13" rMBP enough for my Lightroom needs?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by JarScott, Apr 16, 2013.

  1. JarScott macrumors 68040

    JarScott

    Joined:
    May 19, 2011
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #1
    Hello! Having recently landed myself a job and my birthday fast approaching, I'm trying to decide what I want to buy. I'm now in a far greater position to afford a Retina MacBook Pro but my budget still only stretches as far as a 13".

    I've been using a custom built PC which I built for myself about a year ago with the use of games and Photoshop in mind. It now seems I'm mostly using it for general web browsing but still using Lightroom normally which consists of using it about 4 times a month max to process my DSLR shots. So photography certainly isn't a way of income at the minute, it's mainly for my own artistic pleasure and for my visual media A-Level. Plus Windows is getting tired and tedious, being a user of iPad and iPhone I feel I'm missing out on Mac.

    My question today is, would the base model 13" rMBP with the i7 processor (approx £1,330 w/edupricing) be enough for my Photoshop needs? I rarely use the full version of Photoshop and mainly stay within Lightroom. Would the dual core processor be enough to process 16MP files smoothly? Is 8GB of RAM enough for my needs? Will I have any issues with the recent problems of the HD 4000 graphics struggling with the Retina display? Are there any image retention problems in the 13" just like in the 15"?

    Maybe some of those questions only I can answer, but I was hoping to get some advice from the pros of MacRumors as to whether this would be a good investment.
     
  2. B... macrumors 68000

    B...

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    #2
    Should be enough in terms of processor. Looks at your RAM uses on your PC and see how much you are using, but since it is not very often, I would say investing in 16 GB would be a relative waste of money, but if you want to get the most years out of your computer...

    The 13" has had IR along with the 15", but it is not all-reaching and you can always return/exchange. HD 4000 is a pretty capable card, and the stuttering is a software optimaztion issue within OSX. Lightroom should be fine.
     
  3. JarScott thread starter macrumors 68040

    JarScott

    Joined:
    May 19, 2011
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #3
    Hmm. My issue with getting 16GB is it would mean a move to a 15" and I wouldn't be able to afford it. But it does bring along the fact that 8GB isn't exactly future proofing a £1,300 laptop. I guess by the time I really need more, I'd be in a better position to afford it. For what I need right now, this is probably fine? Good to hear the stuttering is a software optimisation issue and should be fixed at some point. Plus I can always, as you say, take it back to Apple should I notice IR.
     
  4. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #4
    I found that in using Lightroom, my 13" MBP was a little small - screen wise. I think the processor will be fine, but screen size could be an issue
     
  5. B... macrumors 68000

    B...

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    #5
    I think, as Maflynn said, the 15" might be more suitable for Lightroom. And it is definitely worth waiting until you can afford to get it if you can. You will gain a quad-core processor and the discrete GPU and a bigger screen, all of which are great for Lightroom and more if your needs evolve. You also gain the possibility for 16 GB of RAM. If you can wait, therefore, you should wait. There would be two options after this time: you can afford the 15" or a new 13" will come out with 16 GB option.
     
  6. Santabean2000 macrumors 68000

    Santabean2000

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    #6
    The 13"rMBP can be scaled to the size of a 15" MBP fairly easily without losing much readability through text/element shrinkage.

    Hopefully on the next gen Apple will offer more RAM to go alongside improved graphics (and quad core anyone..? [he says wishfully]).

    That'd be sweeeeeeeet.:D:apple:
     
  7. B... macrumors 68000

    B...

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    #7
    No, no quad core for 13" probably, because the heat would go way out of control and the heat sink would not be able to keep up.
     
  8. Orlandoech macrumors 68040

    Orlandoech

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Location:
    Salt Lake City, UT
    #8
    Yes the 13" rMBP can handle LR just fine.

    People who dont think it can are just plain silly... well, I wish I could say it, less... nicely.
     
  9. Devilcup macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2013
    #9
    Have been running LR3 in my mac mini mid 2010. As compared, LR3 on 13" rMBP runs faster than my mac mini. i even put ssd and 8gb of ram into my mini.
     
  10. Santabean2000 macrumors 68000

    Santabean2000

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    #10
    And Apple really want to keep a clear distinction in their portable line-up...

