13" or 15" rMBP

[iamthecondenser]

I'm wanting to upgrade to a newer rMBP and have a few questions.

I'm debating on getting either a 13" w/ 2.9 dual core or 15" w/2.2 quad core.

How much of a difference is there between the 13" 2.9GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 and the 15" 2.2GHz quad-core i7?

In layman's terms, what is the difference between a dual-core and quad core (besides being 2 and 4)?

Wasn't one of these supposed to be a Broadwell?

I am fine with a 13" screen size, but I'm mostly concerned with the processor.

I am going to be using this for recording music via Garageband, some light video editing, and some other things.

Thanks for your assistance!

 

[yjchua95]

I'm wanting to upgrade to a newer rMBP and have a few questions.

I'm debating on getting either a 13" w/ 2.9 dual core or 15" w/2.5 quad core.

How much of a difference is there between the 13" 2.9GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 and the 15" 2.5GHz quad-core i7?

In layman's terms, what is the difference between a dual-core and quad core (besides being 2 and 4)?

Wasn't one of these supposed to be a Broadwell?

I am fine with a 13" screen size, but I'm mostly concerned with the processor.

I am going to be using this for recording music via Garageband, some light video editing, and some other things.

Thanks for your assistance!

The quad core would be at least twice as fast, not to mention that the dGPU in the 2.5GHz variant can greatly speed up things like video rendering and gaming.

For your needs, the 13" should do.

 

[iamthecondenser]

The quad core would be at least twice as fast, not to mention that the dGPU in the 2.5GHz variant can greatly speed up things like video rendering and gaming.

For your needs, the 13" should do.

Thanks. Would the 2.2 Quad core still be faster?

 

[Studflower]

Thanks. Would the 2.2 Quad core still be faster?

Yup.

 

[yjchua95]

Thanks. Would the 2.2 Quad core still be faster?

Hell yes.

 

[hopefulhandle]

I would like to jump in here if I may; either the 13" or 15" MacBookPros and their respective connectors are more than capable to satisfy a garage band or free pro-tools setup, but the TB2 connector or the usb 3.0 will [both have them]determine how you capture your music. What Audio I/O are you using? That may also help solve this question.

 

[iamthecondenser]

I would like to jump in here if I may; either the 13" or 15" MacBookPros and their respective connectors are more than capable to satisfy a garage band or free pro-tools setup, but the TB2 connector or the usb 3.0 will [both have them]determine how you capture your music. What Audio I/O are you using? That may also help solve this question.

Thank you. I would be using an Apogee Jam to record guitar as well as a MIDI Synth. These would be plugged in through the USB.

Would BOTH the 13" and 15" rMBP work well w/ Logic Pro / ProTools if I decide to upgrade?

 

[Samuelsan2001]

Thank you. I would be using an Apogee Jam to record guitar as well as a MIDI Synth. These would be plugged in through the USB.

Would BOTH the 13" and 15" rMBP work well w/ Logic Pro / ProTools if I decide to upgrade?

They will both work well, audio programs really aren't that intensive. It will depend on how many tracks/instrument/ effects etc you are running as to how much power you need.

A quad core will be faster and handle more as logic uses those extra cores and the hyperthreading if I remember rightly.

In short the 15 inch will be more powerful and handle much more in logic but the 13 inch is still a very capable machine if the size and price are a better fit for you.

Remember you have a 14 day no questions asked return period, get one check it out if it's not enough then take it back and get the 15 inch.

 

[ZBoater]

Hell yes.

Faster at what? You need to be more specific, because for most regular uses this is not true. The app has to take advantage of the extra two cores.

 

[iamthecondenser]

Faster at what? You need to be more specific, because for most regular uses this is not true. The app has to take advantage of the extra two cores.

Faster and longer lasting. I am going to need this laptop to last me 5 or more years.

 

[newellj]

Faster and longer lasting. I am going to need this laptop to last me 5 or more years.

As posted above, it's not necessarily true that it's going to be faster - that depends on the program. And longer lasting - what do you mean? Longer lasting because it's more powerful? Same issue: if the program doesn't use all available cores, it won't run faster, and new programs aren't necessarily going to be optimized for quad core CPUs.

 

[iamthecondenser]

As posted above, it's not necessarily true that it's going to be faster - that depends on the program. And longer lasting - what do you mean? Longer lasting because it's more powerful? Same issue: if the program doesn't use all available cores, it won't run faster, and new programs aren't necessarily going to be optimized for quad core CPUs.

By longer lasting, I mean I'd like my computer to be able to effectively and efficiently run current and upcoming programs.

I guess you could say that I want to "future proof" it.

 

[snaky69]

By longer lasting, I mean I'd like my computer to be able to effectively and efficiently run current and upcoming programs.

I guess you could say that I want to "future proof" it.

Future proofing and computers is not possible.

Let's keep things in layman's terms: If you buy a computer, and said computer is powerful enough to fullfil your computing needs, then it will be powerful enough for as long as your needs do not change. Except in the event of a hardware failure, the computer will last as long as you want it to.

In essence, you decide your own computer's usable life.

 

[biposto]

By longer lasting, I mean I'd like my computer to be able to effectively and efficiently run current and upcoming programs.

I guess you could say that I want to "future proof" it.

The things you want to do you can do easily on the 2.7 13' mpb, get the 13 and put the money you save aside so you can upgrade maybe 2 years earlier to a totally new laptop with the latest technology.

 

[newellj]

By longer lasting, I mean I'd like my computer to be able to effectively and efficiently run current and upcoming programs.

I guess you could say that I want to "future proof" it.

Nothing about a quad core CPU is likely to future-proof the computer.

 

[hopefulhandle]

Thank you. I would be using an Apogee Jam to record guitar as well as a MIDI Synth. These would be plugged in through the USB.

Would BOTH the 13" and 15" rMBP work well w/ Logic Pro / ProTools if I decide to upgrade?

Both should run protools like a dream. if you end up getting a higher-end thunderbolt interface[they range from about $500-$5000] down the road you are going to appreciate the 15". Also if you are looking at more than 4- waveforms in a session you will also appreciate the bigger screen quite a bit. Most of those pro-tool type programs have tiny little buttons and meters that can be hard to see even on a 17" pc monitor. In fact usually most session work best with two screens, a mix window, and a edit window.

These are all things to think about.

 

[Ubele]

I went through the same thought process that you are, for similar use. I decided on the mid-range 2015 13" MBP because 1) it's smaller and lighter and 2) it's cheaper than the 15". For your uses, the 13" will be fine. Would the 15" be faster for some things? Yes, of course. Would you actually notice the difference and care about it in everyday use? Only you can answer that.

There's no such thing as "future-proof." Eventually, any computer will become too slow for what you want to do. "Too slow" is subjective. If you have the money, and you don't mind the extra size and weight of the 15", then get it. If you want something smaller and lighter, and budget is a concern, then get the 13". When it starts to seem to slow, sell it and get whatever new computer suits you best.

 

[iamthecondenser]

Thank you all very much! I've decided on purchasing the 13" rMBP and upgrading the processor to 2.9 (which I hope will be enough) and upgrading the RAM to 16 GB.