13" rMBP 2.9ghz: To upgrade or Not to Upgrade to New Haswell Version

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by fskywalker, Oct 28, 2013.

  1. fskywalker macrumors 65816


    Nov 6, 2009
    I have a like new max out 2012 rMBP (2.9/8/768, 3 yr Applecare, 25 cycles on battery) and am tempted to sell it (can get around $1900- $2,000 for it) to buy a new Haswell rMBP in the 2.6/8/512 configuration. Does anyone knows how does the Geekbench of rhe new Haswell I5 2.6ghz compares to my I7 2.9 ghz machine? I dont really need the extra 256gb SSD size right now so may accept such storage downgrade.

    Would such machine upgrade makes sense to you? I run regular Office software and use it for general Internet browsing, no gamming at all.
  2. treyjustice macrumors 65816


    Jun 14, 2009
    I wouldn't upgrade. Yours does everything perfectly fine, you wouldn't notice an improvement.
  3. winterny macrumors 6502

    Jul 5, 2010
    What geekbench score do you get?

    I get 8825 on a 2.6/16/1TB (with a bunch of safari windows open).

    The main improvements seem to be:
    * Thinner
    * 1TB vs 768GB Max SSD
    * 16GB vs 8GB Max Ram
    * cooler (lower TDP)
    * longer battery (up to 9 hours quoted -- my battery life estimates at 11 hours with screen brightness at 75%)
    * faster GPU (though still not 'fast')

    Likely the CPU in your system is slightly faster or about the same as this generation
  4. fskywalker, Oct 28, 2013
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2013

    fskywalker thread starter macrumors 65816


    Nov 6, 2009
    I got 2891 on single core and 5960 multi-core on the 32bit version; 2963 and 6186 respectively in the 64 bit version. I found my results very low versus your scores and did some research on the Internet. Found this benchmarks from the Geekbench software on Internet (http://www.primatelabs.com/blog/)



    Based on these results my 32 bit single score (2891) is similar to the one in the benchmark (2792); the same happens to my multi-core result (5960) versus the one on the benchmark (5775). The report says there is not a big difference on my 2.9 versus the new higher end 2.8, so looks like my 2012 machine, at least based on speed, is a keeper!

    What test did you run in your machine?

Share This Page