rmbp 13" - does it lag at the highest scaled res?

[yjchua95]

OP, I was asking myself this exact question.
Went to the Apple Store and tried out the 13" and the 15" for a long time there.

The 13" definitely do lag. In fact, some animations are laggy even at the "Best for Retina" 1280x720 setting. For example switching back to a desktop with a bunch of webpages or programs open lags noticeably. Launch Pad is definitely not completely smooth.

The 15" barely lags at all. Sure, Mission Control while opening 20 programs isn't perfectly smooth (I tried), but apart from that, switching desktops, launch pad, scrolling. That's all smooth.

Regarding the scaled resolutions: on the 13" the lag very clearly gets worse the higher you go in resolution. 1440x900 is still fine, on 1680x1050 even other animations lag. Mission Control on the highest resolution on 13" is not very fun to use. Some people can't be bothered by this, but if you're like me, want to use 1680x1050 and UI and animation lag really annoys you, don't get the 13". You will notice it.

Don't listen to those who say there isn't any lag. Believe me, I wish there wasn't, but there is. I saw no difference between the high-end and low-end models. This is the reason I bought the 15" in the end.

On my 15", the lag is a wee bit noticeable when on Iris. After forcing it into the GT750M via GFXcardstatus, it becomes silky smooth.

 

[Vanilla35]

Pushing the Iris 5100 to render things at 2560x1600 is taxing the system. It wasn't really designed to do this. Neither is the Iris Pro 5200 in my 15" rMBP.

That's why I always use GFXcardstatus to force it into GT750M whenever possible, unless I'm low on battery.

It doesn't lag on GT750M.

That's not correct at all. It's software. The 650M in the 2012 rMBP still produces the same lag. Even intel 4000 graphics (last years 13" rMBP) can push the retina pixels in the computer.

----------

Which model are you using? Your experience is almost 180° different then mine (2012 2.7/16/768--Mavericks). I use 1920x1200 99% of the time and the 'lag', scrolling jumps and glitches on ARS, TechCrunch, Facebook, as well as a couple of other 'busy' sites is essentially all but gone. Lion wasn't great. ML made a big improvement....Mavericks, IMHO has definitely squashed ANY & ALL lag issues (which were never half as bad as many will lead you to believe) have been dealt with in the OS itself
I've noticed TechCrunch, ARS and others have 're'coded their sites for HiDPI displays. Again, IMO, that's where the 'issues' were. Heavy saturation and poor coding on the part of these developers of extremely busy websites. Tons of content. Lots of pics, video, Flash ads, etc. those are gone now and in a year....I'd say 90-95% of the apps I use from Adobe have ALSO been updated for high resolution support....as well as hundreds of others. It's been an amazing and FAST transition over the past year....as Windows is also stepping into the Hi.DPI arena. I'm hoping 2014 is that 'year'. Support for high resolution across the board (software) with their scaling code to match up with the working OS.
Apple can only do so much. For so many years....we've been using half these pixels. Apple's initial pixel doubling effort was a major achievement regardless of what, again, some will lead you to believe. ML and Mavericks has bettered their scaling engine even more....there's TWO sides to EVERY story. The other side, the coders for apps, sites and software HAVE to get on board too or there will be clashes
Mission control. Launch pad. Not sure where you're seeing frame drops or stutters but again, my year old rMBP is absolutely as fluent as I would like it to be. And usually I'm using the Intel 4000. A much lesser iGPU then the iris pro. I also use gfxCardStatus to force the 650 when I feel it'll help. In those cases, it handles troubled sites aplomb.
I can't speak for the 13"--- but as well as mine is running on the 4000 typical for most workflow the 5100 is a helluva lot faster. I'm sure you'll be good to go
With Photoshop though, I'd take a close look at the 15" and your finances though. The larger screen area is awesome when working through PS

Good luck
J

Thanks for your comment. It could be our differing opinions is based on, to a certain degree, how much pickier I may be over you. A few months ago, I went to the Apple store to test out the current models (ML, High end 15" and 13") and I immediately noticed lag within both compared to cMBP. This was confirmed when I researched tons and tons of threads on here. Mavericks has fixed some of the lag, but I cannot say whether it has fixed all of it or not, because there were other picky people like me who said even though better, it still definitely lags more than their old cMBP's. I definitely agree with you (at least in hoping) that 2014 will be the Ultra HD optimization year. I am going to wait for next year's rMBP, as well as next year's OS X in hope that the 15" will have something better than Iris Pro.....if they put a real graphics card in there next year (750M = 650M), then I might even pay the extra $500.

 

[Ckar]

A $2000 laptop shouldn't lag at all for basic tasks such as web browsing and mission control. Retina is not ready for prime time, how much longer do we keep telling people to wait or to spend more money and upgrade to the newer MacBook Pro when it comes out. For the price you are paying for an Apple laptop the device should be flawless.

 

[Godlikes]

A $2000 laptop shouldn't lag at all for basic tasks such as web browsing and mission control. Retina is not ready for prime time, how much longer do we keep telling people to wait or to spend more money and upgrade to the newer MacBook Pro when it comes out. For the price you are paying for an Apple laptop the device should be flawless.

$2000? lol, make it $3000.

Macbooks screens used to be pretty much flawless. But ever since Apple mindlessly introduced rMBP (even though the software and hardware doesn't fully support it) and defective screens it is clear what their business strategy has become:

Maximise profit margins by enticing customers with high (but unusable) specs and cut corners on quality.

The screens used in Macbook Pro line are probably worse than most laptop brands and yet it's the most expensive. It seems they are relying heavily on the OSX exclusivity to keep customers on board.

 

[tigerintank]

Thanks for your comment. It could be our differing opinions is based on, to a certain degree, how much pickier I may be over you.

This is the situation in a nutshell for me. Day to day i don't notice the lag, but when I try some examples given on here I can definitely see it. The 'resize a finder window quickly' is a great example - you can see the steps in the animation very clearly.

I must admit when i bought the laptop I assumed that Apple would improve the performance with subsequent Mavericks updates. if that doesn't happen I think i'll be a bit disappointed, but will be ok with it overall. I'm certainly enjoying the increased spec of 1650/1050 on the 13" screen.

 

[Vanilla35]

This is the situation in a nutshell for me. Day to day i don't notice the lag, but when I try some examples given on here I can definitely see it. The 'resize a finder window quickly' is a great example - you can see the steps in the animation very clearly.

I must admit when i bought the laptop I assumed that Apple would improve the performance with subsequent Mavericks updates. if that doesn't happen I think i'll be a bit disappointed, but will be ok with it overall. I'm certainly enjoying the increased spec of 1650/1050 on the 13" screen.

Yes, it's not by any means a deal-breaker, but it is very subtly...frustrating for me. I was really hoping for Mavericks to be the end of the lag, but it's still there to a certain degree. Because it is still here, I feel like they will never completely rid the system of it. It's clearly not a priority for them (insert Steve Jobs reference here).

 

[richard371]

If the slight lag bothers you use a non HiDPI resolution
(using the RDM app). The fonts are not quiet as smooth but still looks better then the non-retina MBP and the lag goes away as its not scaling. All the test sites people post on here that lag are buttery smooth on my 13 using the non HiDPI resolutions.

Again its up to Apple to fix the software so it doesn't lag in hiDPI but there are workarounds.

 

[Meister]

If the slight lag bothers you use a non HiDPI resolution
(using the RDM app). The fonts are not quiet as smooth but still looks better then the non-retina MBP and the lag goes away as its not scaling. All the test sites people post on here that lag are buttery smooth on my 13 using the non HiDPI resolutions.

Again its up to Apple to fix the software so it doesn't lag in hiDPI but there are workarounds.

Thank u 🙂

This worked for me.

 

[Nostalgia]

If the slight lag bothers you use a non HiDPI resolution
(using the RDM app). The fonts are not quiet as smooth but still looks better then the non-retina MBP and the lag goes away as its not scaling. All the test sites people post on here that lag are buttery smooth on my 13 using the non HiDPI resolutions.

Again its up to Apple to fix the software so it doesn't lag in hiDPI but there are workarounds.

Download the simple RDM app from the link below, set it to run during startup. It will show up on the top right of the computer and you can play with the different resolutions to see what works best for you. Its the HiDPI resolutions that cause lag that many notice. If you don't use HiDPI the fonts are not quiet as sharp but you don't really have the lag issues. You can click on one of the items on the OPs test page and do some scroll comparisons. There is a difference.

Apple needs to figure out how to optimize the HiDPI to be smoother simple as that.


https://dl.dropbox.com/u/87351306/RDM.tar.gz

Thanks for the suggestions, seems like a good way to "fix" the issue for now!

moreover, i would like to kindly ask if someone could post some screenshots, comparing an hidpi and a non-hidpi resolution using the RDM (Retina DisplayMenu) to see to what extent the sharpness or image detail is degraded.

^let´s say for example the 1680x1050 hidpi vs non-hidpi setting.

would really appreciate it!

 

[tigerintank]

Yes, it's not by any means a deal-breaker, but it is very subtly...frustrating for me. I was really hoping for Mavericks to be the end of the lag, but it's still there to a certain degree. Because it is still here, I feel like they will never completely rid the system of it. It's clearly not a priority for them (insert Steve Jobs reference here).

tbh me too - i'd spotted in Anands review last year that the lag was there and he was hopeful it might be fixed this year although iirc he did say it might take longer. when his review didn't arrive i took the gamble - hence my acceptance /resignation if it doesn't get fixed.

once the laptop was delivered it was such an improvement on my old 2007 model i decided to keep it even tho there are various problems.

----------

Download the simple RDM app from the link below, set it to run during startup.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/87351306/RDM.tar.gz

Thanks for this - just installed - a useful app. One thing surprised me - the HiDPi options only go up to 1920x1080 with no 1920x1200 - surely it should be the other way around with a 16x10 screen.

Note i've not rebooted - in case thats the problem

 

[richard371]

The text looks slightly less sharp then hidpi but still better then a non retina mbp. I still use hidpi as the slight lag doesn't bother me. I just posted this for people that are bothered by the lag.


I like the fact I have almost 30 resolutions I can quickly choose from. Very great tool. I put it as a start up item. Apples selection of resolutions are lame.

Again do not use the rdm app in the App Store. It's is a scaled down version.

Thanks for the suggestions, seems like a good way to "fix" the issue for now!

moreover, i would like to kindly ask if someone could post some screenshots, comparing an hidpi and a non-hidpi resolution using the RDM (Retina DisplayMenu) to see to what extent the sharpness or image detail is degraded.

^let´s say for example the 1680x1050 hidpi vs non-hidpi setting.

would really appreciate it!

 

[Nostalgia]

The text looks slightly less sharp then hidpi but still better then a non retina mbp. I still use hidpi as the slight lag doesn't bother me. I just posted this for people that are bothered by the lag.


I like the fact I have almost 30 resolutions I can quickly choose from. Very great tool. I put it as a start up item. Apples selection of resolutions are lame.

Again do not use the rdm app in the App Store. It's is a scaled down version.

oh so it´s still better than the non-retina mbp?! not bad then! good news

and yes indeed quite handy to be able to choose between many resolutions easily and quickly. gotta love thrid-party software 😛

about the app, no of course not ahahah i´ll just download it from the link the user richard371 posted.[rdm download]

 

[Meister]

oh so it´s still better than the non-retina mbp?! not bad then! good news

It works great but it looks exactly like the non-retina mbp.
If you put it to 1440x900 it looks exactly loke the mba.
I have a mba at home. Put them next to each other and can see no difference.

I too use the retina now but if the lag interferes with my work i can scale it.

 

[tigerintank]

Thanks for this - just installed - a useful app. One thing surprised me - the HiDPi options only go up to 1920x1080 with no 1920x1200 - surely it should be the other way around with a 16x10 screen.

Note i've not rebooted - in case thats the problem

Rebooted and still can only see the 1920x1080 as the HiDPI maximum.

Tbh in normal use I can't tell the difference between HiDPI and non HiDPI at 1680x1050 or 1920x1080, so not sure i'd use HiDPI 1920x1200 if it was available.

Was wondering if there was a technical reason why it wasn't there, so tried to have a look at the developers site www.phoenix-dev.com, but it appears to be down for me here in the UK.

Anyway thanks to Paul Griffin for the tool - appreciated

 

[AnonMac50]

It's noticeable on my top spec 15" when on the Intel card when using the (1920x1200). On the nVidia there is less lag.

 

[akdj]

That's not correct at all. It's software. The 650M in the 2012 rMBP still produces the same lag. Even intel 4000 graphics (last years 13" rMBP) can push the retina pixels in the computer.

