I'm in the market for a new MacBook Pro, but I wasn't sure if I was getting the best bang for my buck (back in the pre-Haswell days when each MBP iteration was a poor performance boost from the last, I couldn't bring myself to drop another 2 grand on a laptop that was only 10% faster than my current model, a 2007 MBP).
As you can see from the table, I compared all of the average benchmarks from different models again the 15" 2.3GHz MBP from late 2013. Then, I compared the average changes in performance, as well as input some preliminary pricing data for the models I could find. What it look like, is by paying an extra 8% to upgrade to the 2.6GHz chip, I'll be gaining an extra 8-9% performance in 64-bit OS. If I were to downgrade to the 2.0 GHz model, I would save 21-23% on cost with only a 8% drop in performance for single-core activities. The real issue for me with that is the lack of a discrete video card for any graphic-intense processing in VMs and a loss of 19% performance in multi-core activities (which is my whole reason for going with Apple in the first place).
While the prices can only get better and the performance gaps will not get any greater, it's tax season and I'm going to put my return to good use while I still have it. Apple has come a long way since the beginning and I plan on sticking with them until SkyNet...
Notes:
I didn't include any 13" MBP because... well... dual core... the end.
The benchmarks came from the three most recent pages for each model of 15" MacBook Pro from the GeekBench 3 postings and were compared to 32-bit and 64-bit single core and multi core benchmarks.
The prices reflect real-time prices on Apple.com/store and in the refurbished section. [I applied the education/educator discount for an extra $200 off the MSRP]
Prices do not include tax.
What do you guys think?
I have the Excel spreadsheet to add more numbers if anyone has a different/better benchmarking program.
I put a lot of time and energy into this article, so if you wouldn't mind voting/repping/+1'ing me to gain a little standing in the forums, Id really appreciate it
As you can see from the table, I compared all of the average benchmarks from different models again the 15" 2.3GHz MBP from late 2013. Then, I compared the average changes in performance, as well as input some preliminary pricing data for the models I could find. What it look like, is by paying an extra 8% to upgrade to the 2.6GHz chip, I'll be gaining an extra 8-9% performance in 64-bit OS. If I were to downgrade to the 2.0 GHz model, I would save 21-23% on cost with only a 8% drop in performance for single-core activities. The real issue for me with that is the lack of a discrete video card for any graphic-intense processing in VMs and a loss of 19% performance in multi-core activities (which is my whole reason for going with Apple in the first place).
While the prices can only get better and the performance gaps will not get any greater, it's tax season and I'm going to put my return to good use while I still have it. Apple has come a long way since the beginning and I plan on sticking with them until SkyNet...
Notes:
I didn't include any 13" MBP because... well... dual core... the end.
The benchmarks came from the three most recent pages for each model of 15" MacBook Pro from the GeekBench 3 postings and were compared to 32-bit and 64-bit single core and multi core benchmarks.
The prices reflect real-time prices on Apple.com/store and in the refurbished section. [I applied the education/educator discount for an extra $200 off the MSRP]
Prices do not include tax.
What do you guys think?
I have the Excel spreadsheet to add more numbers if anyone has a different/better benchmarking program.
I put a lot of time and energy into this article, so if you wouldn't mind voting/repping/+1'ing me to gain a little standing in the forums, Id really appreciate it
