Waiting for Haswell MBP Mega Thread

[actuallyinaus]

@Hourfilms, you seem to fail to understand the technicalities of how ram works

I actually did semi-intense editing on Final Cut Pro on my rMBP last night and it went from 14GBs of ram free to 163mbs. That is very alarming. It was a 2 minute video with minimal editing. Everything ran smooth rendering was quick but WTF. How is it conceivably possible to only work with 8GBs of RAM. I would die.

your computer is attempting to use as much ram as it can so it can minimize the calls to disk (storing the original 2 minute video in ram) and minimizing re-calculations (probably storing the uncompressed raw video in ram of the current edited status or something..)

when you load a program on a 16gb machine it will use more ram than on an 8gb machine - from that observation you can't directly say that the 8gb machine would be noticeably slower with out analyzing the actual data stored in ram

on a 16gb machine FCP will use more data / or leave more crap in your ram than on an 8gb machine, this is to increase speed

for example, if you opened chrome after a reboot, it needs to access the ssd and load the required data into ram, when you close chrome, it marks all that data in ram as 'inactive' if another program needs more ram then the 'inactive' chrome data will be replaced with the active important data - the point is that when you next open chrome it checks the ram for 'inactive' chrome data and re-activates it rather than having to load the data from the ssd (which is much slower)

I had 24gigs in my iMac and would always push it to 22-23. So I guess I don't know why I am so alarmed. Actually out of the 15.8 that was being used my activity monitor showed that 6.81 was inactive. I still haven't figured out how to purge the inactive files to redistribute memory back to programs in need. I hate when that happens. So essentially I lost a significant amount of processing power.

you don't want to be removing that inactive ram, it is making your computer much faster, it will automatically be over written if another program needs the ram space

There are four ways that RAM is described by the system: free, wired, active, and inactive.
Free RAM
Being rather self-explanatory, this is the amount that has not been recently used by an application or system process.
Wired RAM
This is the amount that must be kept active for the system to run. This RAM cannot be written to virtual memory on the hard disk.
Active RAM
This is the current amount of memory besides wired RAM that is being used by system and user processes.
Inactive RAM
This is the amount that has recently been used but is no longer required. It may have been used by a recently quit process, or by an active one that no longer needs it, and is not required for use. This RAM is essentially free RAM, with the exception that OS X has kept track of what has recently been loaded into it. [ the reason why it is not deleted, is because if you open up the program that you just closed (or whatever) the system can re-mark the ram as active rather than loading it from disk again]

In regards to memory, the rMBP is supposed to use lots more RAM right? I thought I recalled seeing that people were using 5-6 GBs out of just basic usage. Perhaps this will be changed in Mavericks?

you WANT your computer to be at 100% ram usage - the more inactive crap you have in ram the faster your computer will be

 

[johnnylarue]

Even though I bought my Ivy Bridge rMBP a week ago, I had been hoping the Haswell MBPs would be released soon. Now you've given me a reason to hope that Apple skip Haswell and wait for Broadwell to introduce new MBPs.

Speaks volumes for the mental health of the downtrodden posters on this thread that the post with the most up-votes in recent memory is the one about killing kittens.

 

[actuallyinaus]

delete

 

[Hourfilms]

@Hourfilms, you seem to fail to understand the technicalities of how ram works



your computer is attempting to use as much ram as it can so it can minimize the calls to disk (storing the original 2 minute video in ram) and minimizing re-calculations (probably storing the uncompressed raw video in ram of the current edited status or something..)

when you load a program on a 16gb machine it will use more ram than on an 8gb machine - from that observation you can't directly say that the 8gb machine would be noticeably slower with out analyzing the actual data stored in ram

on a 16gb machine FCP will use more data / or leave more crap in your ram than on an 8gb machine, this is to increase speed

for example, if you opened chrome after a reboot, it needs to access the ssd and load the required data into ram, when you close chrome, it marks all that data in ram as 'inactive' if another program needs more ram then the 'inactive' chrome data will be replaced with the active important data - the point is that when you next open chrome it checks the ram for 'inactive' chrome data and re-activates it rather than having to load the data from the ssd (which is much slower)



you don't want to be removing that inactive ram, it is making your computer much faster, it will automatically be over written if another program needs the ram space

Well that my good friend is why I am a video editor and not a computer wiz. I sort of understand what you said then there was this dog barking outside and my fan mad this low pitch buzzing sound. So the inactive RAM I first thought unretrievable/accessible is essentially going to eventually be redistributed to tasks that need more ram. My FCPX was bogging down and I saw 6.81 inactive so I assumed that was the reason my FCPX wasn't running at optimal speeds. I started shutting down web pages etc. So if the inactive RAM is accessible how come it was not redistributing to FCPX fast enough to make a difference? I get the whole booting programs faster since they have a cached memory placed so to speak but I dont care about booting uo other programs when im solely invested in editing, I understand what you're saying to an extent, I'm probably missing a key point in what you're trying to explain to me.

Just read this article about inactive RAM now it makes perfect sense, exactly what you were saying:
http://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/67031/isnt-inactive-memory-a-waste-of-resources

 

[The Leafs Fan]

Guys, although off topic, I still think you should check out this Quora thread:http://www.quora.com/Apple-Inc-2/What-is-the-internal-culture-like-at-Apple

 

[NocturnalJazz]

What's the possibility of a quad core 13". If not now, is there any possibility for the near future?

 

[actuallyinaus]

Well that my good friend is why I am a video editor and not a computer wiz. I sort of understand what you said then there was this dog barking outside and my fan mad this low pitch buzzing sound. So the inactive RAM I first thought unretrievable/accessible is essentially going to eventually be redistributed to tasks that need more ram. My FCPX was bogging down and I saw 6.81 inactive so I assumed that was the reason my FCPX wasn't running at optimal speeds. I started shutting down web pages etc. So if the inactive RAM is accessible how come it was not redistributing to FCPX fast enough to make a difference? I get the whole booting programs faster since they have a cached memory placed so to speak but I dont care about booting uo other programs when im solely invested in editing, I understand what you're saying to an extent, I'm probably missing a key point in what you're trying to explain to me.

that's perfectly fine, now you know and can be less worried about inactive ram, nor needing to buy so much

'not redistributing to FCPX fast enough' - the problem is not going to be the time it takes to clear the inactive sections of ram (that's super fast), its probably disk being slow to load to ram or something else

crappy analogy:
- ram is kinda like a whiteboard
- the teacher copies text out of the textbook (slow) onto the whiteboard then explains it to the class
- when the teacher changes topic he does not clear the whiteboard completely but rather writes in the free space / gaps - if there is no free space left he wipes out a little section of the oldest text and writes the new stuff in that section
- if a student asks a question about some thing that happened earlier the teacher can simply point to what he wrote before and start explaining right away (assuming he has not needed to wipe it out yet) - if he has wiped it out he needs to flip around in the text book (wasting time) and re-write it on the board again (wasting more time) then finally start explaining again

besides the advantage of reopening a closed program, there are many advantages of cached data in a program:
- when you click preview in final cut pro (i dont actually use fcpx so it might be a bad example) it renders the video and plays it back on the screen - this would be cached in ram so if you preview again without editing more, all the computer has to do is send the video from ram to gpu to be shown on the screen - this saves cpu cycles and battery
- when you drag the preview playback bar (whatever it's called) through a large video file, the more ram you have, the more raw video data can be cached at a time, thus giving you quicker playback/response - rather than having to load from disk
- in a multiplayer video game, it could keep the previous map stored in ram so if that map was played again it does not have to access disk to load the map to ram again, as the map is still in ram from before

----------

What's the possibility of a quad core 13". If not now, is there any possibility for the near future?

guaranteed not this year

 

[NocturnalJazz]

guaranteed not this year

Thanks

 

[KUguardgrl13]

You need to exercise your battery. Every month or so, use it off the charger and let it die -- kill the battery. Otherwise leaving it plugged in 24/7 will actually decrease the battery life over time.

My MBP is four years old with the original battery, so I'm not at all surprised that its capacity is down.

