Forget Anti Aliasing - Where is PPI

[Homeles]

Who cares? The 650M is trash for what we're talking about. 1080p at mediocre settings is pointless when you're trying to push the benefits of high PPI gaming. It defeats the entire purpose if you can't game at native resolution, and can't even do it well at 1080p.

NOBODY would seriously buy a MBP for gaming. I've used several, they're outstanding for their intended purposes, but terrible at gaming. A $500 desktop will absolutely crush it, and we're talking about 1/6th the price.

I've used the 15" with the 650, I didn't know the 13" didn't even have the 650 option, that's pretty sad honestly that the 13" is even MORE gimped.

The RMBP still offers an incredible density of computing power, considering the form factor and weight of the device.

 

[Fx1]

The RMBP still offers an incredible density of computing power, considering the form factor and weight of the device.

Dont forget its actually a work of art to behold too. Quite possibly the best looking and feeling notebook ever made.

Back on topic though.

Give me 2560x1600 in a 24" screen and ill be happy for a while.

 

[Arkaign]

The RMBP still offers an incredible density of computing power, considering the form factor and weight of the device.

I fully agree with that as well. It's a great device for content creation, audio work, video editing, etc for the high quality of the materials, keyboard, touchpad, and of course the display. Even the SSD memory and network components are outstanding.

It's the gaming side that is silly to promote. It's moderately passable with low resolution, lowered details, but again we're talking a GPU that is slower than a 460SE desktop card. The only way to consider the MBP for gaming is as a nice afterthought that you can get by with it casually, but the kind of folks who drop $3k on a notebook can and probably do already have a $1k+ PC that walks circles around it for their gaming needs. Gamers are still a minority in the market though, and most MBP owners will probably never install a game, or just stick to consoles, iphone, ipad for their gaming needs.

This brings up an interesting idea though, that we've heard before. I have nothing against Apple whatsoever, and if they truly pushed a gaming console with high PPI support it would be fantastic.

I think we can all agree that we want high res, high PPI gaming I hope it comes sooner. I'm just trying to be realistic here.

 

[kache]

Good, I agree with all of that. I have no idea why anyone would try to say that the MBP is good for gaming. It's mediocre with lowered settings at 1080p, but that defeats the idea of native res high PPI gaming.

1440x900 is amazing for 2012/2013

The funny thing is that I think we all agree that high PPI will be awesome for gaming when it becomes feasible. We also all agree that sooner will be better than later.

It's just not realistic yet for high end, let alone average and low end. The best you can do for now is a high end PC with 2560x1600 + set it back a couple of feet. Bingo. Beyond that we're waiting for 4K displays to hit the streets, then we can spend thousands on those with several bleeding edge GPUs to go with them.

Like I said, it will be wonderful, but it's still years out before it's doable even with a large budget, and perhaps a decade or more before an average PC will handle it. The next Playstation and Xbox after the new ones, maaaaybe. In all probability, they will do 4K sort of like how the X360 and PS3 do 1080p, in a tricky way that isn't true 1080p, but upscaled after being rendered at a lower resolution (most games are like this, although a handful are true 1080p albeit with kind of low poly/texture detail).

The good thing about a 4k monitor is that it doesn't need scaling to run at 1080p or 720p, so it's an awesome investment, since for now you can play at lower res and still have the huge space for other uses, and in the future play at native res once tech catches up.

 

[Arkaign]

The good thing about a 4k monitor is that it doesn't need scaling to run at 1080p or 720p, so it's an awesome investment, since for now you can play at lower res and still have the huge space for other uses, and in the future play at native res once tech catches up.

True. Although I won't buy one unless the prices are reasonable. For example, I won't personally pay more than $1k for a 27-30" model, or $2k for a 55". So I will wait a couple gens obviously for them to get better and cheaper, along with better hardware to drive them effectively.

But what you say is workable, nothing wrong with running 1:2 resolutions so that you don't have odd artifacts and you can still use the awesome PPI/resolution for general desktop use.

 

[blackened23]

The good thing about a 4k monitor is that it doesn't need scaling to run at 1080p or 720p, so it's an awesome investment, since for now you can play at lower res and still have the huge space for other uses, and in the future play at native res once tech catches up.

Hmm? Where do you get this information from? From everything i've read scaling still applies. It has to apply since 4k still uses IPS/LCD technology.

Ultra HD resolution (or 4k) allows for easy upscaling from 1080p or 720p via pixel doubling. That would mean that it still scales lower res images.

If something changed recently please clarify! I love higher resolution but having the option for lower res without having an input lag ridden, blurry mess would be nice.

 

[Homeles]

I fully agree with that as well. It's a great device for content creation, audio work, video editing, etc for the high quality of the materials, keyboard, touchpad, and of course the display. Even the SSD memory and network components are outstanding.

