Why does my rMBP suck on certain pages?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by rnp614, Jan 21, 2013.

  1. rnp614 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 12, 2010
    #1
    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?
     
  2. Xgm541 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #2
    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.
     
  3. chrise2 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2012
    #3
    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.
     
  4. locoboi187 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2012
    #4
    Have you tried WebKit?
     
  5. walkie macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    #5
    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.
     
  6. nontroppo macrumors 6502

    nontroppo

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    #6
    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!
     
  7. comper macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Location:
    Michigan
    #7
    Agreed. Do people really think that the internals of the rMBP are slower than those inside of the iPad with Retina Display?
     
  8. Xgm541 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #8
    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.
     
  9. Valkyre macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2012
  10. runebinder macrumors 6502a

    runebinder

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Location:
    Nottingham, UK
    #10
    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.
     
  11. Xgm541 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #11
    LOL i think you need to re-read both of my posts which clearly state its SW.
     
  12. maxosx macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2012
    Location:
    Southern California
    #12
    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.
     
  13. rnp614 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 12, 2010
    #13
    i get these slowdowns in chrome more than safari somehow. What the deal!
     
  14. Valkyre macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2012
    #14
    chrome lags even more than safari and chrome even uses more ram than safari.
     
  15. Ploki macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    #15
    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?
     
  16. maxosx macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2012
    Location:
    Southern California
    #16
    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
     
  17. Ploki macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    #17
    max ram for web-surfing?
    jesus what has this world come to.
     
  18. Valkyre macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2012
    #18
    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)
     
  19. Freyqq macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2004
    #19
    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.
     
  20. Xgm541 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #20
    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.
     
  21. Ploki macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    #21
    My mistake. I'm downloading Xcode as we speak, to see what fps I get, because visually i don't see it.
     
  22. Xgm541 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #22
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSMjcYGIrY4

    although that video shows the 13inch retina, the 15 inch is generally the same. If you need me to find you the 15 inch video, i can.
     
  23. Ploki macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    #23
    i guess i'm lucky. just tried with quartz debug and I get 60fps... every page i try. (on integrated)
     
  24. nontroppo macrumors 6502

    nontroppo

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    #24
    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.
     
  25. maxosx macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2012
    Location:
    Southern California
    #25
    You certainly have a vivid imagination with a propensity for negative assumptions....

    If all I did was surf the web, I sure wouldn't have a maxed out MBP for such a simple task.
     

Share This Page