Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Notebooks > MacBook Pro

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Aug 30, 2013, 04:35 PM   #1
legaleye3000
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
2012 rMBP vs. 2013 rMBP: Any Difference?

The only difference I see is a bump in the cpu from 2.3 to 2.4ghz. Any other difference as to why I should get the 2013? Thanks.
legaleye3000 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 30, 2013, 04:39 PM   #2
B...
macrumors 68000
 
B...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
The inclusion of an LG SJA2 display, which fixed IR issues.
B... is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 07:57 AM   #3
legaleye3000
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
I wonder if direct refurbs from apple of the 2012 model include this...?
legaleye3000 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 09:20 AM   #4
NickPhamUK
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2013
Pretty much what poster #2 said, but I'd want to add in. The new technology in Haswell makes CPU more efficient, hence more battery power. We already see 12h (from 7h) battery life in MBA, so we can expect a bump to 9-10h in MBP.
NickPhamUK is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 09:26 AM   #5
legaleye3000
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Thanks Nick but I'm talking about 2012 vs. Early 3013 refresh
legaleye3000 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 09:29 AM   #6
petvas
macrumors 68040
 
petvas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mannheim, Germany
Send a message via AIM to petvas
Have a look here: http://9to5mac.com/2013/02/16/new-mo...nternal-parts/
__________________
petvas is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 09:39 AM   #7
NickPhamUK
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by legaleye3000 View Post
Thanks Nick but I'm talking about 2012 vs. Early 3013 refresh
Oh I'm sorry, didn't realise that. But aren't they in the same range of price? Shouldn't you just get the refresh? Or better, Apple is releasing Haswell soon (like in 2-6 weeks). You can either get the latest tech or get the previous gen with a hugely discounted price.
NickPhamUK is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 11:55 AM   #8
TheKDub
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickPhamUK View Post
Oh I'm sorry, didn't realise that. But aren't they in the same range of price? Shouldn't you just get the refresh? Or better, Apple is releasing Haswell soon (like in 2-6 weeks). You can either get the latest tech or get the previous gen with a hugely discounted price.
Looking specifically at the refurbs on apple's website for the 15" rMBPs, there seems to be a substantial price difference between the June 2012 and Feb 2013 models for the exact same specs (except for 0.1 GHz difference).

It's $1599 for 2012 (2.3GHz, 8GB Ram, 256GB SSD) vs $1869 (2.4GHz, 8GB Ram, 256GB SSD) for 2013. Is the +$269 really worth it to get the later refurb model?
TheKDub is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 12:25 PM   #9
Tavicu
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Romania
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheKDub View Post
Looking specifically at the refurbs on apple's website for the 15" rMBPs, there seems to be a substantial price difference between the June 2012 and Feb 2013 models for the exact same specs (except for 0.1 GHz difference).

It's $1599 for 2012 (2.3GHz, 8GB Ram, 256GB SSD) vs $1869 (2.4GHz, 8GB Ram, 256GB SSD) for 2013. Is the +$269 really worth it to get the later refurb model?
With the 269$ that you save you can buy Apple Care from B&H for 244$ and you still have some $ for a beer
Tavicu is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 03:35 PM   #10
ColdCase
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: NH
There were a couple threads on this back in Jan-Feb 2013 time frame. Those that upgraded thought the 2013 was much better than their 2012, but they generally had early 2012 models. The 2013 is a better machine especially at the high end, many small updates from the 2012 that help with cooling and performance in general, especially battery life some claim. Not sure how much difference it makes on the low end. Not all 2013s came with the SA2, I believe it wasn't till early March that they started putting those into the BTO ones.

Difference may be subjective but I don't know of anyone that thinks the 2013 is a step down.

Oh deriving real performance from Ghz differences went out with the stone age. It is a CPU upgrade. Most benchmarks show a noticeable improvement. Worth it depend on what you use it for.
__________________
MiniServer (2012-2.3-i7-8-120SSD-1TBHD), rMBP15 (2014-SJE1-2.6-16-SM1024), LG27EA83D, SYDS212JK2, LaCie Big5s, MacBooks, iMacs, AppleTVs, Time Capsules, AEBSs, MacPro early 08, some older stuff.
ColdCase is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 03:51 PM   #11
vpro
macrumors 6502a
 
vpro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
But we all know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickPhamUK View Post
Pretty much what poster #2 said, but I'd want to add in. The new technology in Haswell makes CPU more efficient, hence more battery power. We already see 12h (from 7h) battery life in MBA, so we can expect a bump to 9-10h in MBP.
In real world use, that will mean a full 7 hours on next mbps, the previous gens you only get up to 6 hours full use in real world sense anyways. I guess the evolution of processors (for now until battery technology improves), is just to cater to limited battery capacity, so the focus on new processors makes sense to conserve battery power over more hours of use, but it just means the same every year. We won't really know until a bunch of us has got a hand on these new mbps to give them a good test drive to know if they will go 9 - 10 hours or if just at a reasonable full 7 hours. Remains to be tested in real world consumer and prosumer use.

