Poll: What resolution are you using with your RMBP?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by juicywaterhouse, Jun 15, 2012.


Which setting do you spend the most time in?

  1. Larger Text (either of the two below 1440x900) :-/

  2. Best (Retina) 1440x900

  3. More Space 1680x1050

  4. Even more Space 1920x1200

  5. Come on, native! 2880x1800

  1. juicywaterhouse macrumors member

    Dec 30, 2010
    Southern California
    Hi all,

    I got my retina macbook pro this past tuesday at a local apple store (got pretty lucky). Coming from the 13 inch Air, everything looks so big at 1440x900 (really 2880x1600). I've been switching resolutions using the display scaling preferences, but the computer looks (by far) the best at 1440x900.

    For those who have the machine (or just want to chime in), what resolution have you been using, and how has it been working? Have you found anything but 1440x900 to be unbearable after seeing how good everything looks at the aforementioned resolution?

    Thanks for everyones thoughts!
  2. Qbiinz macrumors newbie

    Jul 15, 2010
    i use 1 setting above the recommended resolution for the retina, 1680x 1050
  3. fryrice macrumors member

    Apr 20, 2012
    Boston, MA
    might as well just get a 15in non retina model (high res matte)

    i would use 1920 x 1200.
  4. Jamesesesesess macrumors 6502a

    Nov 26, 2011
    For now, I'm using the 1440x900. I might go up in the future, but this is the same res that my old MBP had so I'm used to it.
  5. kaydot macrumors regular

    Sep 15, 2011
    Except there are numerous posts from members on this forum that the scaled 1680 on the Retina is superior to the native 1680.

    I saw it in at least two threads, but I won't go looking for them.

    One would have to compare these side by side of course, which will be difficult to do unless you own the high res model.
  6. Anonymouslives macrumors 6502


    Apr 26, 2008
    If I ever actually find one, I would use the two higher resolutions, not the native, doubled 1440 one.
  7. jimmyz80 macrumors member

    Jun 12, 2012
    Apex, NC
    I use 1920x1200 for the added screen real estate. Anything else makes me feel like I'm working on a laptop with a bottom-of-the-barrel screen, that just happens to be sharp.
  8. corvus32 macrumors 6502a

    Sep 4, 2009
    Stuff on the screen is smaller, but 1920x1200 is better than it was on my 17" MBP.

    I prefer and use 1440x900.
  9. ebolamonkey3 macrumors regular


    Apr 9, 2011
    Doesn't Apple make it super convenient to switch b/t the modes? I would probably end up switching a lot b/t the modes depending on workload.

    Spreadsheet/productivity: more space, movies/photos/browsing, more details.
  10. ipearx macrumors member


    Sep 18, 2005
    New Zealand
    Can anyone try SwitchResX and see if they can choose non HiDPI modes? In particular, can you run 2880 x 1800?

    Thanks in advance
  11. henrikrox macrumors 65816


    Feb 3, 2010
    Thats already been covered here:


    Short answer: Yes you can
  12. Ljohnson72 macrumors 6502a


    Dec 21, 2008
    Denver, Co
    I'm using 1920 x 1200 right now and enjoy the extra real estate.
  13. zahque macrumors member

    Jun 24, 2006
    +1. the base resolution makes everything look way too big. nice, but big.
  14. juicywaterhouse thread starter macrumors member

    Dec 30, 2010
    Southern California

    Yeah, I addressed that in my initial post—definitely a huge difference between 1680x1050 on the retina and my old 15inch high-res mbp


    cool, yeah I settled on 1680x1050 ... just couldn't take 1440x900 anymore. I think once one is spoiled with high-res, going back to default res just makes things look too cramped.

    So with the 1920x1200, you're okay with the drop in quality? How much a a drop off do you notice? With the 1650 applied, I'm noticing things appear a bit fuzzy ... are you noticing anything similar after prolonged use at 1920?
  15. jcpb macrumors 6502a

    Jun 5, 2012
    1920 x 1200 usually, but I'll also go for native res for kicks :p
  16. WilliamG macrumors G3

    Mar 29, 2008
    The best res is by far 1440x900, but then, as others have mentioned, things get a little big. Unfortunately, with Safari, shrinking the text does bizarre things. Still CMD and + , CMD and - help some, since you can really make the text small and fit a lot of stuff on the screen. I would use the other scaled modes but the text just gets somewhat blurrier. This is one of the reasons I wish Apple had gone with a 3360x2100 display so we could have 1680x1050 equivalent res, which I believe is the sweet spot for 15.4" displays...
  17. JohnDoe98 macrumors 68020

    May 1, 2009
    I tried the 1680 and 1920, and as far as real estate is concerned, they are marvelous, however, the native 1440 is much clearer. Yes the 1680 and 1920 look good, probably better than the older models, but they still are not nearly as crisp as the Retina. There is a noticeable difference.

    So I'll be running the 1440 Retina resolution until Apple releases a model that can do 1680 or 1920 natively, in which case I'd upgrade to that. Once you go Retina, you don't go back :D
  18. juicywaterhouse, Jun 20, 2012
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2012

    juicywaterhouse thread starter macrumors member

    Dec 30, 2010
    Southern California

    Wow, that much of a difference for you huh? What computer are you coming from? Coming from a high-res 15 inch MBP, it's hard to get used to how big and cramped everything looks at 1440 ...
  19. VacantPsalm macrumors member

    Sep 21, 2010
    I don't have it yet, but I'm predicting I'll be switching around 1680, 1920, and full 2880. At first I thought I'd definitely use it on 1920, since I'm coming from a 17" MBP. But looking at the Best Buy display rMBP, it seemed like you can zoom webpages in/out to get the same space taken up on either resolution. (When it comes to text and stuff at least.) Which makes sense, zooming out on the 1680 so a webpage is the same size as it would normally be on 1920 results in the same number of pixels being used to display things.

    I didn't get to fully test this out, so I'm just assuming using 2880 then zooming a webpage to 200% would look pretty similar to a normal 1440 webpage. The difference would be how small things like tabs and menubar would be, which those don't matter if you control most things with BetterTouchTool gestures. If anyone has a rMBP, it would be nice if you could confirm rather what I'm talking about is right to not.

    As for 1440, that's just too cramped. I don't care how sharp things look, interface elements like the menubar taking up that much space is just obnoxious.
  20. doh123 macrumors 65816

    Dec 28, 2009
  21. Hidendra macrumors member

    May 19, 2008
  22. fs454 macrumors 68000

    Dec 7, 2007
    Los Angeles / Boston
    When mine arrives I plan on running it fully unscaled 2880x1800 most of the time. Tried it out in the store and its infinitely more useful from a usage standpoint than "Retina mode" is, given that most pro design apps don't even take advantage of it.

    Being able to have this much real estate, no matter how small, for working with large timelines in Final Cut, Premiere, or Avid? invaluable. Losing all that real estate for enlarged assets? Not for me.
  23. charlieegan3 macrumors 68020


    Feb 16, 2012
    Natively or scaled? Everything on the RMBP is 2880*1800...
  24. Hidendra macrumors member

    May 19, 2008
    natively, i.e unscaled
  25. heyitsmichelle macrumors newbie

    Jun 13, 2012
    New Jersey
    Guys, full 2880 is not an option. Your options are 1024x640, 1280x800, 1440x900(Retina), 1680x1050, and 1920x1200. The full retina option would be 1440x900; all the other resolutions are scaled.

    Edit: I'm currently using 1680x1050, but feel the same way as OP.

Share This Page