Razer has announced the 2017 Razer Blade (14")

[Spudlicious]

Razer have introduced the new Razer Blade with a Kaby Lake i7, faster RAM (2400MHz DDR4), and a 4K screen (up from 3K), ad also HDMI 2 (not sure if this was on the previous one or not).

The top spec model costs $2799:

• 14" 3840x2160 touch screen
• 2.8GHz i7-7700HQ
• 16GB 2400MHz DDR4 RAM
• GTX 1060 (6GB)
• 1TB PCIe SSD
• 1 Thunderbolt 3 port

For those wondering, compared to the $2799 MBP:

• 15.4" 2880x1800 P3 display
• 2.7GHZ i7-6820HQ
• 16GB 2133MHz DDR3 RAM
• Radeon Pro 455 (2GB)
• 512GB PCIe SSD
• 4 Thunderbolt 3 ports

Would anyone choose this over the new MBP?

It's hard for me to imagine anyone would have those two computers on their shortlist, they're really not aimed at the same consumer group. Do I want to play Deathslaughter Porno Babes IV or whatever the latest game is at 120FPS? No, so if someone gifted me the Razer I would leave the box unopened and put it on ebay. But I would keep a freebie new 15.4" Mac as my desk computer.

 

[Appleaker]

It's hard for me to imagine anyone would have those two computers on their shortlist, they're really not aimed at the same consumer group. Do I want to play Deathslaughter Porno Babes IV or whatever the latest game is at 120FPS? No, so if someone gifted me the Razer I would leave the box unopened and put it on ebay. But I would keep a freebie new 15.4" Mac as my desk computer.

I don't think they are aimed at entirely different groups. People keep saying the Razer is only for gaming for the simple reason that it has a more powerful graphics card. Similarly people say that the MacBook Pro is really powerful but not for gaming as a justification for it having a lower end graphics card. It doesn't work like that. Sure, there are tasks that AMD cards are better at and for the MBP, software optimization is a big factor, but just because the 1060 is more powerful it doesn't mean it is to be used exclusively in gaming notebooks and for gaming. Since the introduction of the QHD+ Blade, they've been positioning this as a device that is for more than gaming. The Adobe suite obviously run better on it, and not only do they include a few games with a purchase, but they also include a free copy of the $199 FL Studio 12 music production suite. The 2 models they offer, a 1080p matte version, and the 4K version show that their market it beyond gamers.

Like I said they are not aimed at entirely different groups, there is some overlap. If this was a 1.5" thick plastic, stealth plastic design with a TN display then maybe I would agree with you.

 

[nikster0029]

I think it is hard to make these two exclusive. Personally, I have decided that a Razer 2017 combo with a MacBook is a perfect combination for me. Get best of both worlds!

 

[Spudlicious]

I don't think they are aimed at entirely different groups. People keep saying the Razer is only for gaming for the simple reason that it has a more powerful graphics card. Similarly people say that the MacBook Pro is really powerful but not for gaming as a justification for it having a lower end graphics card. It doesn't work like that. Sure, there are tasks that AMD cards are better at and for the MBP, software optimization is a big factor, but just because the 1060 is more powerful it doesn't mean it is to be used exclusively in gaming notebooks and for gaming. Since the introduction of the QHD+ Blade, they've been positioning this as a device that is for more than gaming. The Adobe suite obviously run better on it, and not only do they include a few games with a purchase, but they also include a free copy of the $199 FL Studio 12 music production suite. The 2 models they offer, a 1080p matte version, and the 4K version show that their market it beyond gamers.

Like I said they are not aimed at entirely different groups, there is some overlap. If this was a 1.5" thick plastic, stealth plastic design with a TN display then maybe I would agree with you.

I here what you're saying, but.... Who does not know if they're shopping for a Windows or Mac computer? That seems fundamental to me and it's why I struggle to see the quoted machines pitching for the same customers. Sure, plenty of folks run both Windows and Mac computers, I do, but the next time I'm looking to waste money (in my wife's view) on a new machine I'll sure as hell know what OS it will run.

Just my view, and if I'm completely misjudging the market it won't be the first time

 

[Appleaker]

I here what you're saying, but.... Who does not know if they're shopping for a Windows or Mac computer? That seems fundamental to me and it's why I struggle to see the quoted machines pitching for the same customers. Sure, plenty of folks run both Windows and Mac computers, I do, but the next time I'm looking to waste money (in my wife's view) on a new machine I'll sure as hell know what OS it will run.

Just my view, and if I'm completely misjudging the market it won't be the first time

Of course, many people are obviously set on the operating system but there are people that can work with either, and it's really about the hardware and how powerful it is to run the applications they need. As Apple have said, a lot of Mac purchases are from first time buyers and that shows that people are willing to switch, although most will switch away from Mac if they have a poor experience, it's too slow/has too many bugs, or they need something more powerful. That hasn't always been a major issue in the past but it's increasing with Apples attitude to the Mac.

You're not misjudging the market, for most people the OS is the deciding factor, but that's not the case for everyone.

 

[Sanpete]

Apples attitude to the Mac.

What is that?

 

[Appleaker]

What is that?

I think what you've just said is the answer, it's hard to say and nobody really knows. They definitely care about the Mac but they desperately want the iPad to be the primary computing device for consumers. It's like the departments are fighting against each other, with the 12" MacBook targeting people who may be looking for an iPad, and the iPad Pro targeting Mac users (even directly in the latest ad campaign). In terms of actual hardware, they have been increasing the upgrade cycle for the Mac mini and Mac Pro with uncertainty about their future from a lot of people/potential customers. And with their notebooks, they're making compromises in terms of battery life and GPU performance to make it thinner.

 

[Sanpete]

I think one can understand what Apple is up to without supposing any disharmony among divisions. I think they'd like to sell more iPads and more Macs.

And with their notebooks, they're making compromises in terms of battery life and GPU performance to make it thinner.

All consumer machines are about compromises, but the new 15" has better battery life and dGPU performance than its predecessor. The nTB 13" also has great battery life (don't know how its iGOU compares). It's just the TB 13" that has issues, though some are doing well with that one too.

 

[getbretweir]

Agreed. They make great looking products which are technically as thin/light as MacBooks but with much higher hardware specs. For a lot of people around here, well that's all they need as confirmation that Apple make Fisher-Price products, and there are so many comments around here about why getting a Razer gets you a much better machine.

That is, until you actually come to live with one or use one! They're like the Christmas present you begged your parents for as a child, that isn't quite as cool as the adverts made it out to be. Almost all other OEMs have the best value and spec on paper, but it's almost always the opposite when it comes to living with it daily.

Even something as simple as the trackpad can make casual usage nothing short of frustrating. I'd still rather use a 2009 Unibody C2D MacBook trackpad over any trackpad in a Windows laptop - and I've tried a lot of trackpads in a lot of Windows laptops. Gesture support in Windows, driver issues, and lack of OEM trackpad consistency (jumping between Synaptics/ALPS/ELAN hardware with every other revision); within 6 months, these are just a few reasons why people end up wishing they paid the extra for a Mac. Something that is consistent, tried-and-tested, with great aftersales support.

Again, not to say that all non-Apple computers are junky and poor quality; though more often than not, that ends up being the case.

Yup. I was lured by the specs of the XPS, but quickly learned why I've always considered MBP the premier choice in laptops. Like you said, the trackpad alone is a good enough reason to stick with Apple.

Personally, I don't need desktop power in a laptop. I don't game on the road, and experience is what I value most. Dealing with Razer's customer service is not a good experience. Neither is anticipating the coil whine from your XPS. My 2016 MBP is as enjoyable as my other Apple product I've used, and that reliability, customer service and user experience is why I pay the premium, despite the inferior specs on paper.

 

[improwise]

Curious what you think of buying a rMBP 2016/2017 maily for running windows? Its so hard to find any PC laptop that even come close to matching the build quality and design of the rMBP. And believe me, I have really tried to find something else than a rMBP as a .NET developer but so far always ended upp with a rMPB anyway. But this year Apple really made it a hard choice with the TouchBar and only 16 GB RAM.

