Please Answer: Can you run 2160 x 1350 resolution on your rMBP?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Radiating, Jul 8, 2012.

  1. Radiating, Jul 8, 2012
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2012

    Radiating macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    #1
  2. bryne macrumors member

    bryne

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2010
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #4
    Pixelfitting should be done zoomed-in anyway, but as far as the rMBP's resolution affects this, only two resolutions are pixel-perfect - 1440x900 and 2880x1800. All other resolutions will be scaled and not pixel-for-pixel - aiming for 75% zoom literally would not matter one bit.

    Your question is pointless. Work at the 1440x900 "best for retina" res for highest fidelity, or a higher res for more workspace. Those are your two options.
     
  3. Radiating thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    #5
    I'm only interested in running Windows on the rMBP. 2880x1800 is not a reasonable resolution to use, and 1980x1200 looks far more blurry than a display with a native resolution of 1980x1200. An intermediate resolution would be the best solution.
     
  4. JS77 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2008
    #6
    Buying a rMBP to solely run Windows is like buying a Ferrari and converting it to diesel... but hey, it's your money!

    As you're looking for an intermediate resolution, I think you might be better of with a cMBP and the Hi-Res display option (1680x1050).
     
  5. Dangerous Theory macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Location:
    UK
    #7
    It's a shame you want to run windows only, but I don't think it's the best laptop for it. Certainly the best in terms of overall hardware quality, but it's not optimised for windows as much as other notebooks.
     
  6. Nozuka macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    #8
    Actually in my experience even 1980x1200 looks way better on the Retina Display than on a native 1980x1200 15'' Screen, because you still get the higher pixel density and the image is scaled down and not scaled up. But obviously needs much more processing power.

    But 1440x900 and obviously 2880x1800 look the best.
     
  7. Radiating thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    #9
    1920x1200 does not look better on the retina macbook. I spent 3 hours comparing the rMBP side by side with a normal laptop. You're most likley using the fake 1920x1200 option which is just 2880x1800 with scaling to make it look like 1920x1200. If you look at a scaled image side by side it will quickly become obvious that the rMBP is much blurrier.

    1440x900 also looks abysmal due to the blocky looking pixels which you do not find in a display with a native resolution of 1440x900 as the pixels have seams which create an aliasing effect that is not seen when four pixels are used in place of one.


    Buying a retina Macbook Pro to run windows is a very sensible solution considering that laptops with equivalent specs have 3-4 times the size and equal or worse battery life in lab tests according to PC Magazone. The hardware is not optimized for anything, it's a standard i7 3840QM processor, universal computer ram, univesal SSD and a standard 650 GT that's overclocked 12%.
     
  8. daleski75 macrumors 65816

    daleski75

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Northampton, UK
    #10
    Can anyone confirm if 2160 x 1350 (75% scaling) is a valid resolution for the change resolution utility?

    Not a valid resolution unless you find some way to hack it or create custom ones.
     
  9. JrJ 15 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2011
    Location:
    Michigan
    #11
    Yes, it is a valid resolution that you can use, but it is very blurry, and you are probably better off running the native resolution. 2880x1800 is not that much smaller at this point.
     
  10. Stetrain macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    #12
    What about running Windows at 2880x1800 with 150% UI scaling?

    Otherwise maybe you would be better off with another machine. Even though it's closer to the native resolution, 2160x1350 is still going to be blurry because it isn't a native resolution. If the scaled "Look like 1920x1200" retina mode is unsatisfactory to you I think you will be unhappy with anything but native panel resolution.
     
  11. astrorider, Jul 10, 2012
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2012

    astrorider macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    #13
    These are the options Retina Display Manager is showing me:
    Screen Shot 2012-07-10 at 6.41.30 AM.png
     
  12. doh123 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    #14
    thats what i was getting ready to post... :) it may be different in Windows.. you won't have hiDPI settings, or anything above 2880x1800. I do not think you will have "2160x1350" as thats very non standard... why do you need that specific res? You should be able to run 2048x1280 or 2560x1600... but of course I don't run Windows so I dunno what it finds.
     
  13. dusk007 macrumors 68040

    dusk007

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2009
    #15
    Speed won't be a problem but battery life is. A decent Windows Notebook from Samsung, Lenovo, HP Elitebook,... can get the same low power consumption as OSX gets on the same hardware.
    Apple's Windows drivers don't and even if there is no unswitchable GPU the cause.
    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=apple_mac_power&num=1
    That is an older test on a Mac mini with only a 9400M.
    I frequently read notebookcheck reviews and the story is still the same. Good drivers offer the same minimum base power consumption. Apple's don't. The 650M constantly active will make it worse.
    Windows is a bit more efficient in its GUI so the higher res might hurt it less or you won't even run it at native but still even 95W will not make up for all the downsides.
    It is not as mobile under Windows.

    Me personally I think the Touchpad sucks worst. Under Windows all you get is point click and two finger vertikal scroll and click. With a proper synaptic Windows notebook Touchpad you get multitouch gestures and there is even a driver for custom ones. Not with Apple's mediocre Windows touchpad drivers.
    I would wait for Asus to release something similar. The UX31A/21A seem to show that a decent IPS big brother isn't that far off. With Windows 8 bringing better resolution independence to the table I think in a couple months you can buy a cheaper and better similar Windows notebook.


    BTT just because there is no option doesn't mean it doesn't work. It is an odd resolution but somebody might just need to hack some config file to add it and the screen might support it just fine after that.
    Personally I would run it at full res, adjust the DPI and put up with some odd apps. Complaining to developers about odd behaving apps or just switching to some that work fine is probably no such a big problem. Most of the important apps like office browsers, Adobe, VLC, should work just fine. I might be mistaken but usually it is the small rather unimportant stuff that shows problems.
     

Share This Page