But are you sure you're actually supposed to let Mac batteries die completely on purpose? I've let it happen by accident, and that seemed to lower the capacity pretty quickly. I lost 5% in a month.

The Lenovo I'm borrowing is all sorts of wonky. It doesn't always recognize the extended battery and shows a lot less time left than there should be.

 

[Hourfilms]

that's perfectly fine, now you know and can be less worried about inactive ram, nor needing to buy so much

'not redistributing to FCPX fast enough' - the problem is not going to be the time it takes to clear the inactive sections of ram (that's super fast), its probably disk being slow to load to ram or something else

crappy analogy:
- ram is kinda like a whiteboard
- the teacher copies text out of the textbook (slow) onto the whiteboard then explains it to the class
- when the teacher changes topic he does not clear the whiteboard completely but rather writes in the free space / gaps - if there is no free space left he wipes out a little section of the oldest text and writes the new stuff in that section
- if a student asks a question about some thing that happened earlier the teacher can simply point to what he wrote before and start explaining right away (assuming he has not needed to wipe it out yet) - if he has wiped it out he needs to flip around in the text book (wasting time) and re-write it on the board again (wasting more time) then finally start explaining again

besides the advantage of reopening a closed program, there are many advantages of cached data in a program:
- when you click preview in final cut pro (i dont actually use fcpx so it might be a bad example) it renders the video and plays it back on the screen - this would be cached in ram so if you preview again without editing more, all the computer has to do is send the video from ram to gpu to be shown on the screen - this saves cpu cycles and battery
- when you drag the preview playback bar (whatever it's called) through a large video file, the more ram you have, the more raw video data can be cached at a time, thus giving you quicker playback/response - rather than having to load from disk
- in a multiplayer video game, it could keep the previous map stored in ram so if that map was played again it does not have to access disk to load the map to ram again, as the map is still in ram from before

Pretty good analogy, You should be a creative writer or perhaps a teacher that was A+ thanks for explaining that, now I have a tremendous understanding of RAM. Sweet!

 

[smoking monkey]

It is very likely that the Haswell MBPs will be silently released on a Tuesday either this month or in November. There is a small chance that the release might be announced next year or during the October 22 event. Same for the Haswell Mac mini.

Now you're just taking the piss.

 

[adjeff8]

Well that my good friend is why I am a video editor and not a computer wiz. I sort of understand what you said then there was this dog barking outside and my fan mad this low pitch buzzing sound. So the inactive RAM I first thought unretrievable/accessible is essentially going to eventually be redistributed to tasks that need more ram. My FCPX was bogging down and I saw 6.81 inactive so I assumed that was the reason my FCPX wasn't running at optimal speeds. I started shutting down web pages etc. So if the inactive RAM is accessible how come it was not redistributing to FCPX fast enough to make a difference? I get the whole booting programs faster since they have a cached memory placed so to speak but I dont care about booting uo other programs when im solely invested in editing, I understand what you're saying to an extent, I'm probably missing a key point in what you're trying to explain to me.

Just read this article about inactive RAM now it makes perfect sense, exactly what you were saying:
http://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/67031/isnt-inactive-memory-a-waste-of-resources

A video editor? I thought you said you were a Cinematographer. I took that to mean you were a DP

 

[johnnylarue]

A video editor? I thought you said you were a Cinematographer. I took that to mean you were a DP

Bah, cinematographer, video editor, personal assistant... it's all the same, right?

 

[CmdrLaForge]

What's the possibility of a quad core 13". If not now, is there any possibility for the near future?

Apple could release it this year even so it is seen as unlikely. Maybe as BTO or the high end model. But then the cost will be very close to the 15".

 

[Hourfilms]

A video editor? I thought you said you were a Cinematographer. I took that to mean you were a DP

Bah, cinematographer, video editor, personal assistant... it's all the same, right?

Haha @johnnylarue
I assume the role of lead from pre-production, to Cinematographer/DP, to post -production/editor to uphold my standards and see the project through. I personally handle every element, we were specifically speaking of the post production phase aka video editing. The term is a OMC "One Man Crew" However, I work with a team on occasion when required for larger events.
I've been a firm believer in being self sufficient and knowledgable in all areas but outsourcing the workflow when necessary (usually during production/niche post-productions vfx)

 

[Crzyrio]

I am probably setting myself up for disappointment but I am hoping for Touch ID

 

[adjeff8]

Haha @johnnylarue
I assume the role of lead from pre-production, to Cinematographer/DP, to post -production/editor to uphold my standards and see the project through. I personally handle every element, we were specifically speaking of the post production phase aka video editing. The term is a OMC "One Man Crew" However, I work with a team on occasion when required for larger events.
I've been a firm believer in being self sufficient and knowledgable in all areas but outsourcing the workflow when necessary (usually during production/niche post-productions vfx)

Got it. But there must be times when you wrap Principal Photography and go straight on to another job. Anyway, Let me know when you're in need of a experienced 1st AD

 

[Lucky:)]

Hey,

here in germany the MBPr runs low, out of stock or isn`t further available at all the top online-resellers (amazon, otto etc.) Could be an evidence...

Cheers

Lucky

 

[Ausn]

Any thoughts about pricing the new rMBP? If they really cancel this non rMBP-Line wich starts at 1199€ and the rMBP starting at 1499€? Feels unlikely that the will price the new 13' rMBP with Haswell at 1199€ beeing the new "low-budget-starting-model".

What do you think?

Cheers guys

 

[Watabou]

Now you're just taking the piss.

I think he's just saying that because he already bought his.

 

[siamchen]

Any thoughts about pricing the new rMBP? If they really cancel this non rMBP-Line wich starts at 1199€ and the rMBP starting at 1499€? Feels unlikely that the will price the new 13' rMBP with Haswell at 1199€ beeing the new "low-budget-starting-model".

What do you think?

Cheers guys

As the Dell XPS 13 and 15 will be available on 15th or 18th this month, Apple should get some pressures with configuration and pricing.

 

[zI INFINITY Iz]

I have read several posts about the new rMBP not being such a big upgrade and therefor not appearing at Apple's event, because it would "steal attention" from other products, like the new iPad's. This doesn't make any sense. If it's not such a big upgrade, how could it steal attention from the iPad's (which are considered a "big upgrade"? And the iPad's are a totally different kind of product category, people that pay attention to it in the first place are interested in Tablets, not in laptops. It's not going to be like: "yeah I'm so interested in a new iPad (which costs about $400-700), but look there is a new rMBP so I'm going to buy a new $2000 laptop." IMO it has nothing to do with it.

Even if the event would be 50 minutes about the rMBP and 10 minutes about the iPad 5 and second iPad mini, all news headlines would be "Apple announces iPad 5 and iPad Mini 2". Because that's what most people are interested in. In the end the iPad would still sell many times more then the rMBP's.

My conclusion: there is really no problem in giving the rMBP a few minutes during the event. And I'm pretty sure it will happen (if there is no silent release until the 22nd).
____________________

Another idea that crossed my mind yesterday, but this is really far fetched. What if 2013 is the year Apple wants to go all "space gray" with their products? They wanted to start with the iPhone's, that's why the MBA didn't get it yet. The iMac's are to big and they don't have enough magical space gray powder at the moment for it. Now the new iPad 5 and 2nd iPad Mini will receive a space gray version, as well as the MacBook Pro and Mac Mini.

I know it sounds far fetched. But a space gray rMBP would look wonderful <3

 

[OceanMindedBoy]

A dark metallic MacBook Pro would be wicked cool.

 

[Rick-ITA]

Another idea that crossed my mind yesterday, but this is really far fetched. What if 2013 is the year Apple wants to go all "space gray"

I hate that colour. I just want my classic pure alluminium, not any star-wars-like crap, not any touchscreen and so on. Just a 2nd gen rMBP with haswell, new SSD and wi-fi and possibily a slight price drop.

 

[ValSalva]

As the Dell XPS 13 and 15 will be available on 15th or 18th this month, Apple should get some pressures with configuration and pricing.

IMO Apple has already set their rMBP prices. The only way I could see prices dropping is if sales are low. It seems like this happened in February. But no way is Apple going to change anything at the last minute because of something Dell does.