13" MBP non-retina i7 vs retina i7

[andiwm2003]

I noticed that the 13" MBP has different CPU options for the i7 for the retina vs the non retina versions (2.9-3.6 vs 3.0-3.5GHz).

Is the non retina version a older i7 version? and what is the performance difference between the two?

I don't need a retina mac because my eyes are not that good. so I could save a ton of money if the CPU's are comparable in performance.

 

[AppleGoat]

I noticed that the 13" MBP has different CPU options for the i7 for the retina vs the non retina versions (2.9-3.6 vs 3.0-3.5GHz).

Is the non retina version a older i7 version? and what is the performance difference between the two?

I don't need a retina mac because my eyes are not that good. so I could save a ton of money if the CPU's are comparable in performance.

You are correct, the non-Retina i7 is indeed an older version (Ivy Bridge) -- the Retina has a Haswell i7 and thus a bit faster.

Honestly, you're best off stick with the base CPU in either of these models. The improvements afforded by the i7 upgrades is rather inconsequential. All available CPU configurations are dual core, and that's all that matters.

 

[2984839]

The non-Retina is the 2012 model, so its CPU options are indeed older. The newer ones do have better performance if pushed hard, but there will be no noticeable difference at all between the two for the overwhelming majority of users.

 

[andiwm2003]

The non-Retina is the 2012 model, so its CPU options are indeed older. The newer ones do have better performance if pushed hard, but there will be no noticeable difference at all between the two for the overwhelming majority of users.

I agree that for most tasks i won't matter. However I usually keep my Mac's for five years or longer. Therefore I like to buy them maxed out. I'm a bit worried that eventually apple doesn't support the older CPU anymore.

There is a second parameter to this: the retina MBP seems to be much less heavy.

 

[TechZeke]

I agree that for most tasks i won't matter. However I usually keep my Mac's for five years or longer. Therefore I like to buy them maxed out. I'm a bit worried that eventually apple doesn't support the older CPU anymore.

There is a second parameter to this: the retina MBP seems to be much less heavy.

It is literally a 1 CPU generation difference. Despite it being nearly 2015, there are still no 5-Generation Intel MacBook CPUs. Although slightly updated, the current CPUs in the retina are just Haswell, only 1 generation ahead of Ivy Bridge in the 2012 non-retina.

In terms of differences between the retinas and non-retinas, the CPU is the last thing you should be comparing.

In terms of weight, my 15" retina weighs even a little less than the 13" non-retina, to give you an idea.

 

[redheeler]

I agree that for most tasks i won't matter. However I usually keep my Mac's for five years or longer. Therefore I like to buy them maxed out. I'm a bit worried that eventually apple doesn't support the older CPU anymore.

There is a second parameter to this: the retina MBP seems to be much less heavy.

There really isn't any reason to get the non-retina unless an optical drive is important to you. The retina is faster and lighter and will be much more future proof for any task not involving the optical drive.

 

[TechZeke]

There really isn't any reason to get the non-retina unless an optical drive is important to you. The retina is faster and lighter and will be much more future proof for any task not involving the optical drive.

Normally I'm an advocate for the non-retina, but at this point, 13" retinas can be found for same price as the non-retina which doesn't make it too worth it anymore, although I still find their upgradeability to be a selling point.