    Honestly, if quad and a discrete GPU can run in tandem in 15", its not beyond the relm of possibility to include a quad in the 13".
     
  11. erikbailey macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    #11
    Speaking only for myself, my 3.0GHz rMBP 13 is *spectacular* at running Lightroom. As in - it's a true joy to use it. This was the primary reason for the new machine (replacing an old Dell D830) and I have no complaints. None.

    I am using one resolution up from Best for Retina, since I like getting more of the toolbars on the screen without scrolling, and no matter how hard I look, I simply cannot tell the difference between scaled and non-scaled resolutions (this is a good thing!).

    Direct answers to your questions - no IR, graphics are fine, 8GB is plenty (the ONLY reason you would need >8GB is if you are running multiple VMs), dual procs are fine (I have a Canon 7D and the speed is just fine). For me, the 13" size is *perfect* and I wouldn't want to go any bigger.

    Go for it!! --Erik
     
  12. JarScott thread starter macrumors 68040

    JarScott

    Joined:
    May 19, 2011
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #12
    Thank you for your reply. Very helpful and great to hear from someone with complete experience in the matter. In terms of which one to go for, I see you have the second from bottom 13" with the 3.0GHz i7 processor, seems a good choice but I don't need the extra SSD space. So I'd choose the base model with the 2.9GHz i7...0.1GHz difference so I presume performance will be identical.
     
  13. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #13
    Bigger screen is always better for those kinds of applications when you're already restricted to notebook sizes.

    There are 35W quad cores. They're fairly expensive, and I think they're just locked down versions of the standard types. They don't seem to be frequently used, but that could always change.
     
  14. B... macrumors 68000

    B...

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    #14
    I know of course that having a quad core with 35W is possible, but I don't think Apple would use the two (?) Ivy Bridge/ Haswell ones that are available because the quad core and discrete GPU are the dividing factors between the 13" and 15". Haswell might have 100 possible chips to choose from; the doesn't mean Apple is 50X more likely to include it in their new models.
     
  15. Krazy Bill macrumors 68030

    Krazy Bill

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    #15
    I process about 30 (paid) photo events per year using LR and an early 2011 MBP (non-retina). Also a heavy photoshop user. The 13" has plenty of muscle for large RAW files. A fast SSD makes all the difference.

    Skip the 15" MBP... use the savings for a good external monitor. You'll have portability and a nice editing station all in one.
     
  16. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #16
    One was a later revision of the other. The earlier one might still ship as Apple does with the cMBP models. The rmbps updated to the second Ivy revisions that came out early Q4. I don't think Apple will do that either. They like to limit the number of configurations and bundle upgrades. It's probably more profitable and easier from a service standpoint.
     
  17. erikbailey macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    #17
    You are welcome! The difference between the 2.9GHz and 3.0GHz is the "late 2012" vs. "early 2013" model. It's very small, but some searches here will show you that there are indeed some differences. I wanted to make sure that I wasn't limited by SSD space (since it is nonexpandable) so the 256GB was important, so that made it a no-brainer to get the latest model (since the 2.9GHz/8GB/256 and the 3.0GHz/8GB/256 are exactly the same price).
     
  18. tomtakesphotos macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    #18
    This is really interesting. I'm currently looking at the 2012 rmbp and upgrading the 2.5ghz i5 to the 2.9ghz i7 and keeping the 128gb SSD. I also use lightroom and photoshop mainly.

    Does anyone know if the upgrade to i7 will actually affect LR and PS performance significantly? Sometimes I do batch editing on 20-50 files but being a bit computer illiterate, I'm not sure if the processor affects this or the RAM.
     
  19. JarScott, Apr 19, 2013
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2013

    JarScott thread starter macrumors 68040

    JarScott

    Joined:
    May 19, 2011
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #19
    I'm in the same predicament. I'm trying to save as much money as possible and I've found a great deal on the base model 13" with the 2.5GHz i5 and would love some information on how that would affect the use within Lightroom and/or Photoshop. I rarely do batch edits but when I do it's only on a maximum of about 20 photos at once. Anyone have an answer to this? However I do occasionally create panoramas and HDRs, but I'm not worried about having to wait for those to complete.
     

Share This Page