Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Faster CPU (2014) or more RAM (2013)?

T

Taylorman22

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Aug 22, 2014
4
0
With this week's sale on the 2.8 i5 13.3 MBP (8gb, 512mb sad) and a 10% Best Buy coupon, I was set to purchase one tomorrow for $1630 out the door. However, I just read that the ram is soldered on and the SSD is also proprietary.

So, I looked at the apple refurb page and there is an October 2013 2.6 i5 with 16gb RAM and 512 ssd for $1599. From what I can tell in the benchmarks, the 2013 2.6 is not a whole lot slower than the 2014 2.8. But, this has double the RAM, which will probably serve me better, longer.

Is there any reason why I should buy the 2014 model over the older model with more RAM? Would the older model with more ram, in the real world, run and process faster than the newer one with less ram?
 
duervo

duervo

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2011
2,466
1,232
In most cases, there is little reason to get the faster CPU/less RAM over the slower CPU/more RAM. Get the latter.
 
B

blooperz

macrumors 6502
Dec 10, 2013
287
1
I highly doubt you'll notice a difference between 8 gig and 16 gigs of RAM unless your one of the 2% of power users that actually need it. The diminishing returns on the benefit from increasing RAM kicks in hard after the 8 gig mark. That being said since it seems your only considering these 2 options and don't mind spending that sort of money on a dual core machine, I would go with the 2nd one. You'll probably never notice the difference between the 2 processors in side by side usage, unless your running some sort of benchmark test.
 
Y

yjchua95

macrumors 604
Apr 23, 2011
6,725
233
GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
Taylorman22 said:
With this week's sale on the 2.8 i5 13.3 MBP (8gb, 512mb sad) and a 10% Best Buy coupon, I was set to purchase one tomorrow for $1630 out the door. However, I just read that the ram is soldered on and the SSD is also proprietary.

So, I looked at the apple refurb page and there is an October 2013 2.6 i5 with 16gb RAM and 512 ssd for $1599. From what I can tell in the benchmarks, the 2013 2.6 is not a whole lot slower than the 2014 2.8. But, this has double the RAM, which will probably serve me better, longer.

Is there any reason why I should buy the 2014 model over the older model with more RAM? Would the older model with more ram, in the real world, run and process faster than the newer one with less ram?
Click to expand...

I'd go for the late-2013 variant with 16GB of RAM, because the 2.6GHz i5-4288U and 2.8GHz i5-4308U perform almost identically.

The RAM would be far more beneficial.
 
maflynn

maflynn

macrumors Haswell
May 3, 2009
73,461
43,381
You didn't state how you'll use the computer so its impossible to say if you need the ram or not.

Most people don't need the 16GB of ram, and based on then generality I'd recommend the best buy. Why buy a slower computer just because it has more ram that you may not even use.
 
Meister

Meister

Suspended
Oct 10, 2013
5,456
4,310
maflynn said:
You didn't state how you'll use the computer so its impossible to say if you need the ram or not.

Most people don't need the 16GB of ram, and based on then generality I'd recommend the best buy. Why buy a slower computer just because it has more ram that you may not even use.
Click to expand...
Maflynn hits the nail on the head. The 2014 is technicaly faster and noone knows what apps you are running.
 
T

Taylorman22

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Aug 22, 2014
4
0
Ugh....I can't believe i forgot to mention how I'll be using it. I would prefer quad core, but portability is huge to me, so it needs to be 13".

I will be using it for general purpose stuff like word, excel, internet, etc...same as everyone. In addition, I'll be using quite a bit of Photoshop, some Final Cut Pro and iMovie, as well as Apple Mainstage with a midi controller for live music.

I would prefer both, but am operating within a budget. My thought is that in this case more memory would be better over the long haul. From what I can tell on benchmarks, there isn't much difference between the CPUs at this level.
 
Y

yjchua95

macrumors 604
Apr 23, 2011
6,725
233
GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
Taylorman22 said:
Ugh....I can't believe i forgot to mention how I'll be using it. I would prefer quad core, but portability is huge to me, so it needs to be 13".

I will be using it for general purpose stuff like word, excel, internet, etc...same as everyone. In addition, I'll be using quite a bit of Photoshop, some Final Cut Pro and iMovie, as well as Apple Mainstage with a midi controller for live music.

I would prefer both, but am operating within a budget. My thought is that in this case more memory would be better over the long haul. From what I can tell on benchmarks, there isn't much difference between the CPUs at this level.
Click to expand...

You're right. The difference between the 2.6GHz and 2.8GHz is almost nonexistent.

Go for the late-2013 with 16GB of RAM.
 
simonsi

simonsi

Contributor
Jan 3, 2014
4,851
735
Auckland
maflynn said:
Most people don't need the 16GB of ram, and based on then generality I'd recommend the best buy. Why buy a slower computer just because it has more ram that you may not even use.
Click to expand...

I disagree, there is almost nothing to separate the CPU's so the "faster" one will still be almost no different now or in 5yrs.

The RAM on the other hand looks far more likely to be beneficial over the same time span, more Apps or more memory-hungry apps, who knows but there is considerable possible upside to the extra ram but almost none on the extra cpu speed.
 
acctman

acctman

macrumors 65816
Oct 26, 2012
1,323
856
Georgia
go for the speed, ram is not needs as much as it use to... remember in 2005 when systems need 16-32gb of ram to do what a 8gb system can do now. go for speed...
 
T

taelan28

macrumors regular
Jan 15, 2014
130
6
acctman said:
go for the speed, ram is not needs as much as it use to... remember in 2005 when systems need 16-32gb of ram to do what a 8gb system can do now. go for speed...
Click to expand...
i couldnt be further from a novice on computers and software as i havent really used word in 5 years but WHAT!?!?
 
M

MannyBothans

macrumors newbie
Aug 23, 2014
9
0
To throw another wrinkle in, I ordered the exact same 2013 refurb last week, and it arrived with an upgraded processor anyway- 2.8ghz i7. Obviously it's a crapshoot, but it stands to reason that many purchasers who loaded up on RAM and SSD would also upgrade the processor when they ordered. Mine only had 4 charging cycles when I got it.
 
TechZeke

TechZeke

macrumors 68020
Jul 29, 2012
2,454
2,287
Dallas, TX
For your uses, you won't benefit from 16GB of RAM. However, given the how close in performance of the CPUs are, 16GB would be the better deal.
 
T5BRICK

T5BRICK

macrumors G3
Aug 3, 2006
8,313
2,387
Oregon
Go with a refurb 2013 2.6GHz/8GB/512GB model and save $160. Use that money towards AppleCare and beer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom