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
GPU Performance
We’ve already established that NVIDIA’s Kepler architecture is fast, but the GeForce GT 650M used in the rMBP is hardly the best NVIDIA has to offer. The result however is a significant improvement in performance over the Radeon HD 6750M used in the previous generation model.
15-inch MacBook Pro Model | Mid 2010 | Upgraded Early 2011 | Upgraded Late 2011 | Retina |
GPU | GeForce GT 330M | Radeon HD 6750M | Radeon HD 6770M | GeForce GT 650M |
Cores | 48 | 480 | 480 | 384 |
Core Clock | 500MHz | 600MHz | 675MHz | 900MHz |
Memory Bus | 128-bit GDDR3 | 128-bit GDDR5 | 128-bit GDDR5 | 128-bit GDDR5 |
Memory Data Rate | 1580MHz | 3200MHz | 3200MHz | 5016MHz |
Memory Size | 512MB | 1GB | 1GB | 1GB |
The GT 650M offers fewer “cores” compared to the 6750M and 6770M used in previous MacBook Pros, but likely better utilization of the available hardware. NVIDIA also clocks the cores much higher in the 650M, the result is a ~20% increase in theoretical raw compute power.
The memory bandwidth story is also better on Kepler. While both the GT 650M and the 67xxM feature a 128-bit GDDR5 interface, Apple clocked AMD’s memory interface at 800MHz compared to 1254MHz on Kepler. The resulting difference is 80.3GB/s of memory bandwidth vs. 51.2GB/s.
The real world impact is most noticeable at higher resolutions, thanks to the tremendous amount of memory bandwidth now available. The other benefit from the new GPU is obviously things run a lot cooler, which as I’ve already shown to considerably reduce thermal throttling under load.
At 1440 x 900 we actually see a regression compared to the 2011 models, but differences in the AMD and NVIDIA GPU drivers alone can account for the difference at this hardly GPU bound setting. Look at what happens once we crank up the resolution:
At 1680 x 1050 with 4X AA enabled we see a modest 11% increase in performance over last year's MacBook Pro. As I established earlier however, the rMBP will be able to more consistently deliver this performance over an extended period of time.
What's even more impressive is the 42.4 fps the GT 650M is able to deliver at the rMBP's native 2880 x 1800 resolution. Even though I ran the test with AA enabled I'm pretty sure AA was automatically disabled. At 2880 x 1800 the rMBP is able to outperform the two year old MacBook Pro running at 1680 x 1050. How's that for progress?
While the gains we've shown thus far have been modest at best, Starcraft 2 is a completely different story. Here for whatever reason the IVB + Kepler combination can be up to 2x the speed of last year’s models. I reran the tests both on the older and rMBP hardware to confirm, but the results were repeatable. The best explanation I have is Starcraft 2 is very stressful on both the CPU and GPU, so we could be seeing some thermal throttling on the older SNB + Turks hardware here.
Once again we see playable, although not entirely smooth frame rates at 2880 x 1800. I've also included a screenshot of SC2 at 2880 x 1800 below:
Starcraft 2 at 2880 x 1800, it's playable
Although gaming options continue to be limited under OS X, Diablo 3 is available and finally performs well on the platform thanks to the latest patches. Diablo 3 performance is appreciably better on the GT 650M compared to last year’s 6750M. There’s no FRAPS equivalent under OS X (free advertising to the first eager dev to correct that) so I have to rely on general discussion of performance here. The GT 650M is fast enough to drive the rMBP’s 2880 x 1800 panel at native resolution at playable frame rates, around 18 fps on average. Connected to an external 2560 x 1440 display however the GT 650M is fast enough to deliver around 30 fps in Diablo 3. For what it’s worth, performance under Diablo 3 is far more consistent with the rMBP than with last year’s MacBook Pro. I suspect once again we’re seeing the effects of thermal throttling under heavy CPU/GPU load that has been well mitigated by the move to more power efficient silicon.
