or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Review: Apple's late-2013 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Review: Apple's late-2013 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display

post #1 of 57
Thread Starter 
The late-2013 version of Apple's high-end professional notebook, the 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display, is a computer in a class of its own, offering a near-perfect blend of style and performance in a more affordable package than before.

15-inch Retina MacBook Pro


The 15 inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display can be ordered with one of three different CPU options. The base model, available for $1,999, ships with a 2.0 GHz quad-core Intel Core i7-4750HQ Crystal Well processor with 6 MB on-chip L3 and 128 MB L4 cache. This was our test machine, with 256 gigabytes of storage and 8 gigabytes of RAM.

It can be upgraded to either a 2.3 GHz quad-core Intel Core i7-4850HQ version, or a 2.6 GHz quad-core Intel Core i7-4960HQ with 6 MB on-chip L3 cache.

All three options provide integrated Intel Iris Pro 5200 Graphics with DDR3L SDRAM shared with main memory and an optional discrete Nvidia GPU: the GeForce GT 750M with 2 GB dedicated GDDR5 video memory. The OS X operating system automatically switches between integrated and discrete graphics hardware when running OS X.

Apple's new Macs all ship with with Mavericks, the company's latest operating system, as well as free copies of the iLife and iWork suites.

Design



The 15-inch MacBook Pro looks identical on the exterior to its predecessor. On its left are a MagSafe 2 charging port, two Thunderbolt 2 inputs, a USB 3.0 port, 3.5-millimeter headphone jack, and two microphone holes. The right of the notebook has another USB 3.0 port, HDMI out, and a full-size SD card slot.

15-inch Retina MacBook Pro


15-inch Retina MacBook Pro


Also returning is the fantastic 15-inch Retina display that debuted in Apple's 2012 model. It's a 2,880-by-1,800-pixel panel packing in 220 pixels per inch.

Like last year's model, this has the same great viewing angles, thanks to the IPS technology found in the panel, as well as relatively low glare.

15-inch Retina MacBook Pro


Unlike the 13-inch model, which houses the speakers under the keyboard, the 15-inch MacBook Pro has room for speaker grilles on each side of the notebook's keyboard. Accordingly, the sound on this model is louder and slightly clearer and work fine, though headphones or external speakers are still recommended for any true fidelity.

Apple's high-end MacBook also comes with 256 gigabytes of solid-state storage, configurable up to 1 terabyte. The entry-level storage is twice that of the 13-inch model.

15-inch Retina MacBook Pro
Left: 15-inch Retina MacBook Pro. Right: 13-inch model.


Internals



As with Apple's new 13-inch model, the highlight of the 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display is Intel's latest silicon. While the 13-inch chips are known as Haswell, the 15-inch model sports more premium chips dubbed Crystalwell.

Crystalwell is Intel's brand for fourth-generation Core processors based on the same technology as Haswell but paired with a more powerful Iris Pro graphics. In the same family, Intel also offers Haswell processors paired with simpler, significantly inferior HD Graphics, as well as "ultra low" and "ultra low extreme."

15-inch Retina MacBook Pro


For the 15 inch MacBook Pro, Apple is only offering Crystalwell chips, which further upgrade Intel's much improved Iris-branded integrated graphics on Haswell processors with "Iris Pro," the primary feature of which is its additional 128MB of eDRAM (embedded DRAM) bundled on the processor package itself.

This specialized memory can both be used for graphics or as an overflow L4 cache assisting the 6MB on on-chip L3 cache. It's a design similar to dedicated video game hardware such as Microsoft's Xbox 360, Sony Playstation 2 and the A-series chips Apple designs for its iPhone and iPad.

Intel's Haswell microarchitecture was first used by Apple this summer for the MacBook Air. Haswell aims to deliver high power efficiency, benefitting from Intel's advanced FinFET transistors built at a 22nm process node.

The chips improve upon the previous Core i5 Ivy Bridge design by incorporating a second branch predictor (used to optimize the flow in the instruction pipeline), a third address generation unit (used in memory access) and a fourth arithmetic and logic unit, along with higher bandwidth cache.

Haswell chips also include new instructions enhancing SIMD vector processing with Advanced Vector Extensions 2 and integrates the Platform Controller Hub and voltage regulator into the chip package itself, rather than being separate components on the logic board.

15-inch Retina MacBook Pro


Along with a series of other advances and optimizations, Haswell is intended to be much more energy efficient while also being slightly faster even at a lower clock speed. Accordingly, latest chips are focused on efficiency, improving battery life to a significant degree.

In our tests, the battery performance on the new 15-inch MacBook Pro was excellent, and comparable with the 13-inch model. Both strong enough to easily get through an average workday with Wi-Fi enabled and backlight at a reasonable setting. For its part, Apple advertises that the 15-inch Pro gets 8 hours of use, but our tests suggested it could exceed that amount.

For comparison's sake, we also ran a more extreme battery stress test, with maximum brightness, keyboard backlight on, streaming a high-definition video from YouTube. In this taxing scenario, the MacBook Pro lasted over four hours before warning it needed to be plugged in.

13-inch MacBook Pro


In terms of raw performance, the 15-inch MacBook Pro easily outclasses the 13-inch variety. In a 32-bit multicore Geekbench test, the 15-inch model showed almost twice the horsepower. An OpenGL test in Cinebench also resulted in 20 more frames per second than the 13-inch model.

Also welcome is the fact that the 15-inch model comes standard with 8 gigabytes of RAM. This is an improvement from Apple's entry-level 13-inch model, which just ships with 4 gigabytes --?a number borderline unacceptable in 2013.

Conclusion



Spending nearly $2,000 on a notebook is no small investment, but we're happy to report that the 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display is worthy of its price tag. Including a beautiful Retina display, a premium Core i7 processor, 256 gigabytes of speedy flash memory, and Intel Iris Pro graphics in the default low-end configuration makes this machine worthy of its "Pro" designation.

The 15-inch model also comes with 8 gigabytes of RAM by default, and still manages to offer a full day's worth of battery life on one charge. Apple's premium notebook offers much better value at its entry-level price than the company's 13-inch variety, which is held back by 4 gigabytes of RAM and 128 gigabytes of storage at $700 less.

Base pricing on the 15-inch model has also fallen from $2,199 to $1,999, offering even more value for buyers.

If there's any significant knock against the 15-inch model, it's the fact that Apple doesn't include a discrete graphics card in the base model. Users looking for dedicated graphics beyond Iris Pro will need to splurge and get the $2,599 model, which includes an Nvidia GeForce GT 750M, as well as 512 gigabytes of PCI-e-based flash storage and 16 gigabytes of RAM.

For notebook shoppers who aren't drawn to the portability of the 13-inch Retina MacBook Pro, Apple's 15-inch model is an easy recommendation. This is a true professional-grade machine that doesn't disappoint.

AppleInsider editor Daniel Eran Dilger contributed to this review.

Score: 4.5 out of 5



ratings_hl_45.png

Pros:


  • Great design and great performance
  • More affordable than last year
  • Offers more value and upgrade options than 13-inch MacBook Pro

Con:


  • Default configuration doesn't include discrete GPU


AppleInsider extends its thanks to Apple Authorized Reseller B&H Photo for sponsoring this year's MacBook Pro Retina review series. The New York-based superstore recently took home top honors in Consumer Reports' 2013 electronic stores rankings for overall customer service and satisfaction.

How to save when buying



Readers looking to purchase up a new MacBook Pro Retina at the absolute lowest prices can turn to our Mac Price Guides, which track the prices of Macs at Apple's largest Authorized Resellers throughout the year. Currently, the AI readers have two exclusive ways to save over Apple's MSRP:

Macs without AppleCare

If you just want to purchase a new MacBook Pro Retina without a 3-year AppleCare protection plan, MacMall exclusively offers AppleInsider readers the lowest prices anywhere on these models, as can be seen in the relevant price guide snippet below. To take advantage of the offer, simply use the MacMall links in the price guide to activate the "Promo Code" field on reseller's website and then apply promo code APPLEINSIDER02

MacMall also only charges tax to residents of CA, NY, IL, WI, MN, CO, TN, NC and GA. This means that -- on most models -- customers outside those states will save at least another $100 from the tax savings, in addition to the 3% exclusive discount.


Macs bundled with AppleCare

Alternatively, if you'd like to bundle a 3-year AppleCare Extended Protection Plan with your new MacBook Pro Retina, AppleInsider also maintains a Mac+AppleCare Price Guide listing the combined prices for each new Mac model along with 3 years of AppleCare. As can be seen in the relevant portion below, the lowest prices on these bundles sometimes come from MacMall, but are more often available at B&H.

For its part, B&H exclusively offers readers instant savings of between $70 (13-inch models) and $105 (15-inch models) on AppleCare protection plans for the MacBook Pro. In addition, B&H only charges sales tax to residents of its home state of New York.



An easy 5-step help guide is also available to show precisely how to pair an AppleCare protection plan to your new Mac at B&H's reduced pricing.

Other options include Amazon, which only charges sales tax to residents of AZ, CA, KS, KY, NJ, NY, ND, PA, TX, and WA; and BestBuy, which sometimes offers in-store pickup of online orders.
post #2 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Con:
• Default configuration doesn't include discrete GPU

I don't think this a valid Con. I'd say it's a Pro that they offer it without a dGPU so they can lower the entry-level price for their expensive 15" notebook.

To make that a Con I would have said "Entry level 15" MBP with discreet GPU option is now $400 more expensive."
Edited by akqies - 11/3/13 at 3:04pm
post #3 of 57
The weight difference is negligible, I held it in the store yesterday and it's still a total brick.
post #4 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post


I don't think this a valid Con. I'd say it's a Pro that they offer it without a dGPU so they can lower the entry-level price for their expensive 15" notebook.

To make that a Con I would have said "Entry level 15" MBP with discreet GPU option is now $400 more expensive."

 

It most certainly is a valid Con.

 

Guess what, 2014 brings a bullet to Intel with the Excavator APU from AMD. The new Kaveri coming out stomps Haswell into the ground with GPGPU processing [OpenCL?] and the gap between Integer/FP has been closed. Excavator comes out Fall of 2014, at the latest and it stomps all over its own brethren, Kaveri at 20nm/16nm FinFET.

 

Sorry, but Intel has no answer to the APU world.

post #5 of 57
Typo: it's discrete graphics, not discreet.
post #6 of 57
Damn, I only have the first gen rMBP 15! But somehow this little beast runs circles around my 3 y/o FULLY LOADED workstation Macs. Totally 5 stars!
post #7 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by indiekiduk View Post

The weight difference is negligible, I held it in the store yesterday and it's still a total brick.

The only comparable notebook I could find was the Razor Blade which comes in around 1/2 a pound lighter at 4.1 lb vs. MBP 15 at 4.46 but the Razor is almost twice the price. It bears mentioning that the Razor only has a 14" screen though with only 1600 x 900 resolution.

 

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2421240,00.asp?tab=Specs

 

The MBP 13" weighs in at 3.46, exactly one pound less than the 15".

 

...and I looked it up... A standard red clay brick weighs 6 lbs, which is 1.5 lbs more than a MBP 15". If someone can't handle 4.46 lbs, they need to hit the gym.


Edited by mstone - 11/3/13 at 4:15pm

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #8 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

It most certainly is a valid Con.

Guess what, 2014 brings a bullet to Intel with the Excavator APU from AMD. The new Kaveri coming out stomps Haswell into the ground with GPGPU processing [OpenCL?] and the gap between Integer/FP has been closed. Excavator comes out Fall of 2014, at the latest and it stomps all over its own brethren, Kaveri at 20nm/16nm FinFET.

Sorry, but Intel has no answer to the APU world.

How is a GPU not due for at least another year a reason for Apple not to release a less expensive 15" MBP now?
post #9 of 57
The Dell XPS 15 is similar in price, performance, and screen resolution. Like Apple, Dell's XPS 15 also carries a hefty price tag for a discrete GPU. Of course, the biggest advantage, of the rMBP 15 is Mavericks vs. the absolutely horrid Windows 8...
post #10 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post


I don't think this a valid Con. I'd say it's a Pro that they offer it without a dGPU so they can lower the entry-level price for their expensive 15" notebook.

To make that a Con I would have said "Entry level 15" MBP with discreet GPU option is now $400 more expensive."

 

I agree. I bought one of these (i7-4960HQ) without a dGPU. I could have easily upgraded to the discrete one if I wanted, but I don't game on my laptop and the experience of my old 2010 MPB cooking my lap every time I started Photoshop, etc made it an easy decision. Paid off too. It runs really cool and quiet almost all the time and I'm not noticing any graphical performance problems in what I do. As a bonus Iris Pro appears to have much better OpenCL performance than the GT 750M. I'm very glad we got the choice.

 

It'd be a completely different story if I was gaming on it, and that's where having to spend extra does become a con as you say.

post #11 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

It most certainly is a valid Con.

Guess what, 2014 brings a bullet to Intel with the Excavator APU from AMD. The new Kaveri coming out stomps Haswell into the ground with GPGPU processing [OpenCL?] and the gap between Integer/FP has been closed. Excavator comes out Fall of 2014, at the latest and it stomps all over its own brethren, Kaveri at 20nm/16nm FinFET.

Sorry, but Intel has no answer to the APU world.

What's the chances that apple will have one of these in a new rMBP next year if this comes out in fall?
post #12 of 57
Unfortunately, this article feels more like an ad and less like a review.

For a review, it would have been nice to benchmark against the previous gen with various configurations and price points under 10.9. This review does not answer if existing rMBP owners should consider upgrading, or for new purchasers, whether to get the 2012 instead to save a few bucks.
Edited by Negafox - 11/4/13 at 12:27am
post #13 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by karmadave View Post

The Dell XPS 15 is similar in price, performance, and screen resolution. Like Apple, Dell's XPS 15 also carries a hefty price tag for a discrete GPU. Of course, the biggest advantage, of the rMBP 15 is Mavericks vs. the absolutely horrid Windows 8...

And build quality. And trackpad. And battery life. And as a whole.

post #14 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by indiekiduk View Post

The weight difference is negligible, I held it in the store yesterday and it's still a total brick.

 

It's perfectly portable. It just doesn't fit in your pocket like a phone. I pick it up with one hand. You didn't have anything logical to say, so you simply relied on an abstract comparison to construction materials.

post #15 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Con:
 
  • Default configuration doesn't include discrete GPU

 

There are two standard configurations, and one of them does include a discrete GPU, so this is false.  The cheapest configuration doesn't include a discrete GPU, but whether that's a con or a choice depends on your point of view.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #16 of 57

Having a discrete GPU or not shouldn't really be a consideration imho. It's what the graphics performance is that matters, and whether it's build in to the CPU or a separate unit, who cares.

post #17 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkman@chartermi.net View Post

Damn, I only have the first gen rMBP 15! But somehow this little beast runs circles around my 3 y/o FULLY LOADED workstation Macs. Totally 5 stars!

Agreed! What a beautiful machine. Apple has really mastered the art of making laptops. The MBA line for max mobility and the MBP line for power.

 

Alas, too much machine and power for me. I would be content with an 11" MBA. Maybe in the spring! :)

post #18 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post
 

It most certainly is a valid Con.

 

Guess what, 2014 brings a bullet to Intel with the Excavator APU from AMD. The new Kaveri coming out stomps Haswell into the ground with GPGPU processing [OpenCL?] and the gap between Integer/FP has been closed. Excavator comes out Fall of 2014, at the latest and it stomps all over its own brethren, Kaveri at 20nm/16nm FinFET.

 

Sorry, but Intel has no answer to the APU world.

 

Given that Kaveri isn't shipping in real products until next year there's nothing to answer at the moment.  And GP/GPU performance is not everything.  The expectation is that Kaveri will otherwise be on par with an i5.  Given that Kaveri has effectively slipped from 2013 to 2014 there's no certainly when Excavator will show up even as a paper launch.

 

HSA's success is not guaranteed even with ARM on board.  They have qualcomm but not, surprisingly, Apple who's big into OpenCL.  I doubt they didn't ask Apple so either Apple declined to not piss off Intel or they simply prefer to wait and see.

 

"We’re expecting a healthy increase in graphics performance with Kaveri, but we don’t know just how fast it will be right now. However, AMD stated that Kaveri will be shipping in 2013 (though perhaps only in small quantities), which means we’ll be able to see just how well Kaveri stacks up against Intel’s latest in the next month or two.

Update: AMD sent along an official statement (which they've issued previously) on Kaveri availability: "AMD's ‘Kaveri’ high-performance APU remains on track and will start shipping to customers in Q4 2013, with first public availability in the desktop component channel very early in Q1 2014. ‘Kaveri’ features up to four ‘Steamroller’ x86 cores, major heterogeneous computing enhancements, and a discrete-level Graphics Core Next (GCN) implementation – AMD’s first high-performance APU to offer GCN. ‘Kaveri’ will be initially offered in the FM2+ package for desktop PCs. Mobile ‘Kaveri’ products will be available later in the first half of 2014."If we read "customers" as the large OEMs that make desktops, then we may or may not have actual Kaveri hardware in hand for testing this year, but we'll wait and see."

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7466/amd-news-a106790k-1311-beta6-drivers-fm2-motherboards-kaveri

post #19 of 57

Alert:  Battery life on this machine is substantially less than what Apple claims.

 

I purchased one of these a week ago and although the laptop is incredibly fast, is designed beautifully, and is an absolute pleasure to use, the battery life is about half of what they claim when I'm using Safari and Mail with the monitor at about 70% brightness.  I actually returned the first laptop I got due to this issue and after 2 extended calls with tech support where they looked in detail with me at activity monitor and ran a whole bunch of trouble shooting.  I've tried disconnected things like Box and Bluetooth.  Obviously, I need to have wi-fi on.  The new replacement computer has a bit of a better battery life, but is still around 4.5 hours tops.

 

The model I got has 2.3 Ghz Intel Core i7 with 16 GB of RAM.  Does anyone have any suggestions?

 

Hardware Overview:

  Model Name:    MacBook Pro

  Model Identifier:    MacBookPro11,3

  Processor Name:    Intel Core i7

  Processor Speed:    2.3 GHz

  Number of Processors:    1

  Total Number of Cores:    4

  L2 Cache (per Core):    256 KB

  L3 Cache:    6 MB

  Memory:    16 GB

  SMC Version (system):    2.19f3

post #20 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruzzell View Post

Alert:  Battery life on this machine is substantially less than what Apple claims.

I purchased one of these a week ago and although the laptop is incredibly fast, is designed beautifully, and is an absolute pleasure to use, the battery life is about half of what they claim when I'm using Safari and Mail with the monitor at about 70% brightness.  I actually returned the first laptop I got due to this issue and after 2 extended calls with tech support where they looked in detail with me at activity monitor and ran a whole bunch of trouble shooting.  I've tried disconnected things like Box and Bluetooth.  Obviously, I need to have wi-fi on.  The new replacement computer has a bit of a better battery life, but is still around 4.5 hours tops.

The model I got has 2.3 Ghz Intel Core i7 with 16 GB of RAM.  Does anyone have any suggestions?

You do know it's based on usage, right? Saying you only have Mail and Safari running is probably not true. You probably installed a bunch of 3rd-party services, including Adobe Flash.
post #21 of 57

Thanks for your reply.  I'm not running third party services as I disconnected Box.  I am not using much flash.  I mainly read articles and have on-going corresp. for my business via email.  There are minimal resources being used according to the activity monitor.   Right now while typing this, it shows there is 54% battery left and 2:16 minutes (and I turned my monitor to about 65% brightness).  On another note, the original computer was run through Apple diagnostics and it showed the battery was perfectly healthy.  I assume the same to be true for this replacement machine.  Therefore, my conclusion is that the battery life is not nearly close to what Apple claims.

post #22 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruzzell View Post

Thanks for your reply.  I'm not running third party services as I disconnected Box.  I am not using much flash.  I mainly read articles and have on-going corresp. for my business via email.  There are minimal resources being used according to the activity monitor.   Right now while typing this, it shows there is 54% battery left and 2:16 minutes (and I turned my monitor to about 65% brightness).  On another note, the original computer was run through Apple diagnostics and it showed the battery was perfectly healthy.  I assume the same to be true for this replacement machine.  Therefore, my conclusion is that the battery life is not nearly close to what Apple claims.

My battery life is fine, reviewers I trust have showed the battery life is right where Apple said it should be, and Apple has been using the most realistic and honest battery life measuring in the industry so for your personal experience to become a blanket statement that Apple is lying just does not read as most likely.
post #23 of 57

Then what do you suggest as a solution?  If the activity monitor shows as I've explained above, Apple Care support can't figure it out and on the first computer even recommended getting a replacement machine after extensive testing (one level 2 support rep at Apple even set up a remote thing so he could go on my screen while I was going through trouble shooting on a call over 1 hour), then what do you suggest?  One of the main reasons I purchased this is for the battery life and it's about half of what they claim.  I have a 3 year old MacBook Pro 15" in which the battery hasn't been changed in hundreds of charge cycles and it still gets 3 hours.  Does anyone have any constructive ideas here on solving this issue?

post #24 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruzzell View Post

Then what do you suggest as a solution?  If the activity monitor shows as I've explained above, Apple Care support can't figure it out and on the first computer even recommended getting a replacement machine after extensive testing (one level 2 support rep at Apple even set up a remote thing so he could go on my screen while I was going through trouble shooting on a call over 1 hour), then what do you suggest?  One of the main reasons I purchased this is for the battery life and it's about half of what they claim.  I have a 3 year old MacBook Pro 15" in which the battery hasn't been changed in hundreds of charge cycles and it still gets 3 hours.  Does anyone have any constructive ideas here on solving this issue?

You do know you haven't detailed anything that is helpful. You haven't listed all the processes that are running. You haven't said if Safari, or any other app, is an app that uses significant power per the Battery drop down in the Menu Bar. You haven't mentioned disabling the dGPU, if you have one.

Let's be clear, it's up to 8 hours, not you will get 8 hours regardless of the workload. This is why battery life tests are best done with multiple atypical usage tests so you can then gauge how it will affect you.

You even said you have Flash installed but oddly claim you aren't using it much. Unless you have Click2Flash installed, too, you really have no idea when Flash is running. It's not about playing a YouTube video it's about Flash running at all. Remember that ads still use Flash and that Apple's tests aren't using Flash.
post #25 of 57

Thanks for your feedback Akquies.  Since you are the only one who is responding, and with each comment you seem to discount what I am saying, I am not sure what your motive is.  My motive is simply to get a solution or understand that Apple has totally misrepresented the market (which is unlikely).  Do you work for Apple in their PR department to quell anything that could be a potential negative?  The bottom line is that Apple Care experts who are trained in trouble shooting this sent me on two diff. occasions to level 2 people.  I then had diagnostics done at the Apple Store.  The conclusion was that even though the battery showed it was healthy in the diagnostics, that something wasn't right so they replaced the computer.   Then the same thing is happening with the new computer.  There is nothing abnormal about what is going on in activity monitor in terms of CPU or energy use, which are the two areas the Apple tech support experts focused on.  With that said, is there anyone else on this forum who can provide some insight as to if they also have this issue and/or ideas as to how to correct it.

 

Thanks everyone.

post #26 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruzzell View Post

Thanks for your feedback Akquies.  Since you are the only one who is responding, and with each comment you seem to discount what I am saying, I am not sure what your motive is.  My motive is simply to get a solution or understand that Apple has totally misrepresented the market (which is unlikely).  Do you work for Apple in their PR department to quell anything that could be a potential negative?  The bottom line is that Apple Care experts who are trained in trouble shooting this sent me on two diff. occasions to level 2 people.  I then had diagnostics done at the Apple Store.  The conclusion was that even though the battery showed it was healthy in the diagnostics, that something wasn't right so they replaced the computer.   Then the same thing is happening with the new computer.  There is nothing abnormal about what is going on in activity monitor in terms of CPU or energy use, which are the two areas the Apple tech support experts focused on.  With that said, is there anyone else on this forum who can provide some insight as to if they also have this issue and/or ideas as to how to correct it.

Thanks everyone.

I haven't discounted that you believe every Mac you've received is faulty or the fact that Macs, just like all complex machinery, can have issues, but you've jumped to a conclusion based on your limited anecdotal experiences that makes Apple's claims an outright lie without making a valid argument that Apple is lying about there entire MBP line.

I asked you several questions that you have refused to answer. Questions that would help determine where the problem resides. It's possible that you could have 2 machines with the same problem just as it's possible to have a dozen machines with the same problem but with each new machine the odds get slimmer and slimmer. At some point you will need to look at this objectively.
post #27 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post
 

 

It most certainly is a valid Con.

 

Guess what, 2014 brings a bullet to Intel with the Excavator APU from AMD. The new Kaveri coming out stomps Haswell into the ground with GPGPU processing [OpenCL?] and the gap between Integer/FP has been closed. Excavator comes out Fall of 2014, at the latest and it stomps all over its own brethren, Kaveri at 20nm/16nm FinFET.

 

Sorry, but Intel has no answer to the APU world.

This just in: newer CPUs are faster than older ones. STOP THE PRESSES!!! Also, by the time that comes out Intel will already be onto Broadwell. Your post seems to have some inane assumption that Intel has not already been working on faster CPUs that will also launch in 2014. How about we compare CPUs that are currently available in products rather than between a shipping product and something with no actual launch date?

post #28 of 57

Since these new laptops have Thunderbolt 2, will they support daisy chaining of DisplayPort 1.2 monitors?

 

What version of HDMI does the HDMI connector use?  Will it support 30 inch (2560x1600) monitors?  4K?

post #29 of 57
Question for the group, I have last years retina version, a programming machine, but like to play games a bit (starcraft). Does this newer generation have any better discrete graphics performance worth updating too? (Thinking the market value of the existing version minus the new version price would be less than building a windows machine)
post #30 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Bonner View Post

Question for the group, I have last years retina version, a programming machine, but like to play games a bit (starcraft). Does this newer generation have any better discrete graphics performance worth updating too? (Thinking the market value of the existing version minus the new version price would be less than building a windows machine)

The 750M is a rebadge of the 650M, it's pretty much the exact same GPU except they increased the clock speed from 900MHz max to 967MHz (7% boost). In a lot of tests, the 750M actually comes out slower than the 650M.

Iris Pro is more suited to OpenCL. It is overall slower for gaming than the 650M and 750M but is close in a lot of games. Someone tested Iris Pro here:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1662978

Starcraft 2 was 23fps, just above 1080p on Ultra settings. The 650M is listed as 25FPS at 1080p Ultra:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-650M.71887.0.html

This shows on the Iris Pro page too:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Iris-Pro-Graphics-5200.90965.0.html

The new machines are no upgrade at all vs one with a 650M and ones with the 750M shouldn't be any better on battery than the old one beyond what Mavericks does and Mavericks would offer the same benefits on the old one. The Iris Pro model should do better on battery because even doing GPU tasks, it has a lower TDP limit. A test of the Iris Pro model online got 8 hours. The old 650M tests tend to be around 5-6 hours and as I say, the 750M models should get around the same because it will kick in the dedicated GPU for graphics tasks.
post #31 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Bonner View Post

Question for the group, I have last years retina version, a programming machine, but like to play games a bit (starcraft). Does this newer generation have any better discrete graphics performance worth updating too? (Thinking the market value of the existing version minus the new version price would be less than building a windows machine)

What Marvin points out in terms of performance could be an issue of drivers, but I wouldn't say an overclocked rebadge of what you own should be motivation to upgrade. The 750m is only available on the upper configuration. They did bump vram to 2GB, which can help with computation if you run a lot of GPGPU applications that are in fact memory bound. In that situation I would suggest the imac though, as the card used there gets 4GB, which is actually significant.

post #32 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post
 

 In that situation I would suggest the imac though, as the card used there gets 4GB, which is actually significant.

 

Yah…the MBP isn't a good iMac replacement if you really need more performance and only occasional mobility.

post #33 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post
 

 

Yah…the MBP isn't a good iMac replacement if you really need more performance and only occasional mobility.


I just mentioned that because Marvin mentioned Iris pro benchmarks and the rmbp. If they are dependent on OpenCL or CUDA for that matter, the issue of framebuffer size is a big deal, because there is no virtual memory system available in gpu based computation. I don't know if that will change, but it is what it is for now. Going 2012 rmbp --> 2013 with discrete card seems like a fairly expensive proposition.

post #34 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post
 

Since these new laptops have Thunderbolt 2, will they support daisy chaining of DisplayPort 1.2 monitors?

 

What version of HDMI does the HDMI connector use?  Will it support 30 inch (2560x1600) monitors?  4K?

You can have up to 2 external 2560x1600 monitors going at the same time as the built-in laptop display, which is 2880x1800. I don't know whether they can be daisy chained, but there are two Thunderbolt 2 ports anyway. 

 

The only 4K support Apple advertises is via the HDMI 1.4 port, which is @30hz. But people have found that with Windows 8.1 you can get 4K @ 60Hz on a Thunderbolt 2 port, so it's a driver issue in OS X not a hardware issue.  The Mac Pro coming out in December supports 4K @ 60Hz under OS X so maybe there will be an update for the Macbook Pro at that time, but no way to know for sure.

post #35 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

You can have up to 2 external 2560x1600 monitors going at the same time as the built-in laptop display, which is 2880x1800. I don't know whether they can be daisy chained, but there are two Thunderbolt 2 ports anyway. 

The only 4K support Apple advertises is via the HDMI 1.4 port, which is @30hz. But people have found that with Windows 8.1 you can get 4K @ 60Hz on a Thunderbolt 2 port, so it's a driver issue in OS X not a hardware issue.  The Mac Pro coming out in December supports 4K @ 60Hz under OS X so maybe there will be an update for the Macbook Pro at that time, but no way to know for sure.

Interesting that Apple doesn't yet support 4K on their TB2 MBPs. I don't think they say they support 4K in their tech specs.

For the Mac Pro they state it will support up to 3x4K displays and yet there is only 1xHDMI 1.4 UltraHD port which means that the 4K support will have to comes from TB2. It also points to there being 3xTB2 controllers each controlling two TB2 ports.
post #36 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post

It also points to there being 3xTB2 controllers each controlling two TB2 ports.

 

Pretty sure Apple already confirmed that themselves.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #37 of 57

ALERT:  Battery life on brand new retina macbook pro not as stated.  See below.

 

Here are some screenshots for you.  Note that the battery life and percentage left in the first screenshot.  In the additional two, you can see the activity monitor under the energy tabs and CPU tabs respectively.  The brightness of the monitor was at approximately 70%.  Does that look like an 8 hour battery charge?!

 

 

 

 

post #38 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruzzell View Post

ALERT:  Battery life on brand new retina macbook pro not as stated.  See below.

Here are some screenshots for you.  Note that the battery life and percentage left in the first screenshot.  In the additional two, you can see the activity monitor under the energy tabs and CPU tabs respectively.  The brightness of the monitor was at approximately 70%.  Does that look like an 8 hour battery charge?!

First of all, that 71% is not your brightness but your remaining battery life. Why you choose to take a screenshot at 71% and then make an additional claim that your brightness is approx. 70% is suspicious.

Second, you do you see that Mail is using significant power and you have installed a lot of services (which you claim you didn't have running previously) that are using a lot of power. You even flat out said you aren't using Adobe Flash that much and there it is actively running. And GoToMeeting? Really? I have that but I make sure that and other services aren't active because they do use more power than I think they should when not in the foreground.

You're basically showing a moderate to heavy use case but want to claim it's a light workload. Based on what you've shown and described Apple is not the sinister liar you're trying to make them out to be, it's your perception that is completely wrong.
post #39 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post

You're basically showing a moderate to heavy use case
You've got to be kidding. That's nowhere near a heavy use case, and would struggle to be described as moderate. MacBooks have been running flash and GotoMeeting for years without that kind of battery problem. And saying that a 71% battery life and a 70% brightness claim is suspicious is ridiculous. It's perfectly reasonable for two numbers to be close, and not indicative of anything.

Ruzzell, I don't doubt anything you've said, but your experience seems so far outside of the norm for an Apple laptop (especially their most recent, and claimed most power efficient one) with little evidence that it's part of a widespread problem, that I think you must have just been incredibly unlucky. It does happen, I had a friend who had three iPods die on him within the space of six months while mine and most other peoples kept on cranking out the tunes for years. He didn't treat them badly, he was just unlucky. I'd suggest (if you can) that you try an Apple Store and show them that battery percentage and time remaining and get a replacement set up then and there in the store so you can check the difference.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #40 of 57

People tend to exaggerate to much in the computer field I see and really they do not know what they are talking about period.It is a dam machine!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Review: Apple's late-2013 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display