rMBP scaling at 2880x1800

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by mogallin, Aug 29, 2012.

  1. mogallin macrumors member

    Jul 21, 2008
    When using one of the many available apps to run the rMBP at its native resolution instead of as a retina screen, will it still render at twice that, like with 1920x1200, and then downscale it? Or will it render straight to 2880x1800. The former case sounds to me like a huge hit to the performance.
  2. inlinevolvo macrumors 6502

    Jul 11, 2012
    There is no scaling at the native resolution.
  3. charlieegan3 macrumors 68020


    Feb 16, 2012
    you have to use 3rd party apps to render at 2880*1800
  4. stevelam macrumors 65816

    Nov 4, 2010
    no retina scaling at 2880. but because of that, everything becomes way too small to be usable.
  5. Stetrain macrumors 68040

    Feb 6, 2009
    Depending on the resolution switcher, it will show "(HiDPI)" next to modes that are doubled.

    For example, "1920x1200 (HiDPI)" is actually 3840x2400, but just "1920x1200" is 1920x1200".

    Selecting just "2880x1800" will run at 2880x1800.
  6. jlin615 macrumors regular

    Nov 4, 2006
    Los Angeles, CA.
    Will playing with resolutions besides the default ones cause any harm to the display?
  7. polotska macrumors 6502

    Sep 23, 2007
  8. fiveainone macrumors 6502a

    Sep 16, 2011
    Not in a million years.
  9. FroColin macrumors regular

    Jun 4, 2008
    Challenge accepted.

    I do have a question regarding resolutions though. If you run one of these retina displays at it's full resolution with no scaling, is that harder or easier on the graphics card or does it make no difference?
  10. Stetrain macrumors 68040

    Feb 6, 2009
    Should be basically the same at 2880x1800 'native' and at 1440x900 HiDPI (which is also 2880x1800).

    The 1680x1050 HiDPI and 1920x1200 HiDPI modes however take more GPU power than native 2880x1800.
  11. ryane67 macrumors member

    Jun 13, 2012
    As obi-wan once said - you will find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on your point of view

    I find 2880x1800 extremely nice when using photoshop & lightroom. pixel for pixel images with a UI that is still there but basically out of the way. I think I'll still be using these programs at native rez once they are updated for retina.
  12. mogallin thread starter macrumors member

    Jul 21, 2008
    Thanks you for all your answers. Based on several of them I gathered some courage and installed resolutiontab, and it seems like it does indeed render at 2880x1600 instead of 5760x3200 as I feared (based on a screenshot which comes out at 3840x2400 in 1920HiDPI mode).
  13. nontroppo macrumors 6502


    Mar 11, 2009
    Correct, I've measured this and WindowServer uses about 0.75% more CPU overall during UI redrawing.
  14. playsontheleft macrumors regular

    Jul 2, 2012
    For you. I don't remember the last time I wasn't running 2880x1800 other than when messing with some non-HiDPI modes to see what it was like.

    Easier because the computer doesn't need to carry out any scaling routines. Not that it's a particularly noticeable difference, but it's there.
  15. stevelam, Aug 30, 2012
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2012

    stevelam macrumors 65816

    Nov 4, 2010
    well obviously some people out there will always do stupid/silly things. i'm not speaking for those folks. and congrats on wasting your money on a screen you're not even utilizing.
  16. alphaod macrumors Core


    Feb 9, 2008
    I have my computer set whenever say Photoshop or Lightroom opens up, the resolution is changed to 2880x1800 non-HiDPI (native). Sure the tool bar looks small, but my images looks perfect. Until Adobe and others update their applications, I will have to live with this. Some things like Word looks fine. I've seen worse with text, but I can't work with blurring images.

    Did you quote the wrong person? :confused:
  17. playsontheleft macrumors regular

    Jul 2, 2012

Share This Page