???
__________________
15" 2.8Ghz 16GB, 1TB|17" 2.5Ghz 16GB, 520GB SSD+980GB RAID|Mac Pro 3.0GHz 32GB, 1TB
vpro is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 06:05 PM   #12
ColdCase
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: NH
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickPhamUK View Post
Pretty much what poster #2 said, but I'd want to add in. The new technology in Haswell makes CPU more efficient, hence more battery power. We already see 12h (from 7h) battery life in MBA, so we can expect a bump to 9-10h in MBP.
Haswell has something to do with that, depending how the MBA is used, but they also bumped the MBA battery capacity quit a bit.

I get 10+ hours out of my rMBP now without trying but long battery life is not a selling point to me (as long as it runs 5-6 hours). There are a few around here for which a longer battery life may actually be useful, but not the vast majority of MBP users. The MBA is a different story. My daughter only gets 9 hours out of her 2012 MBA 13 inch.
__________________
MiniServer (2012-2.3-i7-8-120SSD-1TBHD), rMBP15 (2014-SJE1-2.6-16-SM1024), LG27EA83D, SYDS212JK2, LaCie Big5s, MacBooks, iMacs, AppleTVs, Time Capsules, AEBSs, MacPro early 08, some older stuff.
ColdCase is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 06:16 PM   #13
MathBunny123
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada | Sibiu, Romania
Quote:
Originally Posted by legaleye3000 View Post
Thanks Nick but I'm talking about 2012 vs. Early 3013 refresh
I think the 3013 model is 7000% thinner, and has a 1024 core Intel i77 @3 Hecta-Hertz which is a bit faster than the 2012 model
__________________
Samsung Galaxy S4 Mini; iPod Touch 5th Generation [64GB]; MacBook Pro Retina 15.4'' Mid-2012; Surface 2 [32GB]
MathBunny123 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 06:40 PM   #14
legaleye3000
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Guys- I'm talking about the early 2013 refresh, not the Haswell model.
legaleye3000 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 06:48 PM   #15
NickPhamUK
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathBunny123 View Post
I think the 3013 model is 7000% thinner, and has a 1024 core Intel i77 @3 Hecta-Hertz which is a bit faster than the 2012 model
Yeah I realised that too but didn't want to be a douche. But your comment is still funny tho.
NickPhamUK is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2013, 09:06 AM   #16
MathBunny123
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada | Sibiu, Romania
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickPhamUK View Post
Yeah I realised that too but didn't want to be a douche. But your comment is still funny tho.
Ha ha, yeah, I try. :P
__________________
Samsung Galaxy S4 Mini; iPod Touch 5th Generation [64GB]; MacBook Pro Retina 15.4'' Mid-2012; Surface 2 [32GB]
MathBunny123 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2013, 07:56 PM   #17
thermodynamic
macrumors 65816
 
thermodynamic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by legaleye3000 View Post
The only difference I see is a bump in the cpu from 2.3 to 2.4ghz. Any other difference as to why I should get the 2013? Thanks.
Main CPU speed, of which 100MHz (2.3->2.4) is pointless for many reasons, is not going to fix the video slugging problem - I'd expect a faster GPU. Since cooling is no longer an issue with the rMBP cooling grilles and fan innovation, if the video sluggishness is dealt with I will definitely buy one. Hopefully it will allow the buyer to upgrade RAM on one's own...

Assuming the AC brick is still 85W, anything that requires more power isn't going to do any good. And I miss the 17" model having a larger battery, which is why the 2011 17" could outperform the 15" version despite having identical CPU and GPU chips... More battery to provide the needed current with...
__________________
Early-2011 17" MacBook Pro (2.2GHz 8GB DDR3-12800 (1600MHz))
2009 Mac Pro (Quad, 2.66GHz, 8GB (DDR3-8500 (1066MHz))
iPhone 3GS (32GB)
thermodynamic is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2013, 12:07 AM   #18
petvas
macrumors 68040
 
petvas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mannheim, Germany
Send a message via AIM to petvas
Quote:
Originally Posted by thermodynamic View Post
Main CPU speed, of which 100MHz (2.3->2.4) is pointless for many reasons, is not going to fix the video slugging problem - I'd expect a faster GPU. Since cooling is no longer an issue with the rMBP cooling grilles and fan innovation, if the video sluggishness is dealt with I will definitely buy one. Hopefully it will allow the buyer to upgrade RAM on one's own...

Assuming the AC brick is still 85W, anything that requires more power isn't going to do any good. And I miss the 17" model having a larger battery, which is why the 2011 17" could outperform the 15" version despite having identical CPU and GPU chips... More battery to provide the needed current with...
Mavericks fixes all performance issues once and for all. Video is smooth on my rMBP..
__________________
petvas is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2013, 02:35 AM   #19
Ploki
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by thermodynamic View Post
Main CPU speed, of which 100MHz (2.3->2.4) is pointless for many reasons, is not going to fix the video slugging problem - I'd expect a faster GPU. Since cooling is no longer an issue with the rMBP cooling grilles and fan innovation, if the video sluggishness is dealt with I will definitely buy one. Hopefully it will allow the buyer to upgrade RAM on one's own...

Assuming the AC brick is still 85W, anything that requires more power isn't going to do any good. And I miss the 17" model having a larger battery, which is why the 2011 17" could outperform the 15" version despite having identical CPU and GPU chips... More battery to provide the needed current with...
You don't even have a 15" rMBP yet you yack on about video slugging. Please people, 100x worse cards were able to output to 3x full HD monitors which is roughly a megapixel more. video sluggishness was due to crappy implementation and its all fixed in 10.8.3. my 2012 2.7 works like a charm.

And no, replaceable ram will not see its grand return.


17" battery was 95Wh, the same as 15" retina. So no idea what are you on about "more bettery to provide the needed current with", especially considering they both use 85W power supplies as well.
Also, constant PSU and better performance indicates advancements in hardware design. You know, like engines of todays car can pull of many more mpg despite the same power-rating and displacement as 20y old fuel-guzzlers?

That's some nice misinformed post you managed to pull off.
Ploki is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2013, 03:20 AM   #20
M5RahuL
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NJ [will always be home ] ... Denver, CO
Zero difference, in my experience and I have an August 2012 built rMBP.

Get the 2012 model, unless a .1 Ghz speed increase is worth spending an extra $270 to you.

Also, if you get the 2.7 Ghz processor, the 2012 version has an extra 2MB of cache VS the 2013 version, since we are looking at 0.1 Ghz differences

Honestly, go for the 2012 model, get AppleCare from B&H Photo for a greatly discounted price over Apple, and enjoy your savings !!
__________________
Late '13 15" rMBP 2.3'16' 512 iPad Air LTE Mini Retina LTE
FS Mid '13 MBA i7`8`256 w/AppleCare thru late 2016! ; Mid '13 13" rMBP 2.4' 8'256 ; iP5S Unlocked ; Note 3
M5RahuL is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2013, 12:44 PM   #21
stevemiller
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Just to tag on a similar question, I have an early 2011 mbp, the quad 2.2. I usually do a computer refresh every few years, around the time my AppleCare is due to expire.

Previously, I've enjoyed some massive jumps in processing power each time I update: going from a 2005 ppc machine to a 2008 intel was a huge leap, and similarly the jump to a quad in 2011.

Obviously some of the main updates of late have been to stuff like the screen, form factor and (upcoming with Haswell) battery life. Those are all awesome updates, don't get me wrong. But given that I use my computer as a production machine, my main justification has always been the speed boost.

Since 2011, it feels like the improvements to raw performance have been fairly incremental; benchmarks I've seen (even rumoured ones for Haswell) seem to be only 25% above my current system. Again, it's not nothing, but its certainly not the doubling and tripling I'd seen in the past.

So I guess my question is basically if the Moore's law days are essentially behind us, and performance improvements will be more modest moving forward, or its just a lull right now where battery and efficiency has been the focus, and there is are rumblings of a more substantial speed boost on the horizon.

Thanks!
__________________
macbook pro | iphone | ipad
stevemiller is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Notebooks > MacBook Pro

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Difference between rMBP 2012 SSD and rMBP 2013 SSD emporiky MacBook Pro 8 May 8, 2014 03:15 PM
FCP X Share performance - rMBP 2012 vs rMBP 2013 DavidDoyle Digital Video 7 Jan 12, 2014 01:47 PM
Late 2013 rMBP Airport Card in 2012 rMBP bluechair1984 MacBook Pro 0 Nov 7, 2013 07:49 AM
Mid-2012 rMBP 15 vs Early-2013 rMBP 15? locoboi187 MacBook Pro 10 Mar 12, 2013 08:10 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:00 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC