16" MBP: i7 or i9?

[Zerosopher]

I bought the 16” i7 with 32 gig ram 1TB SSD and 8 gig 5500 and returned it for the i9 variant because it was worth the money to not have that nagging at me for the next 3-5 years.

At first I had the i7 in my mind. I never thought the 16 inch models will not be available in my country this month so I thouht I would have some time reading the reviews before it is available. But, this morning, the Apple Store in my country went live and the price is not much different. I was hesitated to go for i7 or i9 since I might not be able to make the most of it. Thank you. After reading your comment, I went to the i9. I did not regret that. ☺️

 

[alfogator]

Latest news: My i9 has been shipped. So the edu restrictions don't seem to be handled too strictly.
If shipping takes the same time as for the i7, I'll have it on Monday. Great, that gives me enough time to compare both.

that's going to be interesting

 

[vebruce123]

bro，my 16 inch macbook is still on the way,i7 mode with 32 gb ram and 5500m,for video editing wise,some visual effex stuff as well on after effect and apple motion,which one matters more,ram or cpu,is it necessary to upgrade to i9，the real world difference

 

[iemcj]

bro，my 16 inch macbook is still on the way,i7 mode with 32 gb ram and 5500m,for video editing wise,some visual effex stuff as well on after effect and apple motion,which one matters more,ram or cpu,is it necessary to upgrade to i9，the real world difference

Real world? For the i7 to i9 95% of peoples daily use it won't be any differnet. Really the only times it'll matter is when doing maxed out stuff like exporting a ton of raw files from lightroom, and at that point you're looking at something taking 3:41 to export vs 3:59.

For the gpu there will be zero actual tangible change unless you're working with extremely large (we're talking 50mp+) images in lightroom.

For ram, that matters less now than it ever did. The read/write speed of the internal drive is so fast that it's really not a big deal if you exeed the available ram and it needs to use the internal disc. It was a huge slow down in like 2010 but those days are long gone.

 

[vebruce123]

Real world? For the i7 to i9 95% of peoples daily use it won't be any differnet. Really the only times it'll matter is when doing maxed out stuff like exporting a ton of raw files from lightroom, and at that point you're looking at something taking 3:41 to export vs 3:59.

For the gpu there will be zero actual tangible change unless you're working with extremely large (we're talking 50mp+) images in lightroom.

For ram, that matters less now than it ever did. The read/write speed of the internal drive is so fast that it's really not a big deal if you exeed the available ram and it needs to use the internal disc. It was a huge slow down in like 2010 but those days are long gone.

thanx a lot,bro
U mean there's really no big issues as far as real world performance goes
so is it perfect to keep i7 model ，keep it in mind i am a bit heavy user on video editing

 

[gxxr]

Real world? For the i7 to i9 95% of peoples daily use it won't be any differnet.

That's obvious, half of those 95% are probably fine with a tablet instead of a laptop.
But I didn't ask about 95% of people, I asked about my use case specifically.

Really the only times it'll matter is when doing maxed out stuff like exporting a ton of raw files from lightroom, and at that point you're looking at something taking 3:41 to export vs 3:59.

Well yes, top-end performance is only relevant when that top-end performance is required. Also obvious.
These kind of differences are what I was asking about, but noone seemed to have any numbers. Are your numbers based on experience with MBPs specifically?

For the gpu there will be zero actual tangible change unless you're working with extremely large (we're talking 50mp+) images in lightroom.

I'm planning on keeping the machine for 3-5 years. Pretty sure I'll be working with ~50mp files by then. I'm working with them even today for brenizer images, stacked panoramas, etc.
But I mostly upgraded the gpu because it was a relatively cheap upgrade and it's supposed to matter more for Adobe Premiere.

For ram, that matters less now than it ever did. The read/write speed of the internal drive is so fast that it's really not a big deal if you exeed the available ram and it needs to use the internal disc. It was a huge slow down in like 2010 but those days are long gone.

RAM is still orders of magnitude faster. I have an SSD now, and I have too little RAM. So I know that while the statement ("matters less than it did") may be technically correct, RAM only doesn't matter while you have enough of it.
[automerge]1574838266[/automerge]

U mean there's really no big issues as far as real world performance goes
so is it perfect to keep i7 model ，keep it in mind i am a bit heavy user on video editing

He didn't really say that. He said that users who use their MBP as a fashion accessoire in the coffee shop are fine with the i7. I'm not yet sure it applies to you or me. People who work with their machines may see a 20 second difference as significant.

 

[vebruce123]

That's obvious, half of those 95% are probably fine with a tablet instead of a laptop.
But I didn't ask about 95% of people, I asked about my use case specifically.



Well yes, top-end performance is only relevant when that top-end performance is required. Also obvious.
These kind of differences are what I was asking about, but noone seemed to have any numbers. Are your numbers based on experience with MBPs specifically?



I'm planning on keeping the machine for 3-5 years. Pretty sure I'll be working with ~50mp files by then. I'm working with them even today for brenizer images, stacked panoramas, etc.
But I mostly upgraded the gpu because it was a relatively cheap upgrade and it's supposed to matter more for Adobe Premiere.



RAM is still orders of magnitