New products don't just come along when you want them to, they require intense research and development, and any new product is a risk, Steve only passed 2 years ago, so any new products that would have come out in that time or in the next year or so would most likely have had his involvement anyway. Over the next few years I think we are going to see some fantastic new products from Apple, you just have to give them time to adjust from their previous structure to their new methods of doing things. If the current rumours about watches and TV's are true, then I think we can safely say that Apple has got some real gems lined up for us
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New Retina MacBook Pro Models Showing Up in Benchmarks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
New products don't just come along when you want them to, they require intense research and development, and any new product is a risk, Steve only passed 2 years ago, so any new products that would have come out in that time or in the next year or so would most likely have had his involvement anyway. Over the next few years I think we are going to see some fantastic new products from Apple, you just have to give them time to adjust from their previous structure to their new methods of doing things. If the current rumours about watches and TV's are true, then I think we can safely say that Apple has got some real gems lined up for us
I'm sure I'm missing something ... Could someone just let me know what it is!?Why are all the 13 inch benchmarks in the 5000 range? Wasn't last years 13 inch rmbp 7000 something? My 2011 13 mba gets like 5500 or something?
As I say, I'm sure I really am missing something, I'd just like to know what it is so I can understand these numbers more.
Thanks!
As I say, I'm sure I really am missing something, I'd just like to know what it is so I can understand these numbers more.
Thanks!
The scores are on a different scale since it's based off of a new version of Geekbench.
Macs are designed to last for longer than a year! If you look after it and are willing to watch the technology world race ahead (as it inevitably will), then that machine should last you 3-5 years, if Mavericks is still available to Macbook Pros built in 2007, then you can expect 6 years of support from Apple's end
The 13" machine doesn't really have room for a Quad Core, if you consider the extra ventilation and whatnot that would be required you would be looking at an increase in size and weight, something which Apple is very keen to avoid.
retina screen is for the supposed "pro" models.
the air is now pretty much the introduction model
the "old" early 2013 rmbp 13" was not that bad, sure
but from the first date of the 13" rmbp we all know that the gfx are far too weak to run a retina resolution smoothly
so THIS will be a huge improvement
the CPU was never the problem
so what are you expecting of a benchmark?
Im sure the gfx benchmarks will be more significant.
Im sure the gfx benchmarks will be more significant.
In terms of comparing vs. the previous generation, I think the bigger question is around graphics / Mavericks. I have found OS X to be a not super pleasant experience w/ the current rMBP. I'm flying home today, and I'll upgrade my machine to Mavericks to see if it makes things smoother. I wanted a big performance bump so I think I'll hold off for a bit. I'll probably get the next rMBP, either the haswell refresh or the next chip after that. Battery is important to me, but performance on these is most important, as I use it as a desktop replacement - would love that PCIe SSD though!
Yeah I think that's what I read, too
you should read the single core score as the multi the 15" has 4 cores compared to 2 on the 13" and therefore the twofold figures.
D
Ordered. As much as I love my 2010 MBP with an i7, it's missing all the things I could really use today -- full connectivity to Apple TV, USB 3, Thunderbolt, the new ac wifi protocol.
I'm in the same boat. Have the same spec'ed macbook pro but with ssd. It's sure is getting long in the tooth for rendering. This new mbp will be a nice upgrade.
That's 8% performance gain, only when the CPU is pinned (as it is in artificial benchmarks).
If you install a CPU monitor (I like MenuMeters), you may find that you only get that 8% performance about 0.1% of the time.
With a more holistic benchmark like Xbench (which measures graphics, disk, etc), the difference will be much less than 8%.
Of course, in real-world usage, when not running a benchmark tool, the difference will be negligible.
7.7% extra cost for 8% of pinned-CPU gain (but little or no cache/graphics/disk or real-world usage gain) is way overpriced for my usage. I went with the 2.3.
One important feature missed, flash storage!
I can agree with you on that. At least one 13" model should've included a quad core, but I can understand the reasons for not doing so. Cost, heat and battery life. At least the i7 dual core options have hyper-threading.
Yeah, I also thought for a second it could be true. I think after they introduced the retina displays, that pretty much sealed the fate of the 17". Too bad, I miss that laptop.
O jeito agora é usar o de 15. abs
Actually I was thinking of getting an Air, but now the Macbook Pro is essentially the same price in the UK, you would be crazy to buy an Air.
13 Inch MacBook Air with 8GB RAM = £1,209.00
13 Inch MacBook Pro Retina with 8GB RAM = £1,249.00
That's just £40 difference
Clearly Apple should have dropped the price on the Airs as well.
Have a look at this page in detail there are quite a few differences
http://store.apple.com/uk/buy-mac/macbook-air (click compare notebooks)
Significant differences in weight, battery life and expandability .....
actually the new MBPr are a rather big update from their previous...faster storage, larger memory options, better processors, better graphics, thinner, longer battery....not sure why people expect the impossible every single refresh....Apple might be awesome, but even they have to respect the laws of physics.
Yes. The 32 bit version is free. You have to pay for the 64 bit version. Of course nowadays the 64 bit version is much more realistic, because most code running on your Mac is 64 bit code.
100% radiohead14. I've often wondered why consumers want Apple to charge high margins. It seems to be a point of pride for certain people. Stock holder? I get it. Consumer? Flabergasted may be too strong of a word but not by much. It's not even a criticism. I'm genuinely curious how a person develops an affinity for a company's high margin. Maybe it's passion. All companies need to make a profit, but I can honestly say I've never cared how much profit any company makes.
Me? I'm more concerned with the value to me. Line up the products. Which meets my need best? That's what I choose. Then where can I get it for the best price. How much profit that company makes is never a variable in that equation.
off topic I know... apologies
absolutely agree...but would add that if a company (Apple) would now start selling at much lower margins, they will also be capable of spending less and less on R&D and take their time to perfect a product. I have no pride in Apple having huge margins, but I take pride in my apple products which show the level of attention spent on them (and the vast amounts of money in R&D)
my 2 pennies