The next-gen MacBook Pro with Retina Display Review
by Anand Lal Shimpi on June 23, 2012 4:14 AM EST- Posted in
- Mac
- Apple
- MacBook Pro
- Laptops
- Notebooks
Driving the Retina Display: A Performance Discussion
As I mentioned earlier, there are quality implications of choosing the higher-than-best resolution options in OS X. At 1680 x 1050 and 1920 x 1200 the screen is drawn with 4x the number of pixels, elements are scaled appropriately, and the result is downscaled to 2880 x 1800. The quality impact is negligible however, especially if you actually need the added real estate. As you’d expect, there is also a performance penalty.
At the default setting, either Intel’s HD 4000 or NVIDIA’s GeForce GT 650M already have to render and display far more pixels than either GPU was ever intended to. At the 1680 and 1920 settings however the GPUs are doing more work than even their high-end desktop counterparts are used to. In writing this article it finally dawned on me exactly what has been happening at Intel over the past few years.
Steve Jobs set a path to bringing high resolution displays to all of Apple’s products, likely beginning several years ago. There was a period of time when Apple kept hiring ex-ATI/AMD Graphics CTOs, first Bob Drebin and then Raja Koduri (although less public, Apple also hired chief CPU architects from AMD and ARM among other companies - but that’s another story for another time). You typically hire smart GPU guys if you’re building a GPU, the alternative is to hire them if you need to be able to work with existing GPU vendors to deliver the performance necessary to fulfill your dreams of GPU dominance.
In 2007 Intel promised to deliver a 10x improvement in integrated graphics performance by 2010:
In 2009 Apple hired Drebin and Koduri.
In 2010 Intel announced that the curve had shifted. Instead of 10x by 2010 the number was now 25x. Intel’s ramp was accelerated, and it stopped providing updates on just how aggressive it would be in the future. Paul Otellini’s keynote from IDF 2010 gave us all a hint of what’s to come (emphasis mine):
But there has been a fundamental shift since 2007. Great graphics performance is required, but it isn't sufficient anymore. If you look at what users are demanding, they are demanding an increasingly good experience, robust experience, across the spectrum of visual computing. Users care about everything they see on the screen, not just 3D graphics. And so delivering a great visual experience requires media performance of all types: in games, in video playback, in video transcoding, in media editing, in 3D graphics, and in display. And Intel is committed to delivering leadership platforms in visual computing, not just in PCs, but across the continuum.
Otellini’s keynote would set the tone for the next few years of Intel’s evolution as a company. Even after this keynote Intel made a lot of adjustments to its roadmap, heavily influenced by Apple. Mobile SoCs got more aggressive on the graphics front as did their desktop/notebook counterparts.
At each IDF I kept hearing about how Apple was the biggest motivator behind Intel’s move into the GPU space, but I never really understood the connection until now. The driving factor wasn’t just the demands of current applications, but rather a dramatic increase in display resolution across the lineup. It’s why Apple has been at the forefront of GPU adoption in its iDevices, and it’s why Apple has been pushing Intel so very hard on the integrated graphics revolution. If there’s any one OEM we can thank for having a significant impact on Intel’s roadmap, it’s Apple. And it’s just getting started.
Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge were both good steps for Intel, but Haswell and Broadwell are the designs that Apple truly wanted. As fond as Apple has been of using discrete GPUs in notebooks, it would rather get rid of them if at all possible. For many SKUs Apple has already done so. Haswell and Broadwell will allow Apple to bring integration to even some of the Pro-level notebooks.
To be quite honest, the hardware in the rMBP isn’t enough to deliver a consistently smooth experience across all applications. At 2880 x 1800 most interactions are smooth but things like zooming windows or scrolling on certain web pages is clearly sub-30fps. At the higher scaled resolutions, since the GPU has to render as much as 9.2MP, even UI performance can be sluggish. There’s simply nothing that can be done at this point - Apple is pushing the limits of the hardware we have available today, far beyond what any other OEM has done. Future iterations of the Retina Display MacBook Pro will have faster hardware with embedded DRAM that will help mitigate this problem. But there are other limitations: many elements of screen drawing are still done on the CPU, and as largely serial architectures their ability to scale performance with dramatically higher resolutions is limited.
