15" RMBP Early 2013 vs Late 2013

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by LEOMODE, Dec 6, 2013.

  1. LEOMODE macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #1
    Battery life
    Late 2013 has 1-2 more hours on integrated graphics (please confirm in the dedicated graphic. I was told that both have same battery time if on dedicated)

    Heat issues
    Late 2013 has more heat (please confirm)

    Fan noise
    Late 2013 has more fan noise (please confirm)

    CPU power

    Late 2013 2.6 > Early 2013 2.8 > Late 2013 2.3 > Early 2013 2.7

    Graphic power

    750m = 650m same

    SSD speed

    Late 2013 a clear winner


    Please feel free to add comments and suggestions so I can update them. Hope to help potential buyers like me to decide to go for a new one or a refurb.
     
  2. red321red321 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2013
  3. bill-p macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2011
    #3
    Correction: 1 extra hour on integrated graphics only. Not 2.

    Seems the same.

    See above.

    Some slight adjustments + CPU codename, Mid 2012 models for reference, and also base models: (list goes from fastest to slowest)

    Early 2013 2.8 (3840QM)
    Late 2013 2.6 (4960HQ)
    Mid 2012 2.7 (3820QM)
    Late 2013 2.3 (4850HQ)
    Early 2013 2.7 (3740QM)
    Mid 2012 2.6 (3720QM)
    Mid 2012 2.3 (3615QM)
    Late 2013 2.0 (4750HQ)

    Late 2013 machines suffer from having less L3 cache, that's why the Early 2013 and Mid 2012 models are faster in some cases.

    Crystalwell (L4 cache) doesn't help much when most of it is clogged by the iGPU at almost any random time while you are viewing the desktop. Unless the dGPU kicks in, then in which case, L4 cache is freed up somewhat for the CPU to use, but then battery life would suffer.

    650M has better driver support by now, and it is still overclocked so it is actually faster in some cases.

    Yep.
     
  4. LEOMODE thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #4


    So if I were to buy Early 2013 with 2.8ghz CPU (8MB Cache), only except a 1-hour battery life and SSD speed, Early 2013 will be a better choice overall (better price, same heat/noise, faster cpu, better gpu)

    ----------

    I heard Late 2013 has more reported. Also TDP Early 2013 CPU's are lower than Late 2013 so generate less power.
     
  5. Silon macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2013
    #5



    The late 2013 also has better wifi capabilities (AC) and thunderbolt 2.
     
  6. LEOMODE, Dec 6, 2013
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2013

    LEOMODE thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #6
    Right but most casual users dont really get affected by that so didnt mention it hehe

    But yes, those 2 are definitely late 2013's
     
  7. VanillaCracker macrumors 68030

    VanillaCracker

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Location:
    Washington D.C.
    #7
    I think buying late 2013 is a waste of money for any casual user.
     
  8. LEOMODE thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #8
    Since late 2013 entry models are without dedicated graphics now,

    I think if you need a dedicated graphic for gaming or designing, I think early 2013 high end model refurb might be a better choice.

    Apple should've just included dedicated on all 15" models. It does not serve a purpose for just pricing it lower, since apple has a good refurb.
     
  9. VanillaCracker macrumors 68030

    VanillaCracker

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Location:
    Washington D.C.
    #9
    Yeah I think you'd be stupid to buy a new 2013 (low end model) when you can buy a refurbed early 2013 for much much less plus the 650M. I also think it's stupid to buy the high end 2013 model just to get the 750M because you're literally paying $600 more just to get the same card as the 650M which would be $800 cheaper in price.
     
  10. bill-p macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2011
    #10
    Well, as noted, there are other aspects that may affect the outcome of your choice.

    Where performance is concerned, though, it may be true that the 2 machines are completely identical or the 2012 may be faster (more mature software support if nothing else) in most cases... so if that's your primary concern, I guess you are right that the Early 2013 may be the better choice overall.

    And then price needs to be considered as well.
     
  11. dusk007 macrumors 68040

    dusk007

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2009
    #11
    While that is true because Apple crippled the 750M clock rate for some reason. You do get 1GB extra VRAM. Hitman Absolution on high textures looks beautiful and that hits 1500MB VRAM use easily.
    Afaik many professional apps rather like lots of VRAM too as workstation GPUs like Quadro usually come with more VRAM then geforce.
    In game it does offer some quality options that you won't get on 1GB VRAM or they mean a bigger performance cost or annoying texture popping on the 1gig card.
     

Share This Page