Which Processor to Buy? Reality Check Needed.

[IsaacT]

Hey guys, I have my own Desktop PC that I built that is running Windows 7 and kicks ass at whatever I need it to. That said I need a computer that is portable that will be good for viewing pictures, maybe the occasional photo edit, etc. Not too much but enough I cannot resign myself to a POS netbook.

What I am planning to do is go back to apple for my portable computing. The reason for this:
1. Build Quality. These computers are built very well.
2. Aesthetics. These computers look very nice and are extremely portable.
3. OS X. I actually like OS X a lot and would love to be back on that system.

I understand that they are overpriced.

I was originally considering the Macbook Air as it is fairly inexpensive but I am worried about the processor speed not being up to snuff and the display not having a nice contrast. This will be a computer mostly used for media consumption/production with some note taking thrown in for good measure.

So I am now looking at a 13inch Macbook Pro with Retina Display. I understand that their 2560x1600 display is mostly a gimmick and the true native resolution is 1440x900(if I remember right) but the panel has better colors and contrast than the air and I was able to tell the difference.

My question, if you made it this far, is if the processor on the Macbook Pro Retina 13" is up to snuff. They have an option for an i7 processor on the 13" but it is not a quad core. Would a dual core i7 really be worth putting money into? I feel like that is stupid personally. And are the dual core i5 processors capable chips? All I find on the web are Apple fanboys and people being paid to push the product. I want to know real world, is this a good computer?

Processor chip options if it helps:
1. i5-4278U - This is the standard 2.6GHz option that comes with the base models.
2. i5-4308U - This is the upgraded 2.8GHz option that is offered for 90 dollars extra.
3. i7-4578U - This is their top tier 3.0GHz option that is offered for 270 dollars extra.

My problem is that a dual core i7 has always seemed like a cop out to me. If I was interested in the 15" rMBP then it would be a different story, although I still think laptop version i7 processors are a joke. It is like getting a guard dog and cutting off his front legs IMO.

Anyone with advice for me I greatly appreciate it.
Thanks guys,
Isaac

 

[Sigurthr]

The difference between 2.6 and 3GHz isn't that noticeable for most applications, but removing two cores most certainly is.

That all being said, if it is just going to be used for minor note taking and multimedia display, have you considered a high end iPad? You'd save a considerable amount of money, yet retain resale value very well provided you care for it well. With notebooks the value declines linearly with time at a profound rate, but even the original iPad still sells for $200 used, despite being four years old now.

 

[crazyspaz]

Most laptops wont have quad core processors in them, unless they are really massive (think "workstation" category laptops). The big things in small laptops is power consumption and heat. Quad cores will run hotter than dual cores, and especially on macs, cooling can be pretty dismal. Also remember it all has to be powered by a couple 18650's.
Although I shouldnt say the power consumption part of it is set in stone- there are some quad cores that mamage to use less power than their dual core counterparts. But mostly, the first scenario applies.

I think you will be find with a dual core. Especially in a mac, where most (if not all) the programs you use are optimized for use on a mac. What will you be doing with it?

Also if it makes any difference, my desktop has a stock i3 (dual core), and can run anything I throw at it just fine- its only when I have Ableton, CAD, and steam open (running a game) at the same time that it starts to have some issues

 

[Blarg King]

Well its dual core with hyper threading, so for applications that are multithreaded (designed to run on multiple cores) you will get similar if not identical performance to a physical quad core.

Like crazyspaz says, most if not all applications on a mac are a lot more optimized since mac's have a lot less hardware configurations to worry about. For day to day tasks (web browsing, photoshop work, light video editing) my old macbook pro with a core 2 duo worked just as well as my ASUS with with a quad core i7.

Also, I have to point out (because incorrect information bothers me) that the 15" rMBP has a quad core cpu, and it isn't a hulking beast of a machine.

And MacBook pro batteries aren't 18650's, they're a custom made cell.

 

[IsaacT]

I mentioned at the end of my post that if I was willing to go for the 15" that it would be a different story because of the fact that they have quad-core i7's but having owned one in the past(2009 model) I do not want something as big. Also, I have a budget constraint to not buy them.

In regards to the 13", the one I am leaning towards now is their 1799 model.
Processor: 2.8GHz i5
RAM: 8GB
Storage: 512GB PCI-e Flash Memory

I should be able to get it for 1609.99 plus tax at Best Buy, maybe even 1599.99

I have heard somewhere that the higher tiers of flash storage improve the performance of the machine as well as add memory space.

 

[Blarg King]

Yeah the PCI-E flash memory does a lot to improve the responsiveness of a computer. SSD's are a huge game changer.

 

[crazyspaz]

And MacBook pro batteries aren't 18650's, they're a custom made cell.

Close enough

And if you can get a solid state drive, do it. Seriously. They are fricking awesome. I have a low end 30gb SSD running windows and some proprietary pograms, and the speed difference between solid state and a hard drive is night and day. Its well worth the extra money.

 

[swamidog]

So I am now looking at a 13inch Macbook Pro with Retina Display. I understand that their 2560x1600 display is mostly a gimmick and the true native resolution is 1440x900(if I remember right) but the panel has better colors and contrast than the air and I was able to tell the difference.

Isaac

it's no gimmick. you can drive the display panel at the full resolution.

 

[IsaacT]

I am definitely going for the Macbook Pro Retina with the flash storage. The question is whether I buy:

1. The i5 2.6GHz with 8GB RAM and 256GB Flash Storage for 1299 after discounts before tax.

Or

2. The i5 2.8GHz with 8GB RAM and 512GB Flash Storage for 1599 after discounts before tax.

I don't know if that is worth the 300 extra dollars. How worth it would it be?

 

[Blarg King]

the 200 Mhz clock speed isnt worth it, but doubling your SSD is.

 

[swamidog]

I am definitely going for the Macbook Pro Retina with the flash storage. The question is whether I buy:

1. The i5 2.6GHz with 8GB RAM and 256GB Flash Storage for 1299 after discounts before tax.

Or

2. The i5 2.8GHz with 8GB RAM and 512GB Flash Storage for 1599 after discounts before tax.

I don't know if that is worth the 300 extra dollars. How worth it would it be?

i have the 2.6Ghz i7 macbook pro with 8GB ram and 512GB SSD (retina, mid 2012 macbookpro10,1) . it is a screaming machine. highly recommended.

 

[IsaacT]

Okay so I went and played with the laptops today and I have narrowed it down a bit.

1. For a portable machine I definitely want to stick with the 13" option. 15" is nice but I have a desktop to play games in.

2. I think the 256GB storage should be sufficient. 512GB would be nice, but for a secondary computer I am not sure it is worth the extra money.

I am still leaning towards the Macbook Pro w/ Retina but I like the Macbook Air more from a design standpoint. Don't know why that is. I think maybe the proportions in length/width are nicer. Not a huge deal though. My biggest question now is. Do I need 8GB or 16GB of RAM. I would rather have 16GB. However if I do that I HAVE to buy it from Apple, and so not only will it cost the 180 dollars more but I will also lose out on 100 dollars off from best buy student deals. So an opportunity cost of 280 dollars. 280 dollars for 8 more GB of RAM seems pretty steep.

Do you all think I will need more than 8GB of RAM? When is RAM used most often?

Thanks,
Isaac

 

[oahu99]

(Putting aside my hate for Apple products)
Ram is used a lot in video rendering and editing, also with photo processing.
However, 8gb ram will suffice. 16gb is total overkill.

 

[Blarg King]

8GB is good for most tasks. Just remember though, its soldered to the logic board, so you can't upgrade later.

 

[IsaacT]

Could I use a soldering iron to upgrade later on down the road?

 

[DashApple]

Could I use a soldering iron to upgrade later on down the road?

No , if it is soldered then the Ram module will be reflowed onto the main board and will be SMD based with fine pitch pads or the RAM chips will be directly soldered onto the board itself .

It may be possible to do , but it would be risky