471 Comments
View All Comments
DJTryHard - Saturday, June 23, 2012 - link
No one said it was quad, this is in 2010. Arrandale had higher thermals, and today's version does have quad.OCedHrt - Sunday, June 24, 2012 - link
Not quad core. Quad raid. As in, 4 separate custom SSD boards connected to 4 separate SATA ports in raid 0. This was before there was 500mb/s raid from SF. Now it's kinda a marketing gimmick because they're not 4 500 mb/s raid that gives you nearly 2 gb/s in raid 0.Totally - Tuesday, June 26, 2012 - link
learn to readquoting op
"...fastest of the dual core i7's while..."
no one mentions anything about a quad core cpu
hkatz - Wednesday, July 11, 2012 - link
I looked up the current model. Vaio Z: 13 inch display 1920 by 1080, maximum 8 gigs ram, 512 ssd, quad core i7 2.1/3.1 , USB 3. However, no thunderbolt, only integrated graphics and the price for the 13 inch computer as above is $2999.Does not compare to the retina macbook pro which has a higher resolution 15 inch display, thunderbolt, significantly faster processor, and discrete graphics with a gig of vram. The price for the better retina macbook pro with the 512 gig flash drive is $2799.
There is no comparison.
wfolta - Saturday, June 23, 2012 - link
The Sony you linked to doesn't have discrete graphics. You have to buy (and use) the docking station to get that.If you load it up with 8 GB of RAM (which is the max, while the rMBP goes to 16 GB), a 256 GB SSD, a 10% slower CPU (2.1 versus 2.3 GHz), no discrete graphics, and a "HD" non-IPS display, it costs you $1,950 versus the rMPB's $2,200.
For the price Sony charges for the upgrade to 512 GB of SSD ($600), you can upgrade the rMBP, to a 512 GB SSD and get a 20% faster (2.6 GHz) CPU thrown in as well.
The non-IPS display means that even if the rMBP didn't have incredibly more pixels, it would still outclass the Sony display in terms of contrast, viewing angle, etc.
The Sony weights about half of what the rMBP does, but it also has less battery life and it's about the same size. I guess the VGA and ethernet ports are a big deal for you, though of course you don't get two Thunderbolt ports. Oh yeah, you also get a Sony MemoryStick slot, too!
OCedHrt - Sunday, June 24, 2012 - link
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5430/sony-vaio-z-wit...It is an IPS display, but non-glossy.
Don't bother comparing the 2 as apples to apples, because they're not comparable. The sony is 2.5 lbs versus 4.5 lbs for the macbook pro retina. You have a whole different power and heat envelope.
I don't disagree that Sony is overcharging for the high end Z, and now with the retina macbook pro maybe they will lower prices (this is really the first contender, but it is 15" so targets a different market segment).
However, you can get the last season's models on the Sony outlet store for 40% off - ie $1400 nets you 256 GB SSD, 8 GB of ram, the external dock with graphics and blu-ray, etc.
maratus - Sunday, June 24, 2012 - link
Z has never had IPS, it's SE series. Still nice laptop though.OCedHrt - Monday, June 25, 2012 - link
I stand corrected, but it is still way better than a TN and not much worse than an IPS (you lose out on viewing angles).Spunjji - Monday, June 25, 2012 - link
You're missing the point of why this product was brought up. But hey, good effort for not reading the preceding posts.cptcolo - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
Wow that Sony VAIO Z Series is impressive!Personally the laptop I am holding out for is something along the lines of:
17" 2560 x 1440 (or 2560 x 1600) Matte IPS Screen
Broadwell Hex-Core, <25W TDP
Super Integrated Graphics (no graphics card or optical drive)
32GB RAM on 2 DIMMS
x2 512GB uSSDs in RAID0 over 16Gb/s interface
100+ WHr Battery
Overall size less than a typical 15" via a thin bezel.
Weight: <4.8lbs
Thickness: <0.8"
Excellent Keyboard/Trackpad and great build quality.
All for ~$2500