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.
rMBP vs. Razer Blade?
- Thread starter exizeo
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The pro moniker is just a marketing term apple came up with to differentiate between their MacBook (not discontinued) and Macbook pro line. Its apple's main consumer product line, and while many professionals use it, the laptop is not geared specifically towards a given demographic
If you look at the usual business line notebooks like Thinkpads, Latitudes and such bad screen and basic GPU capabilities are what usually marked business aka pro. The beefy power packes used to be called the workstation class which is why various companies sneak in the little 'w' into the name tag. Thinkpad w series as opposed to the t series.
So Pro isn't so wrong.
They just call it pro because it is bigger and some guys in marketing haven't gotten around to purchase an English dictionary yet.
I still think it is weird to put an 870M into a 14" that thing will be loud as hell when everytime you play and probably have throttling issues or at least the Turbos on both chips will have a hard time. The 17" with 860M may actually be fairly acceptable in noise output at least relatively.
You get the different keyboard/touchpad and not such a mess with an 870M which probably makes it a better notebook overall. The 14" is just smaller but worse otherwise. The screen is still a fairly decent 1080p one and not complete no contrast 768p garbage like the last 14" razer came with.
Who wants to game on 14" anyway? If you just need a mobile allround gaming capable piece 17" are perfectly fine to carry from desk to desk in any normal sized bag. And on the desk you can actually spot something on the screen.
I don't really see those two in direct competition. Every sane person picks the size first and there is a big difference.
So Pro isn't so wrong.
They just call it pro because it is bigger and some guys in marketing haven't gotten around to purchase an English dictionary yet.
I still think it is weird to put an 870M into a 14" that thing will be loud as hell when everytime you play and probably have throttling issues or at least the Turbos on both chips will have a hard time. The 17" with 860M may actually be fairly acceptable in noise output at least relatively.
You get the different keyboard/touchpad and not such a mess with an 870M which probably makes it a better notebook overall. The 14" is just smaller but worse otherwise. The screen is still a fairly decent 1080p one and not complete no contrast 768p garbage like the last 14" razer came with.
Who wants to game on 14" anyway? If you just need a mobile allround gaming capable piece 17" are perfectly fine to carry from desk to desk in any normal sized bag. And on the desk you can actually spot something on the screen.
I don't really see those two in direct competition. Every sane person picks the size first and there is a big difference.
You're comparing apples to, well...
Yours is no competition really, it's the Blade by a mile. They're not even in the same ballpark, though. Let's look at the $2599 rMBP and the $2699 Blade (both 512GB SSD) for a more accurate comparison.
rMBP: better CPU, double RAM, larger screen, longer battery life, lightest, $100 cheaper
Blade: much better GPU, better screen, touchscreen, extra USB port, thinnest
Yours is no competition really, it's the Blade by a mile. They're not even in the same ballpark, though. Let's look at the $2599 rMBP and the $2699 Blade (both 512GB SSD) for a more accurate comparison.
rMBP: better CPU, double RAM, larger screen, longer battery life, lightest, $100 cheaper
Blade: much better GPU, better screen, touchscreen, extra USB port, thinnest
It's a very impressive machine Razer has put together. I highly doubt I would have dropped any more money on a laptop than I did on this one. Not to mention, I got rid of my custom built gaming machine before school so that I wouldn't be so distracted.. No regrets, love my rMBP.
Gaming is best done on a monitor any way, in which case I'd rather have a desktop with enough horsepower to do the job right.
Gaming is best done on a monitor any way, in which case I'd rather have a desktop with enough horsepower to do the job right.
Note: I'm not buying this completely for gaming. I'm looking into a 13-14" laptop, that can handle some amounts of gaming. rMBP and RB stick out.
Tbh, at low levels of use, I don't see it being extremely loud. my current MBP by no means is quite when gaming...
Tbh, at low levels of use, I don't see it being extremely loud. my current MBP by no means is quite when gaming...
The single biggest draw of the Razer, as I see it, is that video card. And for the MBP, the big one is OS X.
Each has other advantages and disadvantages compared to the other, but those two things are really what the decision is about, right? There have always been nice Windows machines with better raw specs than macs, and there probably always will be. The question here, as always, is whether the spec bump is worth giving up OS X. For a serious gamer, it might well be. Both machines are quite nice.
Each has other advantages and disadvantages compared to the other, but those two things are really what the decision is about, right? There have always been nice Windows machines with better raw specs than macs, and there probably always will be. The question here, as always, is whether the spec bump is worth giving up OS X. For a serious gamer, it might well be. Both machines are quite nice.
Indeed OS X has been one of biggest reasons I left the PC world, and started using the MBP. I love its simplicity, and restraint in functionality - might not be the right word here.
