These machines are not built for next gen graphics on max out settings. I don't care which processor you are running. The bottleneck is in the GPU when it comes to max out graphics.
2.3 vs 2.6 wont see any difference in this case.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
15" MacBook Pro Retina 2.3GHz vs 2.6GHz
- Thread starter SimonFi
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
These machines are not built for next gen graphics on max out settings. I don't care which processor you are running. The bottleneck is in the GPU when it comes to max out graphics.
2.3 vs 2.6 wont see any difference in this case.
I opted for the 2.6GHz in the end to use my buddy's 15% to its full potential... But honestly, it's more of a comfort/buyers' remorse avoidance tactic than anything, as I highly doubt I'll see a real-world improvement in UI smoothness or anything like that. I just didn't want to regret getting the "2nd best" processor.
Topics I've hit, some have had great life, some appear to have been low at the beginning, but have improved very quickly after a few cycles.
Original report of low battery life, but later improved to 9 hours and 11 minutes.
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1662777/
A case of improvement, but at least getting over 7 hours and 20 minutes, might have improved since then. (Either way its better than last years advertised 7 hours)
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1662044/
Much newer post polling the battery life people are getting out of the 2.6:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1664752/
Majority are getting 8+ hours.
Thanks Starfyre! Still pretty interesting since battery life really seem to vary drastically...
Would be interesting to know a little more about the CPU temperature. If the temperature is also higher and the fans therefore noisier it would be a no-brainer for me to go for the 2.3GHz CPU.
Would be interesting to know a little more about the CPU temperature. If the temperature is also higher and the fans therefore noisier it would be a no-brainer for me to go for the 2.3GHz CPU.
If you look at threads on the 2.3, there are users reporting less than advertised battery life so it is moot. I still wait for more real world results, but there are many posters with the 2.6 that say it runs cool. Don't take my word for it, I'll let you dig up those threads this time.
Last edited:
I have not checked that yet but I'm mostly plugged in most of the time. If I got enough for a flight across country than I'm happy. I'm a heavy user so it's mostly plugged in when I do real work.
Yes, I think it's worth getting the faster model if you want to get your tasks done faster.
I don't see much of a heat and power consumption difference between the base and higher model. The faster processor gets things done faster, so perhaps consider that when the processor will drop to idle before the other which is power savings as well.
For regular tasks you most likely won't noticed a difference, but for heavy work there will be more noticeable difference.
And if anyone thinks a few minutes doesn't matter, consider how close some schedules are these days, a few minutes here and there will add up.
I don't see much of a heat and power consumption difference between the base and higher model. The faster processor gets things done faster, so perhaps consider that when the processor will drop to idle before the other which is power savings as well.
For regular tasks you most likely won't noticed a difference, but for heavy work there will be more noticeable difference.
And if anyone thinks a few minutes doesn't matter, consider how close some schedules are these days, a few minutes here and there will add up.
Given the lousy quality control apple seem to have in combination with all the screen issues they are unable to solve since the first generation retina hit the market in 2012, does it even make sense to buy a BTO model?
I mean if I get one of those many faulty units with all the well-known problems I can't just go to the store and swap it out, right? How will that be handled by apple in this case? Will they just send my computer in for repair? As an engineer there is no way I could possibly spent a day without my laptop...
I mean if I get one of those many faulty units with all the well-known problems I can't just go to the store and swap it out, right? How will that be handled by apple in this case? Will they just send my computer in for repair? As an engineer there is no way I could possibly spent a day without my laptop...
hi folks,
any idea on the delta on battery life between the 2.3 and 2.6Ghz high end-2013 ?
In june, 2012 , Engagdget did a similar comparison with the mid-2012 models in a standard rundown test, which involves looping a video with WiFi on and the display set at a fixed brightness, and noticed that 2,3 Ghz lasted 9h22, 1h30 more (!) than the 2,6 Ghz model (7h49).
Will Haswell shorten the difference ?
If there is nearly no difference in term of battery life on the end-2013, i'll drop an extra $200 for sure and choose the 2.6 Ghz.
I' m sure Anantech will review the 2 models soon.
any idea on the delta on battery life between the 2.3 and 2.6Ghz high end-2013 ?
In june, 2012 , Engagdget did a similar comparison with the mid-2012 models in a standard rundown test, which involves looping a video with WiFi on and the display set at a fixed brightness, and noticed that 2,3 Ghz lasted 9h22, 1h30 more (!) than the 2,6 Ghz model (7h49).
Will Haswell shorten the difference ?
If there is nearly no difference in term of battery life on the end-2013, i'll drop an extra $200 for sure and choose the 2.6 Ghz.
I' m sure Anantech will review the 2 models soon.
Anandtech actually only has the 2.3GHz as far as I know, so I wouldn't expect any comparisons with other Haswell models right away.
Interestingly, I did a comparison with my friends machine and in an interesting discovery, at the same 5 cycles of charge.
Battery on the 2.3 = 8 hrs+ (fluctuated up and down, went up to 10+ hours at one point)
Battery on the 2.6 = 6hr 30 (fluctuated up and down)
Doing the exact same thing on both, a combination of installing software, watching a movie, running benchmark tests... in the end result, they both appeared to drain battery at the same pace. In fact, doing the same thing on both, the 2.3 actually ran out a few minutes faster than the 2.6 by about a few minutes. This is assuming low to moderate workload and not high fan crunching workloads (except for when benchmarks were run)
Wait - how can the 2.3 possibly run out faster with 8-10h compared to the 6hr30 of the 2.6?
I just talked to an Apple representative. He told me that the difference is insignificant and almost not measurable (both, heat and battery wise)....
I agree with the Apple representative, it is insignificant. I was very surprised myself. I knew Haswell would bring optimizations, but the results were even more supportive of it.
The majority of the time during my test involved playing a movie. The heat of the 2.6 reported by iStat Pro is actually lower than that of the 2.3, and that held true when playing the video for a quarter of the screen, then web browsing on both machines.
My guess is as the average clock of the 2.6 is higher, what may be considered as a "heavier" moderate workload for the 2.3, is less of a deal for the 2.6. As such, the 2.3 has to work a little harder to support the video, whereas the 2.6 considers the video to require less effort than the 2.3.
Last edited:
Was the heat lower because the fans were spinning on higher speeds? Or - in other words - was the machine still silent?
How does it come that the 2.3 GHz shows 10hr of battery life in your example and then runs out faster than the 2.6 model which only shows 6.5hr? That's a little weird, isn't it?
How is the UI lag? Same for 2.3 and 2.6, or better with the 2.6 model?
After your tests, what would be your suggestion if the 200$ don't matter? Go for the 2.6?
Was the heat lower because the fans were spinning on higher speeds? Or - in other words - was the machine still silent?
How does it come that the 2.3 GHz shows 10hr of battery life in your example and the runs out faster than the 2.6 model which only shows 6.5hr? That's a little weird, isn't it?
How is the UI lag? Same for 2.3 and 2.6, or better with the 2.6 model?
After your tests, what would be your suggestion if the 200$ don't matter? Go for the 2.6?
Both machines are slient, can't hear them even though 2.3 was generating more heat and draining more power than the other during video watching process. (bear in mind the more heat is just 2-3 degrees, so it is not significant by any measure. the fan speeds were slightly faster on the 2.3.. both machines were silent still). Most of the time though at idle, the 2.6 was a few degrees higher than the 2.3, but the fan speeds were generally lower unless when benchmarked.
When doing benchmarks... the 2.6 had a few hundred higher than the 2.3 (was also 4-5 degrees higher). The 2.6 may have been slightly louder than the 2.3, but recovery is something that the 2.6 was really good at. As soon as the tests were finished the 2.6 immediately kicked to a lower fan speed than the 2.3, whereas the 2.3 maintained a higher overall fan speed. Temperature-wise, even though the 2.6 was 1-2 degrees higher after the test than the 2.3... the fan speeds on the 2.6 were lower than the 2.3. (maybe some offset factor by Apple or by Intel to balance out processor vs fan speed?)
I agree the battery life report is weird, but I think it comes down to the following:
1- What is piece of cake work for 2.6 requires more effort on 2.3.
2- What is not piece of cake work for either processor, the 2.6 gets done faster.
3- Though fanspeed is variable, the 2.6 fan speed tries to be lower quicker than the 2.3 when it can.
UI lagwise, I found it to be about same and no difference.