It's the gaming side that is silly to promote. It's moderately passable with low resolution, lowered details, but again we're talking a GPU that is slower than a 460SE desktop card. The only way to consider the MBP for gaming is as a nice afterthought that you can get by with it casually, but the kind of folks who drop $3k on a notebook can and probably do already have a $1k+ PC that walks circles around it for their gaming needs. Gamers are still a minority in the market though, and most MBP owners will probably never install a game, or just stick to consoles, iphone, ipad for their gaming needs.

This brings up an interesting idea though, that we've heard before. I have nothing against Apple whatsoever, and if they truly pushed a gaming console with high PPI support it would be fantastic.

I think we can all agree that we want high res, high PPI gaming I hope it comes sooner. I'm just trying to be realistic here.

Gotcha. I'm on the same page as you, now.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Where do you get this information from? As far as i'm aware it is still based on LCD technology and has a native resolution.

Ultra HD resolution (or 4k) allows for easy upscaling from 1080p or 720p via pixel doubling. This does not mean that native resolution doesn't apply.

If the pixels are small enough you can upscale and hardly notice. On my nexus 10 I run gta3 at 70% of native and it still looks great.

Also like that article I posted I think that there will be post processing that will convert pixels to vectors and let us scale indefinitely to meet native resolutions. If that theory pans out we could render tiny images at ultra high performance and then convert them to vectors and scale them up to 4k.

 

[blackened23]

If the pixels are small enough you can upscale and hardly notice. On my nexus 10 I run gta3 at 70% of native and it still looks great.

Also like that article I posted I think that there will be post processing that will convert pixels to vectors and let us scale indefinitely to meet native resolutions. If that theory pans out we could render tiny images at ultra high performance and then convert them to vectors and scale them up to 4k.

Ah, I missed that link earlier. Interesting info, thanks.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Ah, I missed that link earlier. Interesting info, thanks.

I think everyone missed it because they were all arguing. The article said that the tech should be ready in about four to five years.

 

[Homeles]

If the pixels are small enough you can upscale and hardly notice. On my nexus 10 I run gta3 at 70% of native and it still looks great.

Also like that article I posted I think that there will be post processing that will convert pixels to vectors and let us scale indefinitely to meet native resolutions. If that theory pans out we could render tiny images at ultra high performance and then convert them to vectors and scale them up to 4k.

While it will certainly be a boon, keep in mind that the detail a vector graphic offers is fixed, regardless of how large you blow it up.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

While it will certainly be a boon, keep in mind that the detail a vector graphic offers is fixed, regardless of how large you blow it up.

That's the point of vector graphics, and why this algorithm they are developing is going to be the end of pixels. Render a ultra detailed image at a tiny resolution and then be able to blow it up huge and have it maintain all the detail.

 

[Homeles]

...that wasn't my point.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

...that wasn't my point.

The article says they can take any pixel based image and turn it into vectors. So a photo will still look like a photo even though its now a vector image.

 

[kache]

Hmm? Where do you get this information from? From everything i've read scaling still applies. It has to apply since 4k still uses IPS/LCD technology.

Ultra HD resolution (or 4k) allows for easy upscaling from 1080p or 720p via pixel doubling. That would mean that it still scales lower res images.

If something changed recently please clarify! I love higher resolution but having the option for lower res without having an input lag ridden, blurry mess would be nice.

I have no idea what you're talking about, but:
1280x3=3840
720x3=2160

1920x2=3840
1080x2=2160

So both these resolutions can be shown on the screen without any scaling whatsoever (just show the same pixel 2/3 times), so no loss of quality or input lag involved.

 

[blackened23]

I have no idea what you're talking about, but:
1280x3=3840
720x3=2160

1920x2=3840
1080x2=2160

So both these resolutions can be shown on the screen without any scaling whatsoever (just show the same pixel 2/3 times), so no loss of quality or input lag involved.

It is still scaled and pixel doubled. This is not dissimilar to what current LCD panels do with scaling - pixel stretching and doubling.

 

[reallyscrued]

You can hate Apple for a lot of things but pushing display technology forward ain't one of them.

Because what the world needs more of are crappy 1366x768 TN panels.

No, what you really hate is seeing Apple innovate.

*sigh*

Re-read my comment guys. I didn't say I hated them for "pushing technology forward" (and there's a reason I put that in quotes.)

I hate them for the marketing they are doing on their Retina displays. All this PPI talk makes it seem like you guys never realized before higher pixel densities meant more detail. Same misconception this dude had:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2290003

Well no s*&%, sherlock, higher pixel densities mean more detail, (and that's debatable at tv screen sizes and viewing distances)but now it's moved onto the point that you can replace AA? Well that's terrific. Enjoy your ignorance fellas.

Tell ya what, you can watch Pixar movies at whatever PPI you wish with no AA. Please start a petition and ask the video engineers if they'll render it that way for you. I wonder what they'd say. Cmdrdredd even pointed it out in the first page.

 

[Enigmoid]

Who cares? The 650M is trash for what we're talking about. 1080p at mediocre settings is pointless when you're trying to push the benefits of high PPI gaming. It defeats the entire purpose if you can't game at native resolution, and can't even do it well at 1080p.

NOBODY would seriously buy a MBP for gaming. I've used several, they're outstanding for their intended purposes, but terrible at gaming. A $500 desktop will absolutely crush it, and we're talking about 1/6th the price.

I've used the 15" with the 650, I didn't know the 13" didn't even have the 650 option, that's pretty sad honestly that the 13" is even MORE gimped.

Please honestly build a $500 desktop that will do better. Include all that the rmbp 15 incher has.


You won't be able to.

 

[blackened23]

Please honestly build a $500 desktop that will do better. Include all that the rmbp 15 incher has.


You won't be able to.

The GT650M is a very slow GPU by desktop standards, even a GTX 460 or 4870 is faster. And those are far less than 100$.

Let's see, retina MBP costs 2100$. Macbook has uses but gaming isn't one unless you play blizzard / indie games.

 

[crisium]

$30 GTX 460. You heard it here first folks.

Hyperbole doesn't help an argument.

 

[Enigmoid]

The GT650M is a dog piece of crap GPU by desktop standards, even a GTX 460 or 4870 is faster. And those are far less than 100$.

100$ Z77 motherboard
100$ i3
8GB DDR3-1600
Random garbage GPU such as the 460 which is still faster than the GT650M: 30$

Let's see, retina MBP costs 2100$. Uh huh. Anyone buying a macbook for gaming is out of their mind. Macbook has uses but gaming isn't one unless you play trash blizzard game - even with WoW you have to use a lower resolution if you want high detail settings.

Um, thats not a computer, thats a pile of parts.

i7 2.6 mobile is as good as a mid range ivy i5 in single thread and better than top range i5s in multithread.

Where is your mobo, psu, hard drive (hey the rmbp has a 256 GB SSD)?

And I could still go on becuase if i buy a rmbp from the store I can go home and turn in on and plug it in and be ready to go.

I would need a monitor, keyboard, mouse, speakers, OS still if I was to do that.

You are not going to get a usable computer that is better than the rmbp for $500.

 

[Throckmorton]

I have no idea what you're talking about, but:
1280x3=3840
720x3=2160

1920x2=3840
1080x2=2160

So both these resolutions can be shown on the screen without any scaling whatsoever (just show the same pixel 2/3 times), so no loss of quality or input lag involved.

What you're talking about is not possible. nVidia does not allow pixel doubling or tripling. Users have asked for that feature, and nVidia said they will not add it to their drivers. You can ONLY scale the image up with interpolation.

 

[Throckmorton]

If the pixels are small enough you can upscale and hardly notice. On my nexus 10 I run gta3 at 70% of native and it still looks great.

Also like that article I posted I think that there will be post processing that will convert pixels to vectors and let us scale indefinitely to meet native resolutions. If that theory pans out we could render tiny images at ultra high performance and then convert them to vectors and scale them up to 4k.

3D graphics are already vectors! Why would you convert to raster, then back to a 2d vector, then convert to high res raster again?

 

[VulgarDisplay]

3D graphics are already vectors! Why would you convert to raster, then back to a 2d vector, then convert to high res raster again?

If this conversion algorithm allowed you to upscale a small image to a larger one with little to no performance hit then you would want to do this. It would negate the performance hit rendering at high resolution has. It would effectively kill the discrete gpu market for gaming if it doesn't have a huge performance hit. Just design hardware to render at like 480p at 120fps and then up scale to 4k or whatever resolution you desire.

 

[Arkaign]

Please honestly build a $500 desktop that will do better. Include all that the rmbp 15 incher has.


You won't be able to.

Well it's apples to oranges, but yes, I can build a $500 desktop that will game better. I wouldn't include all the rMBP has due to much of it being pointless or unnecessary for good gaming performance (eg; SSD, nice to have but purely a luxury for gaming, much better to have superior GPU first, worry about SSD later).

Generic mATX Case 30
500W PSU 30
970 Mobo 55
8GB DDR3 35
FX 6300 140
1GB 7850 165
750GB HDD (refurb, but with warranty) 40

495. Granted, that assumes someone has an OS, monitor, and keyboard to re-use. But let's just say you needed an Asus 23" IPS screen for $250, and a keyboard/mouse set of respectable quality for $50, and an OS for $100. That brings us up well short of $1k, a far cry from the nearly $3k MBP. Hell you could add a 27" IPS 2560x1440 panel, i7-3770k, Z77 mobo, 512GB SSD, 5.1 Speakers, 750W PSU, and 7970 or 680 and STILL be way cheaper than a MBP.

The MBP is actually a great device for what it is, it's just not built for gaming, it's more of an afterthought that it can do it at all.

And a FX 6300 w/7850 will eat the 2.6ghz i7 w/650M alive in gaming. We're talking the difference between legit 1080p performance with high details and being severely crippled without turning a lot of stuff down in stuff like FC3/etc.

Edit : all prices above from newegg, piecing together w/used the whole thing can be done for $500 including display, and still be a better gaming setup. While the MBP is good at being portable and well balanced otherwise.