----------



Thanks for your comment. It could be our differing opinions is based on, to a certain degree, how much pickier I may be over you. A few months ago, I went to the Apple store to test out the current models (ML, High end 15" and 13") and I immediately noticed lag within both compared to cMBP. This was confirmed when I researched tons and tons of threads on here. Mavericks has fixed some of the lag, but I cannot say whether it has fixed all of it or not, because there were other picky people like me who said even though better, it still definitely lags more than their old cMBP's. I definitely agree with you (at least in hoping) that 2014 will be the Ultra HD optimization year. I am going to wait for next year's rMBP, as well as next year's OS X in hope that the 15" will have something better than Iris Pro.....if they put a real graphics card in there next year (750M = 650M), then I might even pay the extra $500.

So you don't own one? Have you spent time with one? ....using YOUR workflow, not just checking Launchpad (which won't flip pages all the way...not sure if this is what some are calling 'lag'....Launchpad will stop between pages and roll through each if you keep scrolling....anyway, nothing to do with your response....but basing a buying decision of 'research' you've done on the web for a hand full of picky buyers or those that got a dud (it's gonna happen...bad apples will be produced....cool thing is you're dealing with hands down the best post purchase support company in the world when it comes to electronics). I've got a pair of 2012 rMBPs and a 2013. Hands down, almost thirty years of buying computers, this is it. For me, the pinnacle of computing. Power. Portability. Speed. Light, plenty of I/O options....but I'm a 15" owner only. Funny thing is, my MBA circa 2011 runs my 27" thunderbolt monitor just fine, without lag....and with the Intel .3000 iGPU. As sites have updated their code, I'm having to switch less and less to the 650 or 750 for fluent scrolling. Big changes at ARS, T/C, Facebook and Engadget to name a few....app support has been absolutely tremendous as has browser support....including Chrome for Mac, fully retina compatible and super SUPER FAST!

It's sad you've already missed a year of the best computer ever produced. Don't miss another by waiting! I absolutely IS software and HAS been alleviated significantly by both 10.8 and 10.9 as well as the development community and online website coders. Hi resolution is here to stay. The rMBP is leading the way...and this year with battery, iris pro and 750---PCIe storage speeds, this absolutely tremendous display. (Believe me, you won't spend much time in Launchpad scrolling between your app screens. It's an iOS thing 😉)

A $2000 laptop shouldn't lag at all for basic tasks such as web browsing and mission control. Retina is not ready for prime time, how much longer do we keep telling people to wait or to spend more money and upgrade to the newer MacBook Pro when it comes out. For the price you are paying for an Apple laptop the device should be flawless.

It doesn't. And it is. Nobody needs to tell anyone anything. They can all decide for themselves if they'd like to buy this flawless computer. There's a reason my wife, myself and our business now have three. And it's not because it's 'not ready for prime time'. Lol....hands down, this laptop can NOT be beat. Read the reviews. Even PC Mag's review, Anand's, ARS....the ones you trust. Check out video and photography sites.
You couldn't be more wrong...but then again, you're not an owner.....are you?

$2000? lol, make it $3000.

Macbooks screens used to be pretty much flawless. But ever since Apple mindlessly introduced rMBP (even though the software and hardware doesn't fully support it) and defective screens it is clear what their business strategy has become:

Maximise profit margins by enticing customers with high (but unusable) specs and cut corners on quality.

The screens used in Macbook Pro line are probably worse than most laptop brands and yet it's the most expensive. It seems they are relying heavily on the OSX exclusivity to keep customers on board.

Every. Single. Comment. You've. Made. Is. WRONG! Unreal! The MBP screens (displays) have been market leaders for YEARS!
Cut corners on quality? REALLY? An example?just one? A corner Apple is cutting that another OEM is making up for? Another non owner I take it? What you've said is so silly it truly made me laugh...out loud! The rMBP display is the best on the market bar NONE. And there isn't an OEM matching Apple's 'quality' ....you've got this all backwards bud. It's the 'other guys' cutting the corners...and starting to find out they can't do that much longer.

One need look no further than Microsoft getting into the computer hardware business because they're tired of seeing the increase in Apple sales quarter after quarter after quarter as Window's OEMs drop quarter after quarter after quarter.

Talk to any REAL rMBP owner. Real owner. Not an internet spokesmen with his seventh return and the pink screen BS. A real, local owner. Preferably someone who's owned it since last year (yep, the BETA model!). See what THEY say about their sweetheart. 😉

J

 

[Blue Sun]

The only lag I notice (at native retina resolution) is when the Dock is set to the left of screen and made smaller than default. Then there is some very minor Mission Control UI lag. 15" rMBP using the Iris Pro. The other scaled resolutions are super laggy and IMO, unusable.

To me it seems like a software bug or lack of optimisation.