 

[Appleaker]

I think one can understand what Apple is up to without supposing any disharmony among divisions. I think they'd like to sell more iPads and more Macs.



All consumer machines are about compromises, but the new 15" has better battery life and dGPU performance than its predecessor. The nTB 13" also has great battery life (don't know how its iGOU compares). It's just the TB 13" that has issues, though some are doing well with that one too.

Of course, but they are separate divisions with some of their goals being separate and possibly opposing.
The battery life isn't always better on the 15", the dGPU performance is better but compared to competing notebooks such as the XPS 15, it isn't great for a 'Pro' machine. The nTB 13" is the MacBook Air replacement so in that regard it's battery life is worse. But the iGPU on both 13" models is an improvement over last gen. Overall, it is a solid upgrade but there are issues as there usually are with a 1st gen redesign.
[doublepost=1487470104][/doublepost]

Curious what you think of buying a rMBP 2016/2017 maily for running windows? Its so hard to find any PC laptop that even come close to matching the build quality and design of the rMBP. And believe me, I have really tried to find something else than a rMBP as a .NET developer but so far always ended upp with a rMPB anyway. But this year Apple really made it a hard choice with the TouchBar and only 16 GB RAM.

I think it depends on the use case, but Windows on the MBP is great but the premium is significant although it could be worth it. Something that I would like to know is whether it's possible to make the Touch Bar display function keys as standard in Windows.

 

[Sanpete]

From the controlled tests I've seen, the new 15" battery life is consistently better than the 2015 for the stuff that most people use the battery for, i.e. browsing, watching video and such. Most wouldn't try to edit a 4K video at 80% screen brightness on battery, but if they did, the 2015 might last two hours instead of 90 minutes for the new. The 2016's battery life is better than comparable Windows machines too.

MBP dGPUs have usually lagged those of Windows machines, nothing new there. But the MBP dGPU will still drive more UHD external monitors than the Windows equivalents (or so I've read).

Yes, there are definitely issues with some of the new components. But I think they've done a good job of balancing competing goods.

 

[Eason85]

Curious what you think of buying a rMBP 2016/2017 maily for running windows? Its so hard to find any PC laptop that even come close to matching the build quality and design of the rMBP. And believe me, I have really tried to find something else than a rMBP as a .NET developer but so far always ended upp with a rMPB anyway. But this year Apple really made it a hard choice with the TouchBar and only 16 GB RAM.

I would have done this if not for the dGPU always being active.

 

[leman]

And with their notebooks, they're making compromises in terms of battery life and GPU performance to make it thinner.

All consumer machines are about compromises, but the new 15" has better battery life and dGPU performance than its predecessor.

I would like to extend Sanpete's answer a bit: the 2016 laptops have better or the same relative battery life and dGPU performance than any other their predecessors. They use same class components as any MBP before them and in fact, this is the first time ever that a mobile mac uses a professional GPU. So I get very surprised when people talk about compromises in these areas. The PowerBook/MBP was always a compromise, as from its initial release a decade ago, it was targeted as a thin and light laptop, albeit one that attempted to achieve good performance at the same time. The current lineup simply continues to carry out that design.

In this sense, Apple's attitude towards the MacBook Pro at least hasn't changed in at least last 14+ years. This series of laptops was created as lightweight performance-oriented, adaptable machine and the 2016 models are literally the pinnacle of that design.

 

[caramelpolice]

They use same class components as any MBP before them and in fact, this is the first time ever that a mobile mac uses a professional GPU.

I'm pretty happy with my Radeon Pro 460, but it's not meaningfully different from consumer Radeons in the way workstation GPUs typically are. It even uses consumer Radeon drivers in Boot Camp.

 

[Eason85]

I'm pretty happy with my Radeon Pro 460, but it's not meaningfully different from consumer Radeons in the way workstation GPUs typically are. It even uses consumer Radeon drivers in Boot Camp.

How dare you. Apple is giving you 1000 times the memory of an ATI rage 128 on the rx460! 1000 times! And they say the new MacBooks aren't enough of an upgrade...

 

[leman]

I'm pretty happy with my Radeon Pro 460, but it's not meaningfully different from consumer Radeons in the way workstation GPUs typically are. It even uses consumer Radeon drivers in Boot Camp.

On the other hand, how is a Quadro M2000M meaningfully different from a 960M (except using a different driver of course)? I agree that AMD's driver situation is a total disaster, but as there is no Windows-oriented product shipping with those cards right now, I guess it does make at least a bit sense that there are no suitable Windows drivers for it. As to Radeon Pro's differences from consumer cards, there are some — they are manufactured using a different process which allegedly gives them better power efficiency and improves stability. Most likely also makes them much more expensive. It would be of course very interesting to run some benchmarks on how these cards perform using FP16/FP64 precision, I don't think this has been done yet.

 

[Eason85]

On the other hand, how is a Quadro M2000M meaningfully different from a 960M (except using a different driver of course)? I agree that AMD's driver situation is a total disaster, but as there is no Windows-oriented product shipping with those cards right now, I guess it does make at least a bit sense that there are no suitable Windows drivers for it. As to Radeon Pro's differences from consumer cards, there are some — they are manufactured using a different process which allegedly gives them better power efficiency and improves stability. Most likely also makes them much more expensive. It would be of course very interesting to run some benchmarks on how these cards perform using FP16/FP64 precision, I don't think this has been done yet.

The m1200 is equal to the 960m in performance (in games). The m2000 is significantly faster than a 960m in every way.

 

[improwise]

I think it depends on the use case, but Windows on the MBP is great but the premium is significant although it could be worth it. Something that I would like to know is whether it's possible to make the Touch Bar display function keys as standard in Windows.

AFAIK you can in the BootCamp Settings.
[doublepost=1487500424][/doublepost]

I would have done this if not for the dGPU always being active.

Yes, that is a big downside. Not only for battery reasons but also for fan noise, has that improved in the 2016 MBP compared to the 2015 (with dGPU active)? If it was possible to buy without a dGPU I would.

 

[Eason85]

AFAIK you can in the BootCamp Settings.
[doublepost=1487500424][/doublepost]

Yes, that is a big downside. Not only for battery reasons but also for fan noise, has that improved in the 2016 MBP compared to the 2015 (with dGPU active)? If it was possible to buy without a dGPU I would.

Yes, I would have bought it on release if I didn't need to pay for that underpowered overpriced excuse for a GPU

 

[Appleaker]

I would like to extend Sanpete's answer a bit: the 2016 laptops have better or the same relative battery life and dGPU performance than any other their predecessors. They use same class components as any MBP before them and in fact, this is the first time ever that a mobile mac uses a professional GPU. So I get very surprised when people talk about compromises in these areas. The PowerBook/MBP was always a compromise, as from its initial release a decade ago, it was targeted as a thin and light laptop, albeit one that attempted to achieve good performance at the same time. The current lineup simply continues to carry out that design.

In this sense, Apple's attitude towards the MacBook Pro at least hasn't changed in at least last 14+ years. This series of laptops was created as lightweight performance-oriented, adaptable machine and the 2016 models are literally the pinnacle of that design.

Of course I was referring to battery life as relative - it's actually sometimes lower than last year on the 15" and 13" TB. And yes, relative performance has obviously increased but things like this can't be exclusively measured by relative improvement, otherwise the MBP would be the absolute best notebook you can get. Also they don't use the same class of components - the nonTB MBP uses the MacBook Air 15W processor and the dGPU in the 15" MBP has a lower TDP. I think people need to stop referring to the 450/455/460 as 'professional graphics cards' - They are just low power mid-range cards that are labelled as 'Pro' because they are exclusively for the MacBook Pro.
The CPU complaints weren't justified because Kaby Lake wasn't released at that point, but the GPU complaints were due to the performance relative to the competition. As you said it's never been the leading notebook in this respect, but the performance compared to competitors is worse than previous years.

 

[leman]

As you said it's never been the leading notebook in this respect, but the performance compared to competitors is worse than previous years.

At the moment of MBP release, the Radeon Pro 460 was the fastest sub 45W mobile GPU on the market. Now that crown of course goes to the 1050 GTX, which was released months later. And no, the relative performance is better than in previous years. The 460 Pro is a higher-performing GPU than the Quadro M1200/M2000M in the 15" Dell Precision laptop series. The 1050 in the Dell XPS is around 25-30% faster — which is a much smaller gap compared to last year, where we had 50%+ difference. And most of that difference is coming from a faster clocked VRAM.

Also, don't forget multiple high-res monitor support that is important for professional users!

I think people need to stop referring to the 450/455/460 as 'professional graphics cards' - They are just low power mid-range cards that are labelled as 'Pro' because they are exclusively for the MacBook Pro.

There is certainly truth in what you say. But then lets also be consistent and stop calling GPUs like Quadro M1200/M2000M etc. professional GPUs — after all, they are just rebrands of the mid-range gaming GPUs with a driver that does not artificially lock performance of some features on Windows platform. IMO, the Radeon Pro series certainly deserve the moniker: they are carefully picked Polaris 11 chips than underwent some additional non-trivial technical procedures, they support up to four 4K external screens and they are designed with stability in mind (5Ghz GDDR5 in contrast to 7Ghz GDDR5 as used by modern-day gaming GPUs).

Of course I was referring to battery life as relative - it's actually sometimes lower than last year on the 15" and 13" TB.

And sometimes its higher. Overall, its more or less the same.

In the end, my point is that a statement like "Apple has sacrificed battery and GPU to make laptops thinner and lighter" is simply not correct. The battery life is still more or less the same(actually, it has improved nicely for my usage on the 15" model) and the GPU performance is better than ever compared to other options on the market.

 

[diamond.g]

At the moment of MBP release, the Radeon Pro 460 was the fastest sub 45W mobile GPU on the market. Now that crown of course goes to the 1050 GTX, which was released months later. And no, the relative performance is better than in previous years. The 460 Pro is a higher-performing GPU than the Quadro M1200/M2000M in the 15" Dell Precision laptop series. The 1050 in the Dell XPS is around 25-30% faster — which is a much smaller gap compared to last year, where we had 50%+ difference. And most of that difference is coming from a faster clocked VRAM.

Also, don't forget multiple high-res monitor support that is important for professional users!



There is certainly truth in what you say. But then lets also be consistent and stop calling GPUs like Quadro M1200/M2000M etc. professional GPUs — after all, they are just rebrands of the mid-range gaming GPUs with a driver that does not artificially lock performance of some features on Windows platform. IMO, the Radeon Pro series certainly deserve the moniker: they are carefully picked Polaris 11 chips than underwent some additional non-trivial technical procedures, they support up to four 4K external screens and they are designed with stability in mind (5Ghz GDDR5 in contrast to 7Ghz GDDR5 as used by modern-day gaming GPUs).




And sometimes its higher. Overall, its more or less the same.

In the end, my point is that a statement like "Apple has sacrificed battery and GPU to make laptops thinner and lighter" is simply not correct. The battery life is still more or less the same(actually, it has improved nicely for my usage on the 15" model) and the GPU performance is better than ever compared to other options on the market.

Odd, Wiki says the 1050 GTX has a 75W TDP. Do you have a link showing otherwise?

 

[MacGizmo]

It can't run the Mac OS natively. End of discussion.

 

[leman]

Odd, Wiki says the 1050 GTX has a 75W TDP. Do you have a link showing otherwise?

The wiki is obviously wrong. Someone has copy-pasted the desktop version TDP without bothering to adjust them. If the mobile 1050 GTX had a TDP of 75W, it would be a horrible card and a massive downgrade efficiency-wise from a 960M used previously.

Nobody really knows the real TDP of a mobile 1050, as Nvidia doesn't publish it, but 45-50W is the most reasonable estimate. After all, that GPU is designed to replace the 950M/960M, so it most likely has the same TDP.