Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16
  1. #1
    Diff between retina and non retina

    Member Since
    Jun 18, 2012
    Posts
    40
    Lightbulb Diff between retina and non retina
    Hello, I am interested in knowing the diff between this non retina I'm leaning towards.

    Configuration

    2.6GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7
    8 GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM -2x4GB
    750GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400
    8x Double-Layer SuperDrive
    MBP 15" HR Antiglare WS Dspl
    Intel HD Graphics 4000
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 1GB of GDDR5 memory

    ( plan is to add SSD 256/512 in few months and upgrade ram on my own)
    Compared to

    Retina base
    2.3GHz quad-core Intel Core i7
    Turbo Boost up to 3.3GHz
    8GB 1600MHz memory
    256GB flash storage1
    Intel HD Graphics 4000
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 1GB of GDDR5 memory
    Built-in battery (7 hours)2

    Besides the fact you get the retina screen, little thinner. What are differences between these too.

    I'm not looking for retina only fans to tell me why I should get the retina one but a educated info on the differences thanks

  2. #2
    Diff between retina and non retina
    Dysfunction's Avatar
    Member Since
    Mar 17, 2008
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    6,821
    Specs:
    Way... way too many specs to list.
    the non-retina is user upgradable, the retina is not.
    mike
    This machine kills fascists
    Got # ? phear the command line!

  3. #3
    Diff between retina and non retina

    Member Since
    Jun 18, 2012
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by Dysfunction View Post
    the non-retina is user upgradable, the retina is not.
    I understand that. That's why I'm leaning more towards the non Retina as it won't cost me a $1000 to do the upgrades I want more like less than half.

    Any other specific differences?

    Thanks in advance

  4. #4
    Diff between retina and non retina

    Member Since
    Feb 25, 2009
    Posts
    2,109
    Specs:
    Late 2013 rMBP, i7, 750m gpu, OSX versions 10.9.3, 10.10
    Non-retina also still has an optical drive, but doesn't have the 2nd thunderbolt nor the HDMI connector. It's also thicker and heavier then the retina version. You can also get a matte display as an option over the glossy.
    My Macs: Late 2013 rMBP w/ 750m; Mac mini G4, 1.25 GHz, 512m ram (server); Late 2011 11" MBA, 1.8GHz i7, 4Gig Ram, 256Gig SSD, HD3000; Powerbook 12" G4 1.33GHz running Debian as a server; Apple TV (1080p version)

  5. #5
    Diff between retina and non retina

    Member Since
    Jun 18, 2012
    Posts
    40
    I get all that! However performance wise? I want to know

  6. #6
    Diff between retina and non retina

    Member Since
    Jun 23, 2012
    Posts
    24
    Playing with same decision, was at the local iStore today, they only have the non retina in stock, still 2/3 weeks before the retina arrives so was wondering if I should wait.

    So the 2 I was looking at are: (Decided to go with the non retina, I'm not into graphic that I can justify the extra cost, also I like to burn backups to optical media, would have liked to see the Superdrive be BR based, but the fact that it is there + it has a RG45 port, where the retina have neither swung me), so potential very happy Monday on it's way

    G

    15-inch: 2.6 GHz

    · 2.6GHz quad-core Intel Core i7
    · Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
    · 8GB 1600MHz memory
    · 750GB 5400-rpm hard drive1
    · Intel HD Graphics 4000
    · NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 1GB of GDDR5 memory
    · Built-in battery (7 hours)2

    OR

    15-inch: 2.6 GHz Retina display
    · 2.6GHz quad-core Intel Core i7
    · Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
    · 8GB 1600MHz memory
    · 512GB flash storage1
    · Intel HD Graphics 4000
    · NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 1GB of GDDR5 memory
    · Built-in battery (7 hours)2

  7. #7
    Diff between retina and non retina

    Member Since
    Feb 25, 2009
    Posts
    2,109
    Specs:
    Late 2013 rMBP, i7, 750m gpu, OSX versions 10.9.3, 10.10
    The CPU and ram performance are identical. Gpu performance on non retina will be better in terms of gaming (fewer pixels to draw) storage on the retina will be faster due to ssd but u can get an ssd drive for the non retina.