I was really on the fence about 2.3 and 2.6. I think whether $200 is worth it is up to you, but after trying it out for myself, I am glad to have the 2.6. Even though there was no UI Lag on both, I noticed applications generally launched faster and installed faster. What was even nicer was despite doing that, the battery life ran out with only a few minutes difference with the 2.6 coming ahead (by a very few minutes).
Last edited:
thanks @starfyre for the data facts and analysis.
My point is that battery life is key on portables, and the 25% drawback diff between the 2.3 and the 2.6 (500mn vs 390minutes) is more important than the 10% CPU*speed benefit for me. ( i m not too sensitive on the heat issue except while computing at bed ¨-)
I dunno it the 25% difference will remain on the long term.
I' d be happy to get some more advanced tests on the battery life for the 2 models.
My point is that battery life is key on portables, and the 25% drawback diff between the 2.3 and the 2.6 (500mn vs 390minutes) is more important than the 10% CPU*speed benefit for me. ( i m not too sensitive on the heat issue except while computing at bed ¨-)
I dunno it the 25% difference will remain on the long term.
I' d be happy to get some more advanced tests on the battery life for the 2 models.
I DID IT! Just ordered the 2.6 GHz model. I hope you were right and the battery life is almost identical to the 2.3....
Congrats! My 2.6 arrives Friday...!!!
----------
Staryfyre, can you look at the data you posted above and make sure you didn't list the stats backwards? Everything you said following the two bullet points suggests the 2.6GHz had slightly longer batter life, but those two bullet points have the 2.3GHz machine outlasting the 2.6GHz by 1.5+ hours...
2.6 here, runs extremely cool, temps don't rise above 43°C even while stress testing.
It's also a very powerful machine!
It's also a very powerful machine!
Not backwards. The 2.3 had much more fluctuation in terms of the battery estimates, whereas the 2.6 was more consistent with the varying amounts of tasks I performed on it. Maybe if I just stuck to web browsing without flash the 2.3 may have gotten more battery life, but the moment you max out brightness, battery-life has greater impact on the 2.6. Play a youtube video, the 2.3 had much bigger impacts. It seemed almost like the 2.6 was more conservative.
----------
Congrats! I'm sure you will love it (assuming your screen is even and looks white overall, creakless, etc.). I think battery management has really improved on Haswell, and it really varies based on how you use it. If you straight use the web browser without flash, maybe you could squeeze a little more out of the 2.3 than the 2.6, but for my testing, I was expecting more "work" on the processor, watching videos/multitasking while doing some work, in which the 2.6 seemed to handle better than the 2.3 for the possible reasons in my last post.
Simon, Im in the same situation... I want buy the new 15ich; my question for you is, how do you know that all the bugs of the first generation (ghosting, choppy scrolling etc.) are resolved now??? you mean the early 2013... but its seems than this later 2013 have some bugs too:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1660649/
How can I know that the machine that I buy are fixed? any serial number? any indicator?
Also that depends of the place that I buy, I plan buy it on macmall.com they give free shipping and tax free...
any help?
Honestly - I think there is just no way to know whether you'll get a good one or not. Personally I think Apple is only one of many computer companies nowadays. The "best quality in the industry" days are simply over. Nonetheless if you want to use OSX you basically have to buy a mac... that's why I ordered one. But I definitely don't expect the quality I was used to get from apple a few years ago...
But if you only want a laptop with the power and display of the new macbook - but not necessarily OSX - take a look at the new Dell XPS. It really is an amazing machine with a stunning display (without all the problems)..
thanks, well my major issue reported to me is this:
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=18320573#post18320573
so bad for me that... and yes! is a shame about new apple, I miss the old apple when we brought quality... I still remember my mac classic II, I still have it! no issues after ALL this years!
about buy a dell or other pc? no thank you, I really hate windows, ubuntu etc... pc's etc... lol and really need an apple, so maybe I wait a little more for see if something change in the new macbook pro's, thanks
Its a little scary that the "Apple is the only product I will buy" "No thank you Windows" and "Apple makes the best products over Dell", etc. that really fuels Apple in continuing to do what they do and not spending time to really fix these issues in quality control. They may be or have been the best, but at the same time, they can afford to "cut corners" and have angry consumers that still buy their products.