So not true. Don't say things when you don't know what you're talking about. People run rMBPs all the time in scaled resolutions. Apple provides those scaled resolutions as standard options from the OS, and they look great.
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.
Real Benchmarks
- Thread starter squirrrl
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So not true. Don't say things when you don't know what you're talking about. People run rMBPs all the time in scaled resolutions. Apple provides those scaled resolutions as standard options from the OS, and they look great.
It's not actually 1400x900, rather 1400x900 HiDPI which is equivalent to 2800x1800. It is scaled down to 2304x1440 on the rMB's display, and the quality loss is barely noticeable at a normal viewing distance.
Last edited:
See? This is what it looks like to say something when you know what you're talking about.
The russian guy has uploaded a video where he reviews and compares the new Macbook vs a Macbook Air. The benchmarks are thus legit I guess and pretty impressive in my opnion.
Enjoy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpRyw5NaUpE&feature=youtu.be&t=1m58s
Enjoy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpRyw5NaUpE&feature=youtu.be&t=1m58s
Thats the top of the line 5Y71 equipped Macbook though and that one is what? $1600? Not impressive at all for the price IMO.
Thanks for posting this! For those who don't understand Russian.. The most interesting part of the video comes at around 11-minute mark, where the reviewer (Natasha) compares rMB performance to the latest Air. Basically, she says she was pleasantly surprised by rMB performance - Yosemite was "snappy", and the computer had no trouble doing all the tasks she did on Air.. which included photo/video editing and playing Diablo. She notes that after playing for about an hour - the temperature of rMB body was 38 degrees (C), and CPU was at 60-65 degrees, and the rMB remained cooler to the touch than her Air doing the same task. She was able to get about 10 hour of battery doing web browsing. She concludes the review stating this was the best ultra-compact laptop she had ever used, and she's putting up her 11" Air for sale.
All in all - very encouraging.
We know that. Now can you please take your trolling and never-ending negative comments elsewhere?
No, actually a lot of people looking at this thread may not, especially since its in a foreign language and doesn't specify its the 1.3Ghz model. Its also not being compared to the new MBA, thats a mid 2013 MBA.
Oh and did I miss something? The rMB didnt have OS X installed on it, they couldn't even have a shot of it with the desktop. How could they get benchmarks from it when it wasn't working? Seems fishy.
The 1.3Ghz for $1400? That wouldn't be too bad I guess but I don't think those benchmarls are legit. Its a non working unit in the video.
yeah if you go from 1.1 to 1.3. I'm hoping that the jump is not too high since these chips are pretty much the same price from intel.
From Intel, recommended price list (look at the third page half way down are all the core-M chips and they are all the same price).
http://files.shareholder.com/downlo...Mar_30_15_Recommended_Customer_Price_List.pdf
Which is from here: http://www.intc.com/priceList.cfm
Apple is really screwing us if the price jump is more than $100 for a chip upgrade when they are getting the chips for the same price. I recognize there is some engineering differences for each chip, so they can justify a slight price increase for each one, but I'm gonna have a hard time swallowing more than $100 jump to 1.3GHz.
Last edited:
The jump from 1.6Ghz to 2.2Ghz in the MBA is $150. So I would hope 1.1Ghz to 1.3Ghz is only $100, $150 at the most.
@dexterbell: when we had the article on the main page it was a comparison of the lowest spec MB with a highest specced Macbook Air. Now we have the highest specced MB and it is a problem for you to compare it to a Macbook Air.
I can only laugh about your comments anymore since you don't give up to find something negative about the MB all the time. So better keep going because in a few days we will have the reviews coming and I doubt you will like what you are reading then
I'll definitely will go for the 1.3 option as it stands now.
I can only laugh about your comments anymore since you don't give up to find something negative about the MB all the time. So better keep going because in a few days we will have the reviews coming and I doubt you will like what you are reading then
I'll definitely will go for the 1.3 option as it stands now.
@dexterbell: when we had the article on the main page it was a comparison of the lowest spec MB with a highest specced Macbook Air. Now we have the highest specced MB and it is a problem for you to compare it to a Macbook Air.
I can only laugh about your comments anymore since you don't give up to find something negative about the MB all the time. So better keep going because in a few days we will have the reviews coming and I doubt you will like what you are reading then
I'll definitely will go for the 1.3 option as it stands now.
I have no problem with that comparison. However, ctyrider said in his post the MB was compared to the latest MBA in that video which is incorrect. Its a mid 2013 MBA, not the current one.
As a guess, $200 for the 1.1 to 1.3 ghz upgrade by itself. Would like to be wrong. We will see soon.
can't wait for the reviews to pop up. If you take the numbers posted so far and compare them this is damn impressive.
The 1.3 ghz option seems to beat all i5 cpus from the Macbook Air and is on par with the 2015 model. Only if you up the specs to the i7 you get more power. I know that this means comparing a specced out version to the basic one but remember we are talking about a CPU that consumes 66% less power (and you would need to upgrade to the i7 as well if you want more power).
If this is indeed true in performance then the price of the MB makes a lot of sense since you get almost identical performance but pay a bit more for the retina display which is reasonable. Regardless I can't wait for Friday to pick one up.
The 1.3 ghz option seems to beat all i5 cpus from the Macbook Air and is on par with the 2015 model. Only if you up the specs to the i7 you get more power. I know that this means comparing a specced out version to the basic one but remember we are talking about a CPU that consumes 66% less power (and you would need to upgrade to the i7 as well if you want more power).
If this is indeed true in performance then the price of the MB makes a lot of sense since you get almost identical performance but pay a bit more for the retina display which is reasonable. Regardless I can't wait for Friday to pick one up.
I don't quite trust the results saying it is as good as it is (comparable to an i5).