  8. #8
    Diff between retina and non retina

    Member Since
    Jun 18, 2012
    Posts
    40
    I've decided the non retina 2.6ghz with antiglare. Maybe in a year or so the retina will be ready for my needs.

    I'm planning on upgrading the hdd in a few months. Any suggestions? (SSD)

    Will bumping ram from 8-16 make difference much?

  9. #9
    Diff between retina and non retina

    Member Since
    Feb 25, 2009
    Posts
    2,109
    Specs:
    Late 2013 rMBP, i7, 750m gpu, OSX versions 10.9.3, 10.10
    8 to 16 won't make a difference for most people. Eventually that may change, but for now 8 would most likely be more then enough. You'd see more of an improvement getting an ssd or a hybrid drive.

    I put an ssd in my wife's new desktop I made for her a few months ago and it's super fast - and quieter. Biggest concern will come at her next upgrade in terms of how to securely dispose of the drive (ssd's are notoriously hard to securely wipe. There's a lot of data on this so if u get an ssd be ready to hang onto it)

  10. #10
    Diff between retina and non retina
    dtravis7's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 04, 2005
    Location
    Modesto, Ca.
    Posts
    28,477
    Specs:
    iMac late 2007 10.11.b4, iMac 2008 10.10.5, Macbook2007 10.7.5, Mac Mini 10.7.5, iPhone 3GS Note 8!!
    If you want a lot of good info and tests on the Retina MBP check Anandtech's review. Very well done and informative.

  11. #11
    Diff between retina and non retina
    chscag's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 23, 2008
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    45,176
    Specs:
    27" iMac i5, 3.2 GHz, iPad 3, iPhone 5c, iPhone 6+, 3 iPods, Yosemite
    Quote Originally Posted by dtravis7 View Post
    If you want a lot of good info and tests on the Retina MBP check Anandtech's review. Very well done and informative.
    Did you notice all the comments from the Mac haters below that review article? Lots of Apple envy from the Windows world.

  12. #12
    Diff between retina and non retina
    dtravis7's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 04, 2005
    Location
    Modesto, Ca.
    Posts
    28,477
    Specs:
    iMac late 2007 10.11.b4, iMac 2008 10.10.5, Macbook2007 10.7.5, Mac Mini 10.7.5, iPhone 3GS Note 8!!
    Quote Originally Posted by chscag View Post
    Did you notice all the comments from the Mac haters below that review article? Lots of Apple envy from the Windows world.
    I usually read a few just to see some of the very hateful and misinformed people out there! Anand loves the Retina MBP and it's the first Apple he has reviewed he has given Anandtech's Editors Choice award to.

  13. #13
    Diff between retina and non retina

    Member Since
    Jun 18, 2012
    Posts
    40
    I think Retina is Too advanced for our time.. Give it time in few years there will be more I bet

  14. #14
    Diff between retina and non retina

    Member Since
    Jan 31, 2012
    Posts
    46
    Comparisons of 2011 vs. Retina
    Scott:

    Last week I took my late 2011 15 Macbook Pro 2.2Ghz/4 GB RAM/500 GB HD with hi-res matte screen to the Apple store and put it side by side with the new 15 MBP 2.3/8/256SSD with retina display while looking at the same 5 mb photos which I had sitting in my e-mails. Apparently no customers had done this before and many of the Apple clerks surrounded me to see this for themselves as the retina laptops are all at the same separate table in the store.

    The glare with the retina display still exists even though there is said to be some sort of film on the display but it is closer to the glare the Macbook Air 13 has, whereas my matte display has none. I thought the retina display was 15-20% better while looking at the photos. Where the difference really became noticeable was in the details surrounding the main photograph objects. For example, the little purple and pink flowers next to a statue popped with the retina where they did not with my hi-res display. The main photo objects were also slightly better as well. Tangentially, I also found my new iPad display to be about 15-20% better than my iPad2 which my 4 year daughter has taken over.

    Downloading the photos from e-mail was slightly snappier with the SSD but not significantly faster and loading to preview was a little quicker as well.