I'd rather not give up OS X, but using W8.1 isn't the end of the world for me.
I guess I'll wait for broadwell, and the next rMBP '14 refresh.
Outside of the physical problems (keys falling off), the computer is noticeably slower even when running things it would've dealt with excellently as new. I'll definitely be looking into a SSD and more RAM (something I considered as well).
Thanks.
Its of course nice to see more native games for OS X. But I can't really visualize Crysis on Mac - it's a quite demanding game even in windows; add in weaker GPUs used in Macs + drivers which are 20% slower on average and it does not look good. Apple could have shown more initiative by implementing newest opengl standards, but they chose to stay with the weird 4.1 version...
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2107...pro-laptops-still-slim-more-supercharged.html Here is a hands-on review of Razer Blade and Pro.
Edit: http://semiaccurate.com/2014/03/25/details-apples-gpu-emerge/ Something is happening in this case.
GT650M and 750M from MBP, and Mac Pro GPU's. They were experimenting, and I wish I would know for what.
Edit: http://semiaccurate.com/2014/03/25/details-apples-gpu-emerge/ Something is happening in this case.
GT650M and 750M from MBP, and Mac Pro GPU's. They were experimenting, and I wish I would know for what.
Last edited:
Not to sound like a broken record in this thread, but I'd echo the sentiments of some of the others. If you're planning to do (pretty much any) gaming, just save yourself the frustration and go for the Blade. The 13" rMBP is a terrific machine but there are few things worse than shelling out two grand for a computer and then experiencing the frustration of trying to game with integrated graphics.
If you're willing to step up to a 15" rMBP however, that's a different story and in that case, I'd give the nod to the Macbook. You can get a used or refurbished 15" rMBP for well within your price range, and I don't care what anyone says - providing you get one with a dedicated GPU - , it makes a damn fine casual gaming machine. I play battlefield 4 on my 2012 rMBP (650m) and it plays just fine.
If you're willing to step up to a 15" rMBP however, that's a different story and in that case, I'd give the nod to the Macbook. You can get a used or refurbished 15" rMBP for well within your price range, and I don't care what anyone says - providing you get one with a dedicated GPU - , it makes a damn fine casual gaming machine. I play battlefield 4 on my 2012 rMBP (650m) and it plays just fine.
Being slightly anal I will have to point out these points between the 15" Pro and the Razer Blade:
- Macbook Pro has better batterylife. Apple, who is known for being honest with their battery ratings, rated their machine at 8 hours while Razer, whose truthfulness I can't comment on, has rated their machine at 6 hours. The Pro's batterylife has been tested, but nobody has yet been able to test the Blade.
- Macbook Pro has a faster CPU despite what the clock frequency count would indicate, for instance the memory bandwidth of the Pro is 3 times that of the Blade. This also applies to the integrated GPU when the Pro has an Iris Pro and the Blade has an HD4600 (the same one used by the Macbook Air).
- The Blade only comes with a 128GB SSD as standard despite being $200 more expensive than the cheapest Pro. The upgrade to 256GB is $200 more and to get in line with the Pro that has a dedicated GPU (512GB) it's another $200 increasing the price to $100 more than the Pro.
- The Blade only comes with 8GB of RAM. Like the Pro the RAM isn't user upgradeable (soldered onto the motherboard) nor does Razer offer an optional upgrade when purchasing.
- Pro has a 16:10 screen when the Blade has a 16:9 one. This might be a personal minor pet peeve, but I work mostly with text (or rather code) meaning that I prefer a "narrower" screen. Also due to the different aspect ratios the actual size difference is somewhat distorted. The Blade's screen area is 540cm^2 while the Pro's is 688cm^2 (about 27% bigger when the diagonal size would indicate only 7%).
So to echo the sentiment put forward over and over agin, for games the Blade is better, but deviate from it, what's the point in a gaming laptop? Sure, you still get the portability of the Pro, but at the cost of ether greater cost or small SSD. Not only that, the Blade is only rated at 6 hours batterylife when not playing games.
While this might satisfy your needs right now, a year or two down the line the battery WILL have worn and WILL not hold the advertised 6 hours, if it held that long even when it was new. Like the machine it's obviously trying to copy, the Blade's battery isn't user replaceable. For the model we're talking about nobody has a proper review yet, just some "hands on" (or rather "first impressions" as it SHOULD be called) articles.
- Macbook Pro has better batterylife. Apple, who is known for being honest with their battery ratings, rated their machine at 8 hours while Razer, whose truthfulness I can't comment on, has rated their machine at 6 hours. The Pro's batterylife has been tested, but nobody has yet been able to test the Blade.
