Retina Macbook Pro choppy scrolling?
According to Anandtech even just driving it's own display it struggles to scroll web pages at 30fps...With two, three or four monitors I can only imagine that would be much worse.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6023/the-nextgen-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review/8
Anyone have one yet? Thoughts on how it performs with external monitors, and its scrolling either by itself or with external displays?
Comments
I was at the shop this morning checking one out and found the choppiness in Safari. The new MBP 13" with the same video specs (I think) was smooth, as was the MBA. I tried all of the machine on the same page.
Could only check the machines by themselves today. Hope to be able to set up an external display this week if the shop will let me.
Hopefully, this is a bug that will be fixed ASAP with a software update. Otherwise I think it will hit sales as it is very noticeable.
That said, I cranked the Retina machine up to its max display size and tried out Final Cut. Wow. What real-estate.
I suspect it will only be fixed with an upgrade to Mountain Lion, as that FINALLY has broad GPU acceleration in Safari. I wonder if other browsers have this problem then?
It will depend on the resolution of the external monitors. The MBP display is rendering 2880x1800 and then scaling it down. External displays are not likely to be that high resolution and the output is not scaled so viewing a web page on an external display should be as smooth as normal. It will only update one screen's static content at a time.
Finally got to try one at length. Even more annoying than Safari is the UI animations, especially the green button resize. You can easily see it frame by frame sometimes. That could be fixed by forcing the dGPU on all the time I'm sure but that would reduce battery life.
When I first got my retina macbook pro, I had a significant scrolling lag and choppiness issue. However, after some experimentation, I've found that there is pretty much no lag at all in Firefox, only in Safari and Chrome. I have no idea what accounts for this, but for now, if you want to make your internet scrolling less choppy, try FIrefox.
Firefox uses GPU hardware acceleration on Mac OS X, so that's why scrolling is smoother than the other two. Chrome and Safari uses Carbon I believe which isn't well optimized for Retina displays.
In Mountain Lion, Safari will be using Core Animation and is literally the smoothest browser I have used, bar none.
RMBP 2.6/16/512 running Mountain Lion, no lag, choppiness, or other issues that people are describing. You may be interested to know that the Intel integrated graphics on the 2.3 model runs at a 12% slower clock than the 2.6 model. 1.1 GHz on the 2.3 vs 1.25 GHz on the 2.6. Could this be enough to cause some people issues? I certainly don't experience any of the issues anyone is describing here. I've used Launchpad, Dashboard, Mission Control and many UI and resize animations. Everything is smooth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist
RMBP 2.6/16/512 running Mountain Lion, no lag, choppiness, or other issues that people are describing. You may be interested to know that the Intel integrated graphics on the 2.3 model runs at a 12% slower clock than the 2.6 model. 1.1 GHz on the 2.3 vs 1.25 GHz on the 2.6. Could this be enough to cause some people issues? I certainly don't experience any of the issues anyone is describing here. I've used Launchpad, Dashboard, Mission Control and many UI and resize animations. Everything is smooth.
Could just be in Lion then, as mentioned above there are improvements in its graphics software stack.
For those who think there is any lag or choppiness with the RMBP should check out this amazing video showing exactly what this little guy can do:
As you can see, there is a lot of image-heavy scrolling happening, Mission Control was used while videos were running without skipping a beat, desktop spaces were switched back and forth while videos were running in the background. This is a good video to show that the issue is not affecting all units. I also do not see any lag at all in any areas, so I don't know what people are talking about. I believe this is a complete non-issue.
No, it's not entirely a non-issue. I currently have the 2.3GHz 8GB model and almost all of the time, when I go into Mission Control, for example, it takes a sec for Mission Control to appear properly. Once it's done with a particular set-up, I can go back and forth to and from Mission Control and everything is super snappy. However, once I get to the point where apps are in different places because Mail goes from one space to another and maybe I open another browser and put it in full-screen mode, the lagging "re-sets", so to speak.
Scrolling on certain websites will also at times cause it to trip up a little bit, but not often. Again, it's very subtle and while it may be a non-issue to a lot, if not most, people, the fact remains that it's there.
On August 1, Apple started allowing the "entry-level" MBP w/ Retina Display to upgrade the CPU and amount of Flash, besides the RAM. My OCD has forced me into immediately ordering the 2.6GHz and 16GB of RAM, once I found out I could BTO a 2.6 model for only $100 more. I wonder if it will make any difference at all with this "lag issue", although the power user in me is doubtful. The reason I'm even remotely giving the additional RAM and 300 extra MHz any credibility at all is because the lag is SO subtle, SO quick, and perhaps the upgrades will just make a subtle enough difference to help with the lag issue. (no, I'm not upgrading because of the "lag issue")
Then again, it might just be the GPU that's responsible for drawing and re-drawing Mission Control, in which case even the i7 Extreme Edition wouldn't make a difference, not that Apple offers it to begin with. Unfortunately, there is no way to upgrade to 2GB of GDDR5 VRAM on the NVIDIA GT650M, not even in the high-end model. I say that because the 1GB of VRAM is constantly near capacity, according to iStat Menus.
EDIT: I just watched the YouTube video in the post before this one and if you look in the comments, this person actually has the 2.6GHz/16GB RAM configuration that I was talking about. Another observation I would make is the fact that he/she doesn't have that many apps open. But I'm intrigued. I'll clone my SSD to the new MBP and will make a true apples-to-apples comparison. OS X is really good when here is extra RAM it doesn't need. It uses it for caching I think and like I said, one of the aforementioned scenarios might just do the trick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crunch
No, it's not entirely a non-issue. I currently have the 2.3GHz 8GB model and almost all of the time, when I go into Mission Control, for example, it takes a sec for Mission Control to appear properly. Once it's done with a particular set-up, I can go back and forth to and from Mission Control and everything is super snappy. However, once I get to the point where apps are in different places because Mail goes from one space to another and maybe I open another browser and put it in full-screen mode, the lagging "re-sets", so to speak.
Scrolling on certain websites will also at times cause it to trip up a little bit, but not often. Again, it's very subtle and while it may be a non-issue to a lot, if not most, people, the fact remains that it's there.
On August 1, Apple started allowing the "entry-level" MBP w/ Retina Display to upgrade the CPU and amount of Flash, besides the RAM. My OCD has forced me into immediately ordering the 2.6GHz and 16GB of RAM, once I found out I could BTO a 2.6 model for only $100 more. I wonder if it will make any difference at all with this "lag issue", although the power user in me is doubtful. The reason I'm even remotely giving the additional RAM and 300 extra MHz any credibility at all is because the lag is SO subtle, SO quick, and perhaps the upgrades will just make a subtle enough difference to help with the lag issue. (no, I'm not upgrading because of the "lag issue")
Then again, it might just be the GPU that's responsible for drawing and re-drawing Mission Control, in which case even the i7 Extreme Edition wouldn't make a difference, not that Apple offers it to begin with. Unfortunately, there is no way to upgrade to 2GB of GDDR5 VRAM on the NVIDIA GT650M, not even in the high-end model. I say that because the 1GB of VRAM is constantly near capacity, according to iStat Menus.
EDIT: I just watched the YouTube video in the post before this one and if you look in the comments, this person actually has the 2.6GHz/16GB RAM configuration that I was talking about. Another observation I would make is the fact that he/she doesn't have that many apps open. But I'm intrigued. I'll clone my SSD to the new MBP and will make a true apples-to-apples comparison. OS X is really good when here is extra RAM it doesn't need. It uses it for caching I think and like I said, one of the aforementioned scenarios might just do the trick.
I took this video of my Retina McBook Pro this morning:
I am scrolling theVerge.com and Facebook, both have been identified as causing laggy scrolling. I am also switching between spaces using Mission Control as well as sliding left/right between spaces. All while playing three videos simultaneously - two in my main space and one full-screen 1080p video playing in the secondary space. All transitions and UI animations are perfectly smooth with no perceptible frame drop, choppiness or lag. Absolutely no delay going into Mission Control. I also have the 2.6 / 16 / 512 model.
Someone in another forum stated that the 2.3 GHz version comes with a slightly under clocked integrated GPU at 1.1 GHz in the 2.3 vs 1.25 GHz in the 2.6. That would make the integrated GPU about 14% faster on the 2.6 with a 13% faster CPU. I don't know if that's enough to make a difference, but it's worth noting.
No, that's not correct. The i7-3610QM has the 1.1GHz GPU, and that's what most PC's use. However, the 2.3GHz in the MacBook Pro's is the i7-3615QM, which runs at 1.2GHz! The latter also has VT-d, which the i7-3610QM does not include.
Yes, technically even the i7-3615QM is still a tad slower, but now we're only talking about a difference of 50MHz. 1.2GHz in the 2.3GHz (i7-3615QM) vs. 1.25GHz in the 2.6GHz (i7-3720QM). The L3 cache is the same amount as well (6MB), so if the 2.6GHz CPU will make a difference at all, it will be the 300MHz bump in speed and also Turbo Boost, and not the Intel HD 4000 graphics clock.
Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist
RMBP 2.6/16/512 running Mountain Lion, no lag, choppiness, or other issues that people are describing. You may be interested to know that the Intel integrated graphics on the 2.3 model runs at a 12% slower clock than the 2.6 model. 1.1 GHz on the 2.3 vs 1.25 GHz on the 2.6. Could this be enough to cause some people issues? I certainly don't experience any of the issues anyone is describing here. I've used Launchpad, Dashboard, Mission Control and many UI and resize animations. Everything is smooth.
I have the exact same model as you and confirm that I am seeing serious choppiness. I am also running mountain Lion.
Expose is the worst. If you have a complex arrangement of windows the movement is jarringly jerky.
Green button resize is also bad.
On complex web pages it is noticeable but not too bad. It gets better after the first couple of scrolls on any given page.
Some functions are better with the dGPU enabled, particularly Expose, but some choppiness is still noticeable.
It doesn't completely ruin the experience of the rMBP but it is disappointing.
Is it hardware or software, or a combination of both? I suspect both.
The same webpage on a retina iPad scrolls much more smoothly with far less powerful hardware and the number of pixels is about 60% as much as the rmbp.
This points to the conclusion that the hardware is not powerful enough given the seriously unoptimised nature of the software.
Quite disappointing really. Apple used to have a reputation for not releasing new innovations before they were just right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwrlane
Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist
The same webpage on a retina iPad scrolls much more smoothly with far less powerful hardware and the number of pixels is about 60% as much as the rmbp.
The Retina MBP does more than just 60% more pixels, it actually renders the content twice at two different resolutions.
Ok, this is too weird now, but I am going to report it anyway: I have switched to the 2.6GHz quad i7 and to 16GB of RAM. I used Time Machine to run one last backup with my "old" 2.3GHz/8GB and upon launching the 2.6GHz/16GB, I used Time Machine to copy everything back, which worked extremely well. Lo' and behold, I'm trying to open apps and several tabs per browser with multiple browsers running. There is no more lag!!!!!??????
Come on, 300MHz faster did this? really? Do the add'l 8GB make that much of a difference? OS X is pretty good with RAM and uses what's there for caching I believe.
EDIT: Correction! The relevant part is crossed out! See post # 19 for details.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crunch
Ok, this is too weird now, but I am going to report it anyway: I have switched to the 2.6GHz quad i7 and to 16GB of RAM. I used Time Machine to run one last backup with my "old" 2.3GHz/8GB and upon launching the 2.6GHz/16GB, I used Time Machine to copy everything back, which worked extremely well. Lo' and behold, I'm trying to open apps and several tabs per browser with multiple browsers running. There is no more lag!!!!!??????
Come on, 300MHz faster did this? really? Do the add'l 8GB make that much of a difference? OS X is pretty good with RAM and uses what's there for caching I believe.
;
As mentioned above the integrated GPU is also clocked higher, and the discreet card is not used for those animations. That could be it too. Really really strange though, for Apple to leave their flagship mac laggy.
OK, it's all B.S.! I was too quick on the trigger by posting about my 2.6GHz/16GB Retina MBP supposedly producing zero lag and I apologize. It was irresponsible for me to do so. After more carefully launching the same amount and type of apps as well as connecting my projector, for example, the Mission Control feature does have the same lag as my now former 2.3GHz/8GB Retina MBP! Period. Again, my apologies. I have crossed out the part in the above quoted text that is simply incorrect.
@tipoo: Did you read my response to your earlier one regarding your ridiculous claim regarding the graphics processors? No, the integrated Intel HD 4000 GPU is not used when the NVIDIA GPU is active, and yes, the latter is very much involved in any and all animations when it is active. Furthermore, the Intel HD 4000 GPU is only clocked 50MHz higher in the 2.6GHz CPU as opposed to the 2.3GHz processor that is found in all Apple notebooks.
Again: Integrated Intel GPU HD 4000 in 2.3GHz: Clocked at 1.2GHz (not 1.1GHz, and even if it were 1.1, the resulting 150MHz would likely be equally as meaningless)
Integrated Intel GPU HD 4000 in 2.6GHz: Clocked at 1.25GHz
"Difference" (if you can call it that): 50MHz. Never mind that it's not even ON/active when you open enough tabs and/or apps, because the discreet GPU, the NVIDIA GT 650M turns ON, which turns the Intel HD 4000 integrated GPU...OFF! (so the difference is 0MHz, as in nothing/nada/no difference)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crunch
OK, it's all B.S.! I was too quick on the trigger by posting about my 2.6GHz/16GB Retina MBP supposedly producing zero lag and I apologize. It was irresponsible for me to do so. After more carefully launching the same amount and type of apps as well as connecting my projector, for example, the Mission Control feature does have the same lag as my now former 2.3GHz/8GB Retina MBP! Period. Again, my apologies. I have crossed out the part in the above quoted text that is simply incorrect.
@tipoo: Did you read my response to your earlier one regarding your ridiculous claim regarding the graphics processors? No, the integrated Intel HD 4000 GPU is not used when the NVIDIA GPU is active, and yes, the latter is very much involved in any and all animations when it is active. Furthermore, the Intel HD 4000 GPU is only clocked 50MHz higher in the 2.6GHz CPU as opposed to the 2.3GHz processor that is found in all Apple notebooks.
Again: Integrated Intel GPU HD 4000 in 2.3GHz: Clocked at 1.2GHz (not 1.1GHz, and even if it were 1.1, the resulting 150MHz would likely be equally as meaningless)
Integrated Intel GPU HD 4000 in 2.6GHz: Clocked at 1.25GHz
"Difference" (if you can call it that): 50MHz. Never mind that it's not even ON/active when you open enough tabs and/or apps, because the discreet GPU, the NVIDIA GT 650M turns ON, which turns the Intel HD 4000 integrated GPU...OFF! (so the difference is 0MHz, as in nothing/nada/no difference)
Well that's interesting, because when forcing the discreet GPU to be on the choppy animations seem to mostly go away. Try it. Force the integrated GPU to be on and they are consistently there. So even if you are right and it uses the dGPU for animations, the switching causes it to stutter, and without switching the discreet one doesn't, so it seems likely to me that for simple animations the system doesn't turn on the discreet card, or the switch brings along too much latency.
Got to use one with 10.8.1 today, still very choppy. I can count individual frames for the green button resize or callender flip animation. Even the Air with the HD4000 alone is smoother.