[Ries]

That's actually not true. I am doing the same task on two different machines, using the same components that the two machines provide. If you want to say that software is different, sure, but the task itself is one and the same on either side.

Carry on...

No it's not. FCP X Transcodes and creates proxy files in the background while editing, Pr does what you ask of it. You're not measuring the same thing or are you going to claim a compression program is faster on one platform because it did half of the work before you hit start?

 

[xorjo]

It sounds to me like if you're doing video work, then Mac is your best option using Final Cut Pro. For everyone else, the Razer would outperform or be comparable to the mac in other pro applications. You have many 3D applications and Architecture design and that "Pros" use everyday exclusively for PC and leaves the Mac way behind. So you can't really compare a software that isn't available in PC to a Mac. There's noting comparable to Revit for example in a Mac, and on that basis alone I can say a Mac isn't Pro. But obviously, everyone has different uses.

 

[spacebro]

I'm looking at getting this razer blade to replace my 2015 macbook. The only thing stopping me is the neon green 3 headed insignia on the cover. I'm an adult who doesn't like neon juvenile **** on my work equipment!

 

[nikster0029]

I'm looking at getting this razer blade to replace my 2015 macbook. The only thing stopping me is the neon green 3 headed insignia on the cover. I'm an adult who doesn't like neon juvenile **** on my work equipment!

Get a dbrand skin

 

[SoyCapitanSoyCapitan]

Depending on the codec, FCPX can and does render whole videos in the background while working. In those cases when you export all it is doing is saving a file that has already been rendered.

Premiere renders a lower quality cached file while working. It only renders to full quality and to chosen codec after you send it to Media Encoder.

 

[jackoatmon]

premiere is a garbage program

 

[dotdotdot]

I'm in a similar camp (own the 15" MacBook Pro and am waiting on a Razer Blade to arrive and whichever is better I will keep) - but your testing running Final Cut vs Premiere unquestionably invalidates your test.

Final Cut Pro is Apple's signature program, not only is the new MacBook Pro heavily optimized for it, but it's literally THE reason some people choose to stick with Apple. If you own Premiere, why not put that on the MacBook Pro too and run the same test? (Keeping in mind that Adobe should be optimizing Premiere for the new MBP soon as well...)

 

[richinaus]

It sounds to me like if you're doing video work, then Mac is your best option using Final Cut Pro. For everyone else, the Razer would outperform or be comparable to the mac in other pro applications. You have many 3D applications and Architecture design and that "Pros" use everyday exclusively for PC and leaves the Mac way behind. So you can't really compare a software that isn't available in PC to a Mac. There's noting comparable to Revit for example in a Mac, and on that basis alone I can say a Mac isn't Pro. But obviously, everyone has different uses.

Except for Archicad...... or just use the mac with bootcamp to use Revit so you still get the benefit of the nice hardware.
I am an architect and designer and the sole reason to use windows, is Revit. Everything else can be done on the mac. I am sure one day this situation will change also so no need at all to go windows.

Even though I say the above, for day to day work, it makes more sense for me to be in Windows, and all the other apps I use separate to Revit are on PC too, so really I am OS agnostic.

I have held off investing in the new 15" and LG monitor for now to see what comes up in March / April with regards to the desktops / iMac / Surface Studio. At this point I may well jump ship to windows for my professional work and remain on macOS for the consumer side [which is the direction it all appears to be going in]

For me, the only mac replacements are the MS Surface range up to now, although I haven't seen a razer in real life so can't comment - it does look nice in the pictures though. I am very happy for the choice though.

 

[spacebro]

I'm in a similar camp (own the 15" MacBook Pro and am waiting on a Razer Blade to arrive and whichever is better I will keep) - but your testing running Final Cut vs Premiere unquestionably invalidates your test.

Final Cut Pro is Apple's signature program, not only is the new MacBook Pro heavily optimized for it, but it's literally THE reason some people choose to stick with Apple. If you own Premiere, why not put that on the MacBook Pro too and run the same test? (Keeping in mind that Adobe should be optimizing Premiere for the new MBP soon as well...)

I was going to order a razer laptop but was told they are not reliable and loud. Let us know how the razer compares. Now I'm leaning towards a cheapish dual core thinkpad with ram upgrade and fast ssd, maybe the next time they refresh.

 

[leman]

You have many 3D applications and Architecture design and that "Pros" use everyday exclusively for PC and leaves the Mac way behind. So you can't really compare a software that isn't available in PC to a Mac. There's noting comparable to Revit for example in a Mac, and on that basis alone I can say a Mac isn't Pro. But obviously, everyone has different uses.

Do you have any benchmarks to show how these applications scale with GPU? I am asking because I am curious. I know nothing about Revit but after a short search it seems that it does not support GPU-accelerated rendering.