13": No-TouchBar 2.4Ghz/16Go RAM vs. TouchBar 2.9 or 3.1GhZ/16Go RAM

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by cc_zion, Nov 20, 2016.

  1. cc_zion macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2016
    #1
    Hi,

    I'm considering those two configurations for the 2016 MB Pro. I don't really need the Touch Bar per se. I saw on this website (https://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks) that there is not that much difference between the two configs, but I'm not very sure how to interpret those numbers.

    1) TouchBar: 2.9 GhZ or 3.1 GhZ / 16 Go Ram / 512 Go SSD

    2) No TouchBar: 2.4 Ghz / 16 Go Ram / 512 Go SSD

    According to the website the 2.4 GhZ (NTB) seems to be faster than the 2.9 GhZ (TB) and a bit slower than the 3.1 GhZ (TB). Could you tell me if this is the right way to interpret it ?

    Thanks, and looking forward to be part of the community here !
     
  2. AnatomyProf macrumors newbie

    AnatomyProf

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2016
    Location:
    Southern California
    #2
    I'm interested in any input on the 2.4 compared to the touchbar and compared to the 2.0
     
  3. Jker macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2016
  4. Stephencovar macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    Location:
    Pasadena, California
    #4
    I'm interested as well. I have the base model non-touch bar right now and I'm coming up on the end of my 14 day return/exchange window (I got the computer right before the holiday return/exchange). I am thinking of either maxing out the non-touch bar or maxing out the touch bar version.
     
  5. Patron_Saint Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2016
    #5
    There's minimal difference between the models in actual performance.

    Generally upgrade money is far better spent on RAM and SSD than processor. The processor upgrades are essentially diminishing returns. You spend more and more on minor performance bumps.
     
  6. Stephencovar macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    Location:
    Pasadena, California
    #6
    Which would you say is more "future proof"?
     
  7. BBD90 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    #7
    All of them are equally future proof. The performance delta is so small 99% of the people won't even notice it.
     
  8. alldat macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2008
    #8
    I'm thinking about getting a maxed out non touch bar model if the battery doesn't improve/get some kind of software fix. Would like to know how that compares to a maxed out 13in with touchbar
     
  9. AnatomyProf, Nov 20, 2016
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2016

    AnatomyProf macrumors newbie

    AnatomyProf

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2016
    Location:
    Southern California
    #9

    I'm not sure how useful the benchmarks (Geekbench - primate labs) are, but here they are (including the 2009 macbook I'm on for comparison).
    Model (Single Core) Multi-Core
    2009 MB 2.26 (1430) 2317
    2016 2.0 (3602) 7001
    2016 2.4 (3844) 7548
    2016 2.9 (3727) 7407
    2016 3.1 (3873) 7697
    2016 3.3 (3997) 7932

    It seems like the 2.0 to 2.4 jump is the most significant single jump (it is .4 vs the .2 jumps in the touch). Its $200 extra at B&H. I don't know if it is worth it, but I'd do 16GB RAM first. Not sure if an extra big drive is important for me as I'd like to store most of my stuff off the laptop, but needs will vary.
     
  10. BBD90 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    #10
    6-7% boost for $300. I'd rather save that money and buy an Apple Watch or something lol.
     
  11. AnatomyProf macrumors newbie

    AnatomyProf

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2016
    Location:
    Southern California
    #11
    RAM is the most important concern for any future proofing. You can (I've read) swap the SSD in the non-touch version. Of course you can just by external storage which keeps getting cheaper.
     
  12. BasicGreatGuy Contributor

    BasicGreatGuy

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2012
    Location:
    In the middle of several books.
    #12
    If you think your current needs might drastically change in 6 months, where you would be putting a lot more load and storage demands on s base model spec, upgrading to the next level is worth consideration.

    If you are trying to "future proof" for the sake of resale, you are wasting your money, in my opinion. You will not get west you paid for it on resale. it is asking to buying high and selling low.

