Listen.
It's kind of irritating to give your post an attention grabbing title. Also I think there's plenty of context in the front page article. Does this reaction have to do with the 'rMBP (Ordered)' in your sig perhaps?
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.
Retina MacBook Pro Pushes the Limits of its Graphics Capabilities
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Listen.
It's kind of irritating to give your post an attention grabbing title. Also I think there's plenty of context in the front page article. Does this reaction have to do with the 'rMBP (Ordered)' in your sig perhaps?
I'm not interested in seeing Fakebook at 1fps, let alone 50. It's the same bulls*hit at any speed. Very trite measuring reference for Anandtech, 'should use something important.
I don't know how the Retina fps relates to video fps, but if it's correlated, Retina should be fine for FCPX and watching movies.
I don't know how the Retina fps relates to video fps, but if it's correlated, Retina should be fine for FCPX and watching movies.
At the risk of sounding like a stuck record, the uMBP is $400 cheaper than a rMBP if you buy the base spec RAM and HDD model then upgrade it yourself with 16gb RAM and 256gb or 512gb SSD.
Do you actually believe that the GPU is capable of running a 3D game at retina resolution at great framerates but cannot scroll a webpage at the same framerate? Do you actually believe that a 2D webpage puts more work on the GPU than a fully featured 3D game like Diablo 3?
This is not about the GPU. The GPU is capable of pushing even more pixels at really high framerates than that. This is simply the software and scaling algorithms. It'll be faster in time due to optimisations in software.
My 9400M in 2009 MBP can even scroll Facebook at 1920*1200 resolution at smooth fps. GT650M is 4-5x faster than 9400M and yet it is trying to push 2.25X many pixels. So basically the GT650M performance should be more or less equivalent to 2x performance I get from 9400M.
This is not about the GPU. The GPU is capable of pushing even more pixels at really high framerates than that. This is simply the software and scaling algorithms. It'll be faster in time due to optimisations in software.
My 9400M in 2009 MBP can even scroll Facebook at 1920*1200 resolution at smooth fps. GT650M is 4-5x faster than 9400M and yet it is trying to push 2.25X many pixels. So basically the GT650M performance should be more or less equivalent to 2x performance I get from 9400M.
Last edited:
I would say you could always (in rare cases where you see a performance issue you actually care about) run in 1440x900 and get GREAT performance, giving up retina sharpness for that specific task... but I dont think theres any non-hack way to make the new MBP run in 1440x900. (Other than for games, at leastthey give you lots of res options.)
20 fps is practically a motion picture anyway... Id accept that occasional problem in trade for the far better display.
Looked at another way... imagine if retina displays (usually fast and smooth but sometimes less so) were simply the norm for laptops. And then a new kind of laptop came along that was better: really super smooth framerates in ALL situations! But what if to do that, it had to disable retina mode and run low-res at certain times. People would be a LOT more upset about that! Theyd rather have retina mode than an unfailing 60fps.
20 fps is practically a motion picture anyway... Id accept that occasional problem in trade for the far better display.
Looked at another way... imagine if retina displays (usually fast and smooth but sometimes less so) were simply the norm for laptops. And then a new kind of laptop came along that was better: really super smooth framerates in ALL situations! But what if to do that, it had to disable retina mode and run low-res at certain times. People would be a LOT more upset about that! Theyd rather have retina mode than an unfailing 60fps.
HP and DELL offer the same GPU from nVidia with 2GB of VRAM to Apple's 1GB of VRAM. I wonder if they had not had to limit the VRAM there would have been this problem?
But then the heat would have been a major problem as it is with HP's Dreamcolor screens.
I do not regard any of Apple's 2012 new MacBook Pros real mobile workstations but more suited for prosumer demographic.
There's plenty that can be done to address whatever issue, along these lines, that people are actually experiencing through software. Though I'm definitely not seeing any real issues. Perhaps a few small things which can be smoothed up just a little bit, and that should fall in nicely with the kind of thing Apple normally does.
Maybe because not everyone reads Anandtech? Are you annoyed by the fact that MR published week long report or the fact that they published a report that exposes flaws in Apple hardware?
Basically it should run the fastest at the 2880*1800 resolution due to no scaling algorithms being used at all. What causes this "lag" is scaling when you use different resolutions. Lion renders the page at quadruple resolution and then downscales, which is a lot of work on the CPU. But if you run it at native resolution then it should be the fastest possible. I hope that the retina resolution through the HDPI mode is as fast as the native resolution as well because that's what most people will use.
If that's all it takes to irritate you, I'd hate to be in a relationship with you.
And regardless of my personal vested interests, I was merely saying that if you read the article, which I have completely, it's not as bad as this post made it sound. It was semi-alarmist.
Yeah me too, I was reading this and I said, wait a second I was reading this a week ago at the lalo shrimp page....
For what it's worth I'm running in 1680x1050 (3360x2100) and the machine has been running beautifully (at least so far as I outlined in my comment earlier). So it definitely looks like at least this level of up/down scaling doesn't stop the machine from running extremely well. I can't speak for the higher resolutions. I tried it out, but I can't imagine being as productive beyond this.
Whatever modest improvements in GPU you are talking about will be swamped by the increased number of pixels required to get retina on a iMac screen.
i was right about this, i still like the older mb pro models and this thing is just a techno showcase for apple it is bound to face these lags
Probably should do your research first. It's been discussed ad nauseam that Diablo 3 runs at full retina 2880x1880 resolution very well, aside from some of the more difficult parts late in the game, where even there it is still playable.
I wonder if this will slumber the retina iMac supporters or just encourage the AIO with desktop graphics crowd?
Unfortunately yes they would still have this problem. Most likely it isn't VRAM it is 10.7's crap GPU (over) usage and underpowered shader processors on the chip they selected. If it plays better in 10.8 then there you go. EVERY user who has moved to 10.7 on ALL apple products notices a GPU slowdown with Lion. Why do you think so many are still using 10.6.8?
Just finished with apple, unfortunately for me, apple gave me the "apple is doing the best we can" when I asked about any type of compensation while I wait over the weekend for delivery...
I'm struck between two feelings here. I want to say, this is fantastic. To see Apple pushing the envelope again is great! Here's something that hasn't been done before and we're using the best technology currently to make it work. Imagine what will happen with future GPUs!
Then again, if the user experience is that poor, (is it? I haven't tested it out yet) then maybe they should have waited 6 months maybe and had a conference just for the rMBP.
In either case, Apple is trying to stay ahead and pushing current technology, and I think that is excellent!
Then again, if the user experience is that poor, (is it? I haven't tested it out yet) then maybe they should have waited 6 months maybe and had a conference just for the rMBP.
In either case, Apple is trying to stay ahead and pushing current technology, and I think that is excellent!