Retina Macbook pro restolutions..

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Skjetne, Jun 23, 2012.

  1. Skjetne macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
    #1
    We all love the new rMBP, and i guess many of you have read the great review Anandtech has posted.

    But theres one question I'm pondering about. He talks a lot about the resolution doubling, and that it renders at twice the resolution. But is that true with the plugin thats lets you run in native 2880x1600? Does it render in 5760x3200 before it scales it?

    Because if it doesn't do that it could be a real performance booster to use that plugin..

    Edit: I'm aware that I've written "restolutions" -_-
     
  2. leman macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #2
    1. yes

    2. no (so you will get very tiny text)
     
  3. Skjetne, Jun 23, 2012
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2012

    Skjetne thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
    #3

    I see that my question got a bit messed up.. My fault for not concentrating enough. But ofc i know that it let's me run in native 2880x1600 resolution, that wasn't supposed to be the question :p

    But if you choose the "more space" in system prefs. It renders at 3690x2400 before scaling to 1980x1200, looks nice, but not everyone needs it because they only need the real-estate, and as Anand said, it needs a lot of power.
    But if you use the plugin, and choose 1980x1200, it doesn't render at 3690x2400 before scaling?

    Because if so then you would have a serious performance gain and that would at least give me the push i need to go and burn of my hard earned cash
     
  4. doh123 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    #4
    if you change to an actual 2880x1800 non scaled, then it just works like any normal monitor that just happens to be a really high resolution. if you knock it down to a true 1920x1200, then its just running a lower res... just like a normal screen that say .. runs 1920x1200 and you instead run it at 1680x1050, everything is done at the lower res then stretched out to fit.

    http://wineskin.urgesoftware.com/tiki-view_blog_post.php?postId=51
     
  5. killmoms macrumors 68040

    killmoms

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #5
    The UI doesn't become noticeably more responsive in the native mode vs the scaled modes, at least not in Mountain Lion (which you'll get for free when it comes out in a few weeks if you buy the RMBP). It's nice and smooth all the time. And the scaled 1920 x 1200 Retina mode still looks better than a 1x 1920 x 1200 scaled up would look.
     
  6. Skjetne thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
    #6
    Okay, so if i choose 1980x1200, thats what it is. No rendering or scaling. Thats just what i needed to hear!

    Yeah, but he(Anand) said it was a bit of a lag in safari(not that i care about that, because thats only when you scroll fast as h**l, and who does that tbh.)

    But I'm concerned about the system animations, mission control, pinch to zoom, switching between spaces, minimizing windows etc. in ML. Are they as smooth as they are on any other mac in "more space" mode?

    I bought myself a TB display for my mbp 13, got choppy as h**l, and I ended up with a mac mini as well, because the choppyness was horrible..
     
  7. doh123 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    #7
    as long as you use a 3rd party res changing app. The only options you get in System Preferences are all 2880x1800 with scaling modes... Apple didn't want to let you actually change the res.... 1920x1200 is NOT an available resolution on the screen. You only get...
    640x480
    800x600
    1024x768
    1280x800
    1440x900
    1680x1050
    2048x1280
    2560x1600
    2880x1800
     
  8. Skjetne thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
    #8
    Okay! Good to know. But have you tried the retina with 2048x1280? How does it look, and how does it perform? smooth as silk, or chopping and lagging?
     
  9. Skjetne thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
  10. doh123 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    #10
    I think all the resolutions run nice and fast... Apple mainly left them int here for fullscreen apps (not Lion fake "fullscreen") like games that actually need to control the resolution.

    The 3 highest ones all look decent, but the 2 non native ones, you can tell things look slightly strange since its not native.... if you looks really close, but just for normal use its not that easy to tell.
     
  11. Skjetne thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
    #11
    Thanks a lot! I really love the new rmbp, but the issues with lag is really a deal breaker.

    I have a 27" tbd which I'm going to use with the rmbp, but I'm a bit afraid about the noise and performance. When i hooked it up to my current mbp the result was a LOT of of fan noise. (5000-6000rpm constantly).

    So i don't know if i want the rmbp because of the awesome design and display, or the regular high end mbp with hi-res.

    First world problems..
     
  12. OSMac, Jun 24, 2012
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2012

    OSMac macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    #12
    If you want 1:1 pixel mapping, only best for retina 1440x900 or using doh123's app for 2880x1800 can offer it.

    The other resolutions, 1920x1200, etc., do scale well in retina mode but they are not capable of showing 1:1 pixel mappings even if using a retina app.

    Turning off retina (high dpi) mode results in a very poor looking scaled desktop, except in full 2880x1800 mode.

    Bottom-line if your looking to optimize images you need 1:1 pixel mapping and should run in retina mode 1440x900 with a retina app, or run in full 2880x1800 mode and squint.

    If using parallels 7 and want photoshop to run with 1:1 pixel mapping you need to set the mac to 2880x1800 and run windows full screen at 2880x1800. If you dont have the mac in 2880x1800 mode p7 does not offer a true 2880x1800 display.

    The lag is being overstated in my opinion, its there but not an issue compared to the enhanced quality of the display.
     
  13. doh123 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    #13

Share This Page