13" MacBook Pro (Crippled?)

[matjamca]

Is the new 2016 13" MacBook Pro crippled power wise by just having a Dual Core CPU and Iris Pro Graphics?

What advantage does having a Quad Core CPU and discreet AMD graphics chip have in comparison?

Can the 13" MacBook Pro handle 4K Video and apps like Final Cut Pro just as well as the 15" MacBook Pro? Or are there any significant drawbacks?

Why does the 13" MacBook Pro have to make do with Iris Graphics and a Dual Core CPU?

Sorry if any of these questions sound lame. I currently have a 2012 15" MacBook Pro with below spec-sheet. I think I'd prefer a 13" model, but don't want to end up worse off.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Current MacBook Pro specs ...

MacBook Pro 10,1

CPU
2.6 GHz Intel Core i7
22nm Ivy Bridge 3720QM
64-bit
TurboBoost 2.0 up to 3.6GHz
L2 Cache: 256k x 4
L3 Cache: 6MB shared

Display
15.4" LED Backlit
IPS Technology
2880x1800 (220 ppi)

Graphics
Intel HD Graphics 4000
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M

HDD
512GB Apple SSD SM512E
6GB/s

Memory
16GB DDR3 1600MHz

Connectivity
Wi-Fi: 802.11 a/b/g/n
Bluetooth: 4.0
USB 3: x2
Thunderbolt: x2
HDMI
Audio: In/Out
SDXC Card Slot

Battery
95Wh
Up to 7 hours Wireless Web Browsing
MagSafe 2 Charger

 

[Ashka]

The 15" MBP has been Quad core for years and the 13" has been Dual core.. in other words no change..

 

[matjamca]

The 15" MBP has been Quad core for years and the 13" has been Dual core.. in other words no change..

Hi Ashka,
I'm aware the 13" has always had Dual Core. My question relates to how they compare with the 15" model I have now.

 

[cambookpro]

A 12" MacBook can edit 4K video if you really want. Be under no illusion that if you buy a new 13", in pure spec and Geekbench score terms, it will be slower. (Though in day to day use, the faster SSDs may make it feel more nippy.) But you're gaining a more portable laptop which is much smaller and therefore has very different thermal constraints. It's wrong to say a 13" MBP is crippled when you're not comparing like-for-like.