13-inch Retina MacBook Pro Review (Late 2012)
by Anand Lal Shimpi on November 13, 2012 2:53 AM ESTThunderbolt Performance
Similar to its 15-inch brother, the 13-inch rMBP integrates Intel's DSL3510L Cactus Ridge Thunderbolt controller. This is Intel's most capable Thunderbolt SKU as it takes four PCIe 2.0 lanes combined with DisplayPort and muxes them into four Thunderbolt channels (2 up/2 down) with two DP outputs.
As we've seen in the past, a single Thunderbolt channel is usually good for nearly 8Gbps although you'll have a hard time reaching that without a decent array of SSDs. With two Thunderbolt ports on board, it shouldn't be too difficult to go beyond 10Gbps if you've got the right devices.
For a sanity check I dusted off Promise's Pegasus J2 (in AC power mode) and measured peak sequential reads/writes between it and the 13-inch rMBP. Performance, as you'd expect, is near identical to what we've seen on the 15-inch model:
This is a final J2 sample that hasn't been battered as much as my original J2 review sample, so write speed looks a lot better. Either way it's pretty effortless to break 6Gbps over Thunderbolt on the 13-inch rMBP.
Thunderbolt behavior continues to be a point of contention with all new machines that implement the spec unfortunately. Of those involved (Apple, Intel and Microsoft), only Apple appears to be doing a somewhat good job of delivering a consistent experience with all devices available on the market today. Even then however, the experience isn't perfect.
I still encounter issues where plugging a sleeping 13-inch rMBP into Apple's Thunderbolt display won't always wake it up. Wake up latency is also highly inconsistent when using Thunderbolt in this manner as well. A big motivation behind Thunderbolt is its ability to let you quickly transition a notebook into a docked, desktop-mode, which is why this is so important.
Apple appears to be getting better with plug and play Thunderbolt compatibility with each new device however. The 15-inch rMBP was noticeably better in random plug testing than the 2011 MacBook Pro, and the 13-inch rMBP appears to be a bit better than the 15-inch model as well.
There are some software issues that I wish Apple would focus on as well. Right now OS X windows don't maintain their proportional size when you switch between resolutions, which can be a problem if you're frequently switching between using the rMBP in notebook mode and when docked to an external display. The result is that when you switch between displays (or even resolution settings on the same display) you often have to go in and resize all of your windows. Ideally I'd like for all windows to retain their proportional size when switching between displays at least. It's an annoying blemish to the Thunderbolt experience.
WiFi
Like its larger sibling, the 13-inch rMBP features a dual-band 3x3:3 802.11n WiFi powered by Broadcom's BCM4331. Peak link rate is unchanged at 450Mbps (5GHz, 40MHz channels, short guard intervals).
Range and performance seem relatively similar to the 15-inch rMBP, which was also a very good performer.
| 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display WiFi Performance | ||||
| 5.0GHz | 2.4GHz | |||
| Location 1 (Next to AP) | 299.5Mbps | 158.9Mbps | ||
| Location 2 (Down the Hall from AP) | 117.1Mbps | 25.2Mbps | ||
| Location 3 (Across House from AP) | 36.5Mbps | 33.2Mbps | ||
| Location 4 (Edge of Coverage Test) | - | 2.3Mbps | ||
Peak performance was just under 300Mbps right next to the access point.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
79 Comments
View All Comments
repoman27 - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link
And just to further clarify, Thunderbolt does not really mux DP and PCIe signals, it takes the packets from both protocols and transports them via a common switching fabric, so that wording is slightly misleading.tipoo - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link
In my time with these, I find there is just a bit of UI lag to most things compared to an Air or the regular Macbook Pros, most of the time it's hard to even notice unless they are side by side. The calender flip animation and sometimes the green button re-size are particularly painful, you can literally count out the frames on the former. On the 15" you can force it to use the dGPU on AC power which fixes that, but there is no fallback for the 13".tipoo - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link
Speaking of which, if switching to the dGPU fixes some of the lag does that mean more of the rendering pipeline is given to the Nvidia chip unlike the HD4000, as otherwise that would put a hole in the single threaded performance theory?sputnik78 - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link
"There's not much you can do here other than wait for faster hardware or buy the fastest CPU available on whatever system you're considering. "Yes there is. Use Firefox or Chrome.
I could not believe the depth of detail in the investigation of the scrolling in Safari issue without the simple test to swap out with Firefox or Chrome and see how much of the problem is Safari rather than the OS/Hardware.
With Firefox, you can enable and disable GPU accelerated UI as well, to see if that helps or hurts.
My experience with all three browsers is that each can have various performance issues with some websites and situations, but that when one does, one of the others tends to be OK.
MrCromulent - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link
Firefox doesn't even have Retina support yet, does it? Last time I heard it was planned for version 18.Disabling hardware acceleration in Firefox would probably just result in even worse performance since it is enabled by default and the CPU single-thread performance is going to get even more maxed out otherwise.
paravorheim - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link
Dear Anand,you mentioned in both the Intel S3700 and 13" rMBP reviews that OS X did not respond well to high IO latency. Could you expand on what you meant by that? Or is the explanation too complicated to put into layman's terms?
AmdInside - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link
I don't see how this is a much better option for someone who travels a lot and uses it mainly for typing. I love my MBA and only wish would be that it had more RAM and IPS display. If i had to do it all over again, I think I would still buy the MBA over the rMBP. If I had more money than I knew what to do with, I guess I'd go with the rMBP though.thefizzle656 - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link
IMO what is wrong with the 13" rMBP is not just that the word "Pro" doesn't at all describe the hardware specs and capabilities of the machine, but that it is so so overpriced for what you get. Even Apple Fanbois are have been criticizing Apple for the complete ripoff that the 13" rMBP is.spronkey - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link
You know, I have to agree with those who say there's a bit of Apple bias going on here. So many important criteria here have been glossed over - remember the pricing of this machine puts it far out of reach for most 'consumers', who go and buy $500-700 dell machines. It's a high-end part for a high-end prosumer/professional.The bottom line is - 8GB of RAM as a maximum ceiling (note - my *2008* MacBook Pro had the same limit) is far too low, and Anand you of all people should know that in the usable life of this machine (lets say 3 years), that limit is going to be hit - especially when it's not uncommon for web browsers with media-heavy content to eat 2+GB. And the move to 64-bit for stuff like the Adobe creative suite, which is a common use case for this particular machine, will eat even more RAM. I'm running 8GB on my MBP at the moment and I max it out very frequently.
I'm also not sure how you can recommend this over the 13" Air. It's much more expensive, the hardware is largley similar, performance isn't *that* much better, it doesn't offer anything in terms of upgradability other than Thunderbolt connectivity, and it's bigger and heavier. Not to mention in the real world, in 2012, it's a laggier experience.
Now, lets imagine an alternate universe where Apple decided not to shave quite so much off the size of the previous 13" pro, and instead gave us a quad core i5/i7 and a couple of RAM slots. Perhaps even a dedicated GPU and a 2.5" bay. Now that would be an improvement. What we have here is an expensive Macbook Air with a pretty display for text, that makes almost everything else look awful.
seapeople - Saturday, November 17, 2012 - link
When will we stop the insanity with this complaint about memory. Times are different, memory requirements are not going to quadruple again in the next four years. The world is not gearing up for Microsoft Gargantuan 9 which will require 8GB of RAM to load the desktop. If anything the world is going more mobile, and memory requirements will likely stagnate. Consider than an Ipad has just one GB of RAM, and they are selling about as many of those as casual consumer PC's nowadays, and you can see where we're heading.Furthermore, any browser worth its salt that's pushing 2GB of RAM based on some standard media heavy tasks will drop that RAM in an instant without a huge user experience impact if you start nearing a system limit. It's just caching everything in sight because it sees that you have 16 GB of RAM; it doesn't mean your system would grind to a halt with only 8!