- Macbook Pro has a faster CPU despite what the clock frequency count would indicate, for instance the memory bandwidth of the Pro is 3 times that of the Blade. This also applies to the integrated GPU when the Pro has an Iris Pro and the Blade has an HD4600 (the same one used by the Macbook Air).
- The Blade only comes with a 128GB SSD as standard despite being $200 more expensive than the cheapest Pro. The upgrade to 256GB is $200 more and to get in line with the Pro that has a dedicated GPU (512GB) it's another $200 increasing the price to $100 more than the Pro.
- The Blade only comes with 8GB of RAM. Like the Pro the RAM isn't user upgradeable (soldered onto the motherboard) nor does Razer offer an optional upgrade when purchasing.
- Pro has a 16:10 screen when the Blade has a 16:9 one. This might be a personal minor pet peeve, but I work mostly with text (or rather code) meaning that I prefer a "narrower" screen. Also due to the different aspect ratios the actual size difference is somewhat distorted. The Blade's screen area is 540cm^2 while the Pro's is 688cm^2 (about 27% bigger when the diagonal size would indicate only 7%).
So to echo the sentiment put forward over and over agin, for games the Blade is better, but deviate from it, what's the point in a gaming laptop? Sure, you still get the portability of the Pro, but at the cost of ether greater cost or small SSD. Not only that, the Blade is only rated at 6 hours batterylife when not playing games.
While this might satisfy your needs right now, a year or two down the line the battery WILL have worn and WILL not hold the advertised 6 hours, if it held that long even when it was new. Like the machine it's obviously trying to copy, the Blade's battery isn't user replaceable. For the model we're talking about nobody has a proper review yet, just some "hands on" (or rather "first impressions" as it SHOULD be called) articles.
It really depends on you, if you are not a big gamer, go for the rmbp, if you are hardcore gamer go for the razer. I preffer Macs and look forward to 2014 rmbp's
Iris Pro is completely useless if you have a fast dGPU if needed. For videos and all normal desktop things an HD 4600 is more than sufficient.
Keep in mind that a 16:9 14" is about as big in look and feel as the 13" 16:10. It is a lot smaller than the 15" and shouldn't be compared directly to the 15" notebook. The 17" is the appropriate comparison there.
The comparison at the moment is especially weird because the MBP with the 750M is just A LOT slower in GPU performance. An 870M is a completely different level. This is 1344 cuda cores vs. 384 on the same architecture at higher clock speeds too. 941Mhz + boost which can be 13-15% on top usuall even though I don't see how they can pull that off in the 14" notebook.
The 750M in MPB is clocked at a measly 925Mhz with no boost.
It is just weird to pitch these two against each other. The size is completely different, the performance is completely different. The only similarity is the looks. MSI GS70 are also fairly slim. Asus Zenbook 15", dell XPS15 and Samsung ATIV 8 are imo the real competition for a 15" MBP. The zenbook at least also comes with a hidef display option.
The 14" Razer competes with a 13" MBP in size and that one it beats in every metric other than battery life by a big margin (and the OS of course).
I guess that settles that...
Honestly, portable gaming isn't a huge deal for me. I've been on console a decent while now. I think I'm just going to 8GB/SSD my current MBP, to push its lifetime a bit longer, and wait for the next generation. Razer Blade was something that interested me, since it had a decent-looking form with great internals. It's definitely unique.
For gaming, a laptop is not the right thing, now that I look at it. Soon my 360 will be obsolete. Wonder how the iMac would do as a gaming machine for home use, then a MBP/rMBP for portability.
Thanks, everyone...for helping me realize the Razer probably isn't the best way to go, for portability nor gaming.
Honestly, portable gaming isn't a huge deal for me. I've been on console a decent while now. I think I'm just going to 8GB/SSD my current MBP, to push its lifetime a bit longer, and wait for the next generation. Razer Blade was something that interested me, since it had a decent-looking form with great internals. It's definitely unique.
For gaming, a laptop is not the right thing, now that I look at it. Soon my 360 will be obsolete. Wonder how the iMac would do as a gaming machine for home use, then a MBP/rMBP for portability.
Thanks, everyone...for helping me realize the Razer probably isn't the best way to go, for portability nor gaming.
This is a comparison of apples to razors.
Anyway I don't like it when my device get too thin because then it feels like theyll break if i lift them.
Anyway I don't like it when my device get too thin because then it feels like theyll break if i lift them.
Its a laptop. If you want High FPS, you need to play out of native res with.
Even Alienware that runs 2x780SLI only runs at 1080p.
Just cause its got a high res screen does not mean its a crap gaming laptop, the rMBP does fine at most games.
When you talk about retina resolutions, and wanting to play games at 60FPS min your into GTX titan territory, and we are talking 2x titan (or 2x GTX 780).