    If you are trying to "future proof" upcoming technology, that too is a gamble, albeit one that is historically and incrementally slower with Apple, thus allowing one to use a Mac for many years to come.
    --- Post Merged, Nov 20, 2016 ---
    It does look fairly simple. That was one of the things that led me to be thankful I originally bought the non touch bar. After returning it today for the touch bar version, I realized that a lot of data that I have stored does not need to be readily kept on the Mac, thus allowing me to be comfortable (at least at this time) with the 256 GB stock version.
     
  13. fantasticman macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2015
    #13
    So if i were to go for the NON touch bar. I would go for the i7 2.4Ghz since the jump is quite significant and for the Touch Bar MBP the best value would be the i5 3.1Ghz ?

    I'm still undecided whether to go with the Ntb or the Tb version. Am thinking i would wait to see if Apple irons out the battery and Graphics glitch issue.

    I would be upgrading my RAM to 16Gb and SSD to 512 in whatever model i get. My question is

    For my usage ( Light photo editing in photoshop, quite a bit of video recording, conversion , rendering blah blah via Handbrake / Screenflicks and there's the usual streaming videos, downloading , web surfing )

    If i were to go with the Non Touch Bar Would the 2.0Ghz i5 be a good option or the different between 2.0Ghz and 2.4Ghz be a noticeable difference in usage?


    If i went with the Touch bar version. Should i go for the i5 3.1 Ghz or stick with the Base 2.9Ghz ?

    Any advice is appreciated. Thank you
     
  14. Garage Battle macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2007
    #14
    This is my take on it.

    Unless you're going to be hammering on that thing, the base model at 8gb ram is enough. If you're planning on doing VMs, then yeah, get the 16gb. The performance difference between the TB model and the nTB model is just not worth the shaky battery life (on the TB models).

    The nTB will run cooler, always use less power, always last longer. You owe it to yourself to look at the idle and TDP of all of the processors you're considering.

    Id rather have less in now, and whenever they refresh hopefully there will be an interesting spec jump.

    So far I havent felt my Best Buy base model slow down or get bogged down yet. It has spent most of its time so far in Windows tho (not by choice/by work).
     
  15. sn0warmy macrumors 6502a

    sn0warmy

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #15
    Not the exact scenario you are looking for, but I recently exchanged my base model 2.0GHz/8GB non-touch bar 13" for the 2.9GHz/8GB touch-bar. 13"

    While I am not a power user in terms of video/photo editing, I do consider myself to be a considerable multi-tacker on my machine. In typical daily use for work I have the following things going on:

    Chrome open with 6+ tabs (Google Analytics, Google Adwords, Omniture Analytics and various client websites)
    Safari open with 6+ tabs
    Email client with 4 different emails syncing and updating
    Rather large MS Excel documents with millions of data points and 10+ tabs
    Google Play Music desktop client
    Skype for business
    Google Adwords Editor
    Bing Ads Editor
    Wunderlist
    Calendar

    I initially replaced my mid-2015 15" 2.2GHz i7/256GB/16GB MPB with the non-touch bar 13" 2.0GHz i5/256GB/8GB MBP. In normal use with the above things going on, I was seeing some considerable lag while switching between apps and workspaces, which was getting quite annoying. I initially thought it was an issue with RAM and when I would monitor I was using anywhere from 6-7GB of the 8GB. The processor was often spiking to 90% active and spent most of it's time hovering around 40% - 50% active.

    I figured I needed to get a machine with 16GB RAM to solve the problem. But the more I read the more I learned that the RAM likely wasn't the issue and it had more to do with the 2.0GHz i5 and the slower RAM. So I went and exchanged the machine for the 13" 2.9GHz i5/256GB/8GB MBP. It's been a week now with the new machine and under the same usage I am experiencing considerably less lagging with the same usage. It is much smoother and better replicates the experience I had with my old 15".

    With all that in mind, I'd say that if I had gone for the non-touch bar 2.4GHz/8GB from the beginning I would have experienced similar great performance like I do with the 2.9GHz. The above benchmarks posted by someone else seem to help prove this.
     

Share This Page