Numbers, just in case it helps. Based on the Geekbench scores, the 2.3 scores 3094 in single core while the 2.6 gets a 3334.
3334/3094 = 1.0775
So there's a 7.75% performance gap based on those numbers. Of course, there can be small variances in performance of individual chips simply due to thermal and voltage performance (some can boost slightly higher than others) so there's going to be some wiggle room here (for example, my 2.3 scored 3112). Calling it 7-8% probably covers that variance range.
2580 / 2400 (educational pricing) = 1.075, interestingly enough. So your price increases by almost exactly the same percentage as your performance. If that was intentional it's very clever.
If raw performance were the only concern I'd say that sounds like an acceptable deal. However keep in mind that the faster chip will also use more power and heat up a bit more (which in turn uses more power keeping the fans at higher RPMs). Usually this power increase is not linear with performance, since we're talking about the same CPUs (i7 Crystalwell) at different clock speeds. How much the impact actually is could only be answered by proper benchmarking, but I'd expect it to be higher than 7.5%.
I'd imagine the Iris Pro GPU has a similar performance gain (though you'd want to check the GPU clocks on Intel's site to be sure), however the 750m runs at the same clock speed with either processor. You may still see some performance advantages if your graphical application is CPU bound (Skyrim comes to mind when thinking about CPU-bound games).
I can't specifically give any advice on which one is better (I picked the 2.3 because I will be working on battery fairly often), but I thought a bit of analysis might help anyone trying to make a decision.