1,1 or 1,3

[Dane95]

Hi Macrumors

I'm in the market for a new Macbook and have fallen in love with the new Macbook. Since 8 GB of RAM comes standard, there's no decision to make regarding RAM, and I'm confident 256 GB of storage would be enough for me. But I'm insecure about the processor. Is there a noticeable difference between the 1,1 and the 1,3 processor? The price difference is noticeable for sure ...

Background: I'm in law school and my usage limits to web-surfing, office, mail, calendar and other basic tasks. No video or photo editing but I'd rather be able to have Word, Excel, Mail, Safari open at the same time.

 

[Niarlatop]

According to your usage, you should go with the 1.1 GHz without an hesitation.

 

[keysofanxiety]

Specs & CPU benchmark below. Higher is better.

The 1.1GHz is an Intel Core M (M-5Y31) - 2484. Comparable benchmark score to i3-2310M.
The 1.2GHz is an Intel Core M (M-5Y51) - 3043. Comparable to i3-3110M.
The 1.3GHz is an Intel Core M (M-5Y71) - 3130. Comparable to i5-2410M or i3-5015U.

So basically the entry level CPU is about as powerful as a 2nd gen mobile i3.

The 1.2GHz and 1.3GHz are practically identical in terms of performance (that being, a 2nd gen mobile i5/3rd gen Intel i3/5th gen ultra-low power i3).

My suggestion - neither of the three options is a powerhouse. But it's worth the jump from 1.1 to 1.2. 1.2 to 1.3, not so much.

For reference, the 2010 13" MacBook Pro (Core 2 Duo) has a CPU benchmark of about 1500, which is half as powerful as the 1.2GHz model MacBook.

 

[Niarlatop]

My suggestion - neither of the three options is a powerhouse. But it's worth the jump from 1.1 to 1.2. 1.2 to 1.3, not so much.

For reference, the 2010 13" MacBook Pro (Core 2 Duo) has a CPU benchmark of about 1500, which is half as powerful as the 1.2GHz model MacBook.

For his usage he won't tell the difference between the 3 CPUs.
Note that in some reviews, the 1.1 GHz even beats down the 1.2 and 1.3 versions, because it's able to stay in TurboBoost longer. Anyway we are speaking of small % of performances over intensive tasks here, which he won't perform.

The best perk in going with the 1.2 GHz version is that you get the 512 GB SSD alongside the upgrade, but then again he's confident that 256 GB is enough.

In his place I would take the 1.1 GHz and consider upgrading it with a future version, if the future versions offers anything worth upgrading to the OP.

 

[Dane95]

Thanks guys, I'll go with the entry level and save the money.

 

[MH01]

The 1.2 cause of the storage bump. Don't bother with the 1.3, though storage goes fast these days.

Or entry level as you decided on.

 

[MH01]

Specs & CPU benchmark below. Higher is better.

The 1.1GHz is an Intel Core M (M-5Y31) - 2484. Comparable benchmark score to i3-2310M.
The 1.2GHz is an Intel Core M (M-5Y51) - 3043. Comparable to i3-3110M.
The 1.3GHz is an Intel Core M (M-5Y71) - 3130. Comparable to i5-2410M or i3-5015U.

So basically the entry level CPU is about as powerful as a 2nd gen mobile i3.

The 1.2GHz and 1.3GHz are practically identical in terms of performance (that being, a 2nd gen mobile i5/3rd gen Intel i3/5th gen ultra-low power i3).

My suggestion - neither of the three options is a powerhouse. But it's worth the jump from 1.1 to 1.2. 1.2 to 1.3, not so much.

For reference, the 2010 13" MacBook Pro (Core 2 Duo) has a CPU benchmark of about 1500, which is half as powerful as the 1.2GHz model MacBook.

Can I ask where those benchmarks came from? From my research the 1.2 and 1.3 are not that close.

 

[keysofanxiety]

Can I ask where those benchmarks came from? From my research the 1.2 and 1.3 are not that close.

cpubenchmark.net

 

[MH01]

cpubenchmark.net

cheers.