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

New Razorblade a Compelling Replacement?

The Razer Blade is probably the best overall Windows notebook around. I have reservations regarding notions that it is superior to the MacBook Pro in all respects though:

1) MBP runs all three major operating systems
2) Battery life is superior
3) The MBP has configuration options that make it more affordable
4) You get service and support from ubiquitous Apple stores that specialize in Apple hardware (hugely underestimated advantage in purchasing Apple products IMHO)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sully
Samuelsan2001 said:
Apple use only intels best processors in every class and have had to wait for them because Intel only released the best skylake chips with the best graphics last of all.

They also design test and make their own logic boards, this is not an instant process, and 2-3 months from chip release to getting enough product for a worldwide release without to much in the way of supply constraints is amazingly quick not slow.

But mainly just have a bit of patience for pity's sake, look what happened last year when apple gave in to pressure and released the 15 inch with haswell, broadwell came out 2 weeks later and everybody is still whinging on about it.....
Click to expand...


LOL.... Intels....Best.... Ok you think that. Also uses middling AMD and a middling one at it with the 370x.....
 
Closingracer said:
No...not really but you go ahead and think that once again
Click to expand...

What are you even talking about now?

Go look at Intel's line up of CPU's.

You do not see Apple using the lower end models, for each family they usually use the ones on the higher end.
So for the i7, all their 15in retinas have the best ones from intel. The i5 dual cores, have the best speced ones. For the Macbook, the highest speced CoreM's and so on and so forth.

Apple has also been using the Iris Pro graphics and not the HD. The Iris Pro graphic CPU's have been released later than the HD>

If you look at Intel's release dates they are usually staggered

-1st Release usually low power processors along with HD graphics
and then usually later they have the HQ processors with Iris Pro graphics and these are the processors apple uses on the 15in Retina MacBooks. I am using this as an example as it is the one I am most familiar with but it applies to their entire line up.



IT IS A FACT, and you saying 'No not really' doesn't change that. Unless you have some factual information you would like to share?
 
Crzyrio said:
What are you even talking about now?

Go look at Intel's line up of CPU's.

You do not see Apple using the lower end models, for each family they usually use the ones on the higher end.
So for the i7, all their 15in retinas have the best ones from intel. The i5 dual cores, have the best speced ones. For the Macbook, the highest speced CoreM's and so on and so forth.

Apple has also been using the Iris Pro graphics and not the HD. The Iris Pro graphic CPU's have been released later than the HD>

If you look at Intel's release dates they are usually staggered

-1st Release usually low power processors along with HD graphics
and then usually later they have the HQ processors with Iris Pro graphics and these are the processors apple uses on the 15in Retina MacBooks. I am using this as an example as it is the one I am most familiar with but it applies to their entire line up.



IT IS A FACT, and you saying 'No not really' doesn't change that. Unless you have some factual information you would like to share?
Click to expand...



It's not a fact...... There is better and fairly large margin of better cpu's they could use. They use near the top end of cpu's not the top. But once again go live in your land of bliss because it's not true



they don't use anywhere as close to the high end mobile cpu's in the 15 inch. They don't use the main stream ones and use the performance cpu's but no where is it the high end of that.
 
8ad91108d1dcfdbe17dea61c7f61e67e.jpg




They use the Intel 4770HQ inside the base model 15 inch with the top end at 4980 which at that price point is absurd but still not top end. On the cpu side considering they are using a dedicated gpu I'm the higher end models they could of easily used the MX series.



1297e2a768beacf7e61097b795768be7.jpg






Also they use 1600Mhz DDR3 RAM not even 1866.
 
The 4930MX and 4940MX are 57W TDP socketed CPUs, so not even close to the same product line. Not to mention they cost at least double anything in the HQ line:

upload_2016-5-22_15-14-5.png


If you want to go full retard over what was meant by "top end", Apple could stick a 140W 5960X or four Xeon E5-4669 v3s in. They're only 135W (and $7007) each 🙄

You're still not countering the point that the 4770HQ and 4870HQ are at the top end of the 45-ish watt (Sandy/Ivy Bridge were 45W, Haswell 47W, Skylake should go back to 45W) TDP Haswell-H CPUs with Iris Pro GPUs and if Apple are going to use Skylake-H it would fit for them to use the 6770HQ/6870HQ/6970HQ, which launched in January and only started shipping in volume recently. Quibbling over whether there's a CPU that's 300MHz faster for an extra $190 but otherwise identical is neither here nor there, it started shipping at the same time as the 4770/4870HQs did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brad9893, dallegre, JTToft and 1 other person
Tolien said:
The 4930MX and 4940MX are 57W TDP socketed CPUs, so not even close to the same product line. Not to mention they cost at least double anything in the HQ line:

View attachment 632427

If you want to go full retard over what was meant by "top end", Apple could stick a 140W 5960X or four Xeon E5-4669 v3s in. They're only 135W (and $7007) each 🙄

You're still not countering the point that the 4770HQ and 4870HQ are at the top end of the 45-ish watt (Sandy/Ivy Bridge were 45W, Haswell 47W, Skylake should go back to 45W) TDP Haswell-H CPUs with Iris Pro GPUs and if Apple are going to use Skylake-H it would fit for them to use the 6770HQ/6870HQ/6970HQ, which launched in January and only started shipping in volume recently. Quibbling over whether there's a CPU that's 300MHz faster for an extra $190 but otherwise identical is neither here nor there, it started shipping at the same time as the 4770/4870HQs did.
Click to expand...



Still not the "top" and yes I will nitpick because my orginal point wasn't even cpu based but gpu based with its horrible AMD 370X. They could of used the 4750, 4760, and 4790 than...


The new Nividia gpu's will crush whatever AMD come out with even for middling gpu's.
 
Samuelsan2001 said:
Not Necessarily, billions of people may agree and have no choice due to economic and monopoly reasons.
Click to expand...

A work PC is a tool to do a job. The users don't care what it runs, as long as they can do what they are paid to do then it's good enough.

A Windows environment is the standard for the vast majority of businesses & home users for a reason.
 
Closingracer said:
It's not a fact...... There is better and fairly large margin of better cpu's they could use. They use near the top end of cpu's not the top. But once again go live in your land of bliss because it's not true



they don't use anywhere as close to the high end mobile cpu's in the 15 inch. They don't use the main stream ones and use the performance cpu's but no where is it the high end of that.
Click to expand...

the 4770 is still in the higher range of CPU's that are usually released at a later date. ffs, do you see any with the 45XXU or the 15in without Pro graphics?

the 4770 is in the high end of Intel's CPU's is it not?
 
  • Like
Reactions: emilioestevez
MBP with current AMD and all extras is $3k+. If you like playing high end games and such without having to install yet another OS just for that, the MBP is not for you, nor any Apple products. The Razer Blade is a beast of a machine that can pretty much handle any game out there easily. Even with Boot Camp, Apple's computers are still legions below the blade.

Far as updates to MBP, there probably will be however as usual historically Apple lags behind anything on the current market. So, the Razer Blade will still beat it without breaking a sweat sadly. People also claim Apple is waiting for X chip or whatever, and that hasn't ever happened. Maybe in the next revision, but at most they'll give a minor bump to the soon to be announced MBPs as they've most likely have begun productions already. Apple won't ever adopt top of the line GPUs and such when it's current. Not the way they release things. Look at what's currently available, then what was available last year. Ignore current market and plan for last years items.

Will keep saying it, I wish for the day when the MBP is worthy of it's price tag. 🙁
 
  • Like
Reactions: Queen6
Crzyrio said:
the 4770 is still in the higher range of CPU's that are usually released at a later date. ffs, do you see any with the 45XXU or the 15in without Pro graphics?

the 4770 is in the high end of Intel's CPU's is it not?
Click to expand...

Still not the "highest" like somebody wanted to claim
 
Closingracer said:
Still not the "highest" like somebody wanted to claim
Click to expand...

Seriously? Go read mmm first post lol

You are exactly what you are calling other and just as bad as a 'blind follower'

You looking at the minor details that don't mean anything and miss the entire point of a post.
 
JTToft said:
- You obviously do think it's worth its price. Otherwise you wouldn't have one.
Click to expand...

Seeing as I didn't buy it, then I'm unsure how I think it's worth the price. Certainly not for games, which is what the Razer is geared towards. The more you know if that's seriously your rebuttal of sort. 🙂
 
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