Some elements of drawing in Safari for example aren’t handled by the GPU. Quickly scrolling up and down on the AnandTech home page will peg one of the four IVB cores in the rMBP at 100%:
The GPU has an easy time with its part of the process but the CPU’s workload is borderline too much for a single core to handle. Throw a more complex website at it and things get bad quickly. Facebook combines a lot of compressed images with text - every single image is decompressed on the CPU before being handed off to the GPU. Combine that with other elements that are processed on the CPU and you get a recipe for choppy scrolling.
To quantify exactly what I was seeing I measured frame rate while scrolling as quickly as possible through my Facebook news feed in Safari on the rMBP as well as my 2011 15-inch High Res MacBook Pro. While last year’s MBP delivered anywhere from 46 - 60 fps during this test, the rMBP hovered around 20 fps (18 - 24 fps was the typical range).
Scrolling in Safari on a 2011, High Res MBP - 51 fps
Scrolling in Safari on the rMBP - 21 fps
Remember at 2880 x 1800 there are simply more pixels to push and more work to be done by both the CPU and the GPU. It’s even worse in those applications that have higher quality assets: the CPU now has to decode images at 4x the resolution of what it’s used to. Future CPUs will take this added workload into account, but it’ll take time to get there.
The good news is Mountain Lion provides some relief. At WWDC Apple mentioned the next version of Safari is ridiculously fast, but it wasn’t specific about why. It turns out that Safari leverages Core Animation in Mountain Lion and more GPU accelerated as a result. Facebook is still a challenge because of the mixture of CPU decoded images and a standard web page, but the experience is a bit better. Repeating the same test as above I measured anywhere from 20 - 30 fps while scrolling through Facebook on ML’s Safari.
Whereas I would consider the rMBP experience under Lion to be borderline unacceptable, everything is significantly better under Mountain Lion. Don’t expect buttery smoothness across the board, you’re still asking a lot of the CPU and GPU, but it’s a lot better.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
471 Comments
View All Comments
hyrule4927 - Sunday, June 24, 2012 - link
I did, and if Cinebench was pushing the same temperatures you saw in your test, then a lack of throttling is certainly not something to applaud. Nobody likes throttling, but it is certainly better than temperatures on the verge of thermal protection shutdown.jc@home - Sunday, June 24, 2012 - link
I am testing my rMBP for almost 1 hour so far via Prime95. Got some results below.• Environment: 28°C indoor beside window w/o air condition
rMBP via System Monitor (Mac App)
CPU@100% : 68~72°C
rMBP via DesktopMonitor or iStat
CPU Heatsink@100% : 53~56°C
GPU : 63°C
GPU Diode : 68~71°C
wfolta - Saturday, June 23, 2012 - link
I haven't read this anywhere else, but just stumbled onto it: In the Get Info window for an application, there is a checkbox that says "Open in Low Resolution". This box is checked for Pages, for example. Unchecking it clears up the text enormously. Why would the box be there and why is it checked for iWorks packages? (And is there any harm in unchecking it and getting clearer text?)EnerJi - Saturday, June 23, 2012 - link
Are the GUI elements still rendered at the same size or are they now half the size? I would expect them to be half size.wfolta - Saturday, June 23, 2012 - link
Oddly enough, in Pages the GUI icons are slightly larger. It's almost as if they simply had to throw that switch and the apps were already ready.I've noticed other apps, like Twitter, have the box checked but it's also greyed out so it can't be turned off.
tipoo - Sunday, June 24, 2012 - link
Do those have a dust filter or a metal mesh grille on them to prevent stuff getting sucked in? Hard to make that out in pictures, just curious. Also I'm curious if blocking them would raise the temperatures significantly, that was one of the things I liked about the MBP design vs bottom suckers, no worry of blocking airflow.wfolta - Sunday, June 24, 2012 - link
I can't see any screens from the outside, so I agree it's a little worrisome. Don't use it where dust or insects might get in. (And it does suck the air in through the vents, not out.)drwho9437 - Sunday, June 24, 2012 - link
Having been a reader since before the Athlon was released, having learned the pencil trick at Ace's in those days, I am saddened by the cool-aid style of the Apple articles as of late. As a regular Apple user I think Anand should co-write these with someone who is not to reduce the subjectivity.While I appreciate IPS and higher resolution. For instance we did not see a 17 page piece on the X220 for its IPS display, all be it a lower resolution one, nor the ability to have SSD + a mechanical disc at 3 lbs or run for massively more than a full work day.
Thunderbolt is neat, but like Firewire it could well be killed by USB 3's legacy and ubiquitous nature. For instance in the mass market most people aren't going to have a PC like monitor with cards in it, because most people don't buy any upgrades to computers, they just buy computers. So while I like myself having PCIe over a cable on a technical level I don't see it being in high demand if it add cost, which such a fast transceiver does, if Intel chooses to put it in everything then it could become established, but assuming the card statement is true most people would have to plug in 3 wires rather than 2 to "dock" (USB 3 -> Hub; power; monitor).
I guess what I am saying is that articles that make statements like "Apple is successful because its competitors have all been selfishly focused on themselves rather than all coming together to build better computers", which are just opinions are rather pointless, everyone has an opinion. My opinion is Apple's success speaks to the shallowness of people, form over function. The premium price as seen in this latest release allows them to load their products with all the latest stuff but at a price that makes it a BMW and not a Toyota. Are BMWs good cars? Yes. Does their price meet their performance? No. Visit Top Gear UK's review of the BMW 3 series, where they pointed out that BMWs were now more common than the comparable Ford. The point is the popularity was brand driven and that society still thinks it is cool, but when everyone has one, when Apple's market cap is larger than Microsoft's when will people realize there isn't anything exclusive about the brand anymore?
The reasons I make these points is not because I dislike Apple (beyond their closed nature), but because I strongly feel that if it didn't say Apple this review would have read:
Its a great screen but 2200 dollars is a lot for a screen and one that doesn't work properly with all software yet on the market. Add to that that you can't upgrade the laptop and it has no customizable options, and we think you may wish to wait (as per all the tablet/cell reviews) until these resolution panels are adopted across the market.
Though perhaps I am biased myself, I couldn't in good conscious give an award to something that I can't service, can't upgrade, and doesn't play well with anything but Apple software at the moment. I get the over all excitement, I've had nothing but IPS desktop displays for over 8 years, but yeah I can't help reading this as the review of a Nikon owner who's D700 just got upgraded to a D800, which is to say very shaded by the reviewer's familiarity and own desires for improvements.
wfolta - Sunday, June 24, 2012 - link
The Thinkpad X220 was in fact rated the best 12" business laptop, bar none. But it doesn't break any ground. The X220 is a great ultrabook, while the Retina Macbook Pro is a great laptop that they've managed to cram into an ultrabook form factor, including a display that no laptop made can match at any price. That's breaking ground, and perhaps deserves a longer review.You do realize that the rMPB is actually thinner than the X220 and only weighs 33% more, even though it's a 15" and has higher internal capacities, right? Once you pump up the X220 to be as comparable to the Retina Macbook Pro as possible, you've saved yourself 33% off of the rMBP, but you've also gotten half of the SSD, a smaller screen (physically and pixel-wise), fewer fast ports, the probable need for a dock, etc, etc.
The complaint about configuration was based on having two tiers of models instead of being continuously configurable from lowest to highest end. It doesn't mean the machine isn't configurable. You can upgrade the SSD, and you can order the rMBP with twice the RAM that the X220 is capable of holding.
"Doesn't play well with anything" is a ridiculous statement, when what you evidently mean is that some software is not optimized for it. "Can't service" is also ridiculous: if it breaks you can get it fixed.
If you want to say, "Hey, for 1/3 less money, I can get a mostly-smaller laptop that is lighter, has better battery life, a pretty amazing screen, and a CPU that's comparable", feel free. But you went way over the top and lost your case along the way.
vision33r - Sunday, June 24, 2012 - link
Very few folks in the tech biz today that aren't biased. Anand delivers another unbiased review of a remarkable device.I know very few of your readers here have nice things to say about Apple but all I can say is most of the folks are just extremely envious and zealous of Apple.
There is not one other company out there that is as focused as Apple and the sad part is their focus on consumer devices makes them seem like they only cater to avg Joes but their designs are really cream of the crop.
It's all in the details where it really matters unlike all the other PC guys that are just doing numbers and spec sheet battles of trivial specs.
In the end, most consumer that walk in the Apple store will see one and want one.
All other PC mfg will just copy, copy, and copy... it's the sad truth but it's fine. Competition is good.