    I found not much difference in speed and downloading pages while surfing the internet with both laptops.

    Even though my laptop is 4 months old, I am going to try and sell it but I will not take any low ball offers because the retina is not that much better. If it sells, I will buy the 2.3 retina, if it does not sell, I will continue to enjoy my laptop and will upgrade it to Mountain Lion when the time comes.

    The new base model MBP 15 2.3/4/500 costs $1799 but I would spend $200 on the hi-res screen and 8GB ram ($100 each) so the real difference is $200 for the 256SSD and retina display which costs $2199. Since so much of my use is somehow related to photos/video, it is worth it for me.

    You asked for input and opinions, right or wrong, I have shared with you mine…
    JPH
    MacBook Pro 17: 2.5 Ghz, 8GB RAM/1 TB, Anti-Glare
    MacBook 1.1Ghz/8 GB RAM/256 GB,
    iPad3, iPhone 6+ Verizon,

  15. #15
    Diff between retina and non retina

    Member Since
    Jun 18, 2012
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by JPH675 View Post
    Scott:

    Last week I took my late 2011 15 Macbook Pro 2.2Ghz/4 GB RAM/500 GB HD with hi-res matte screen to the Apple store and put it side by side with the new 15 MBP 2.3/8/256SSD with retina display while looking at the same 5 mb photos which I had sitting in my e-mails. Apparently no customers had done this before and many of the Apple clerks surrounded me to see this for themselves as the retina laptops are all at the same separate table in the store.

    The glare with the retina display still exists even though there is said to be some sort of film on the display but it is closer to the glare the Macbook Air 13 has, whereas my matte display has none. I thought the retina display was 15-20% better while looking at the photos. Where the difference really became noticeable was in the details surrounding the main photograph objects. For example, the little purple and pink flowers next to a statue popped with the retina where they did not with my hi-res display. The main photo objects were also slightly better as well. Tangentially, I also found my new iPad display to be about 15-20% better than my iPad2 which my 4 year daughter has taken over.

    Downloading the photos from e-mail was slightly snappier with the SSD but not significantly faster and loading to preview was a little quicker as well.

    I found not much difference in speed and downloading pages while surfing the internet with both laptops.

    Even though my laptop is 4 months old, I am going to try and sell it but I will not take any low ball offers because the retina is not that much better. If it sells, I will buy the 2.3 retina, if it does not sell, I will continue to enjoy my laptop and will upgrade it to Mountain Lion when the time comes.

    The new base model MBP 15 2.3/4/500 costs $1799 but I would spend $200 on the hi-res screen and 8GB ram ($100 each) so the real difference is $200 for the 256SSD and retina display which costs $2199. Since so much of my use is somehow related to photos/video, it is worth it for me.

    You asked for input and opinions, right or wrong, I have shared with you mine…
    I appreciate your opinion. I am not hating on the retina. I believe everyone needs to update their stuff for retina display to take full advantage. I use photoshop a Lot. Currently working on could get update next month or next year. Right now pictures look bad on them.

    Second is the non upgradable features- if I went with the retina specs I need. it would cost me 3k. So I decided to go with the non retina 1k cheaper and I can upgrade later of I wished.

    I may get the retina when more company's like photoshop etc have stepped up. However I'm fine with my Non retina

    2.6GHz quad-core Intel Core i7
    Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
    8GB 1600MHz memory
    750GB 5400-rpm hard drive1
    Intel HD Graphics 4000
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 1GB of GDDR5 memory
    Antiglare

    P.s. mbpR you may be on my wish list next year

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. will 2012 retina HD..work in a 2014 retina?
    By dez570 in forum Apple Notebooks
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-23-2015, 08:26 PM
  2. 16GB RAM - non-retina vs fully equiped new 13" retina?
    By Luke345 in forum Apple Notebooks
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-08-2014, 09:43 AM
  3. MacBook PRo Retina to IPad Retina
    By gafferlyons in forum Apple Notebooks
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-05-2013, 03:10 AM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-30-2012, 11:59 AM
  5. MacBook Pro Retina 13 or without Retina?
    By blaake in forum Apple Notebooks
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-03-2012, 06:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •