Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Why does my rMBP suck on certain pages?

R

rnp614

macrumors newbie
Original poster
May 12, 2010
18
0
I have 16gb of ram, and do not do much more than web browsing IM etc at one time, no heavy intesive apps and yet webpages like ESPN and the clubpolk forums (polk audio) for example stutter like hell when I scroll. Its DRIVING ME BANANAS!

Whats the deal with this? Any tips?
 
Because its pushing so many pixels.

The macbook pro 13 inch pushes 1,024,000
The 15 inch retina pushes 5,184,000.

Apple should release an update to safari sometime soon to update the webkit to handle rendering a lot better.
 
Yeah, hopefully some updates will make things even smoother than previous updates. In a year or two, video cards will be able to handle these types of resolutions no problem. I think Apple is really pushing the limits of the hardware with these resolutions.
 
rnp614 said:
I have 16gb of ram, and do not do much more than web browsing IM etc at one time, no heavy intesive apps and yet webpages like ESPN and the clubpolk forums (polk audio) for example stutter like hell when I scroll. Its DRIVING ME BANANAS!

Whats the deal with this? Any tips?
Click to expand...

Have you tried WebKit?
 
This is a software issue not hardware, I can scroll smoothly the ESPN page on my iPad retina display 3rd gen, download the WebKit mentioned above.
 
GAH, when will the idiotic "too many pixels" meme DIE!?!?!

I've driven custom OpenGL stimuli programmed in Matlab over 3 displays including the HiDPI rMBP display without issue - that is 9331200 pixels. Apart from the multiple posts on here saying using nightly browser builds alleviates issues some people have with particular web pages.

This is a SOFTWARE ISSUE!
 
nontroppo said:
GAH, when will the idiotic "too many pixels" meme DIE!?!?!

I've driven custom OpenGL stimuli programmed in Matlab over 3 displays including the HiDPI rMBP display without issue - that is 9331200 pixels. Apart from the multiple posts on here saying using nightly browser builds alleviates issues some people have with particular web pages.

This is a SOFTWARE ISSUE!
Click to expand...

Agreed. Do people really think that the internals of the rMBP are slower than those inside of the iPad with Retina Display?
 
nontroppo said:
GAH, when will the idiotic "too many pixels" meme DIE!?!?!

I've driven custom OpenGL stimuli programmed in Matlab over 3 displays including the HiDPI rMBP display without issue - that is 9331200 pixels. Apart from the multiple posts on here saying using nightly browser builds alleviates issues some people have with particular web pages.

This is a SOFTWARE ISSUE!
Click to expand...

There is no need to call it idiotic because it is in fact the answer to OP's question. A non retina model of the macbook pro will scroll through espn flawlessly. A retina model of the macbook pro will not. The difference is the resolution. Clearly webkit has not been updated and the large resolution of the rmbp is causing it to stutter.
 
Xgm541 said:
There is no need to call it idiotic because it is in fact the answer to OP's question. A non retina model of the macbook pro will scroll through espn flawlessly. A retina model of the macbook pro will not. The difference is the resolution. Clearly webkit has not been updated and the large resolution of the rmbp is causing it to stutter.
Click to expand...

It's SW dude. The rMBP is definitely more snappy than my 2010 MBP, and I have experienced no lag what so ever yet. I have been using the WebKit nightlies since I got it.
 
runebinder said:
It's SW dude. The rMBP is definitely more snappy than my 2010 MBP, and I have experienced no lag what so ever yet. I have been using the WebKit nightlies since I got it.
Click to expand...

LOL i think you need to re-read both of my posts which clearly state its SW.
 
i get these slowdowns in chrome more than safari somehow. What the deal!
 
maxosx said:
I like Safari, but Chrome is a rocket!

Then there's the vast number of free, highly efficient extensions that no other browser has.

Ten points to Google for making my brand new MBPr even faster when on the web.
Click to expand...

chrome lags even more than safari and chrome even uses more ram than safari.
 
Xgm541 said:
There is no need to call it idiotic because it is in fact the answer to OP's question. A non retina model of the macbook pro will scroll through espn flawlessly. A retina model of the macbook pro will not. The difference is the resolution. Clearly webkit has not been updated and the large resolution of the rmbp is causing it to stutter.
Click to expand...

No. Large resolution has nothing to do with it. As I already mentioned severaltimes, the first iMac 27" didn't have that less pixels to work with and it didn't lag or stutter. (3,6m as opposed to 5.2)
It was running far inferior hardware.

It's the software implementation of retina workings. Try it on 2880*1800... I can't because I'm not experiencing any stutter...

I'm using Safari 6.0.2...

Could someone link me directly a laggy page?
 
maxosx said:
You have to have enough resources to have a fast Mac. I always order BTO with max ram, it's well worth it. With Apples fast SSD, mines a rocket thanks to Chrome :D
Click to expand...

max ram for web-surfing?
jesus what has this world come to.
 
Ploki said:
max ram for web-surfing?
jesus what has this world come to.
Click to expand...

exactly....

chrome might be a tiny tiny bit faster than webkit safari (really is a huge difference that 0.03 secs....) but its memory usage is crap, it lags like hell and to be honest i cant even fathom why someone with webkit safari would change over to chrome.

Webkit safari doesnt lag even at the most demanding webpages out there, while chrome is (at the moment) a lagfest. Even if you mess around with advanced settings and enable gpu rendering)
 
Ploki said:
max ram for web-surfing?
jesus what has this world come to.
Click to expand...

I use firefox, and I've never seen it eat more that ~1gb before..and that's with 20+ open tabs. Chrome is a special case because it runs a completely new instance of chrome for each tab and each extension. So...if you have 20 tabs open in chrome and a few extensions, expect 25+ instances of chrome running. Arguably, that is suppose to help reliability and security, but at the cost of lots and lots of ram.
 
Ploki said:
No. Large resolution has nothing to do with it. As I already mentioned severaltimes, the first iMac 27" didn't have that less pixels to work with and it didn't lag or stutter. (3,6m as opposed to 5.2)
It was running far inferior hardware.

It's the software implementation of retina workings. Try it on 2880*1800... I can't because I'm not experiencing any stutter...

I'm using Safari 6.0.2...

Could someone link me directly a laggy page?
Click to expand...

I really don't understand what part of what I said is not making sense. You have two computers. Both 15 inch macbook pro's. Lets say both are the same specs except one is retina. Opening Safari, going to ESPN, the retina will have 20ish FPS scrolling down the page. The non-retina will have higher FPS, less stuttering. The only difference is the number of pixels.

This does not mean that the hardware is not capable of pushing that many pixels. What it does mean is that the only factor that changes (the resolution) causes the software to develop stuttering. This is a software issue that apple has yet to address. My assumption is that webkit has not historically been running at such high resolutions and therefore has not been optimized to do so.
 
Xgm541 said:
I really don't understand what part of what I said is not making sense. You have two computers. Both 15 inch macbook pro's. Lets say both are the same specs except one is retina. Opening Safari, going to ESPN, the retina will have 20ish FPS scrolling down the page. The non-retina will have higher FPS, less stuttering. The only difference is the number of pixels.

This does not mean that the hardware is not capable of pushing that many pixels. What it does mean is that the only factor that changes (the resolution) causes the software to develop stuttering. This is a software issue that apple has yet to address. My assumption is that webkit has not historically been running at such high resolutions and therefore has not been optimized to do so.
Click to expand...

My mistake. I'm downloading Xcode as we speak, to see what fps I get, because visually i don't see it.
 
Xgm541 said:
Because its pushing so many pixels...

...There is no need to call it idiotic because it is in fact the answer to OP's question... The difference is the resolution. Clearly webkit has not been updated and the large resolution of the rmbp is causing it to stutter...

...What it does mean is that the only factor that changes (the resolution) causes the software to develop stuttering
Click to expand...

No! It is not about pixels. For the one site I've seen clear slowdown on (EBay new design page in Chromium a month or so ago), connect TWO external monitors so total number of pixels is >9million and scroll the page on the external -- no stutter. The number of pixels is irrelevant. In Chrome (because the bug tracker report was posted), it was because images were not being properly cached in HiDPI mode, and Safari was/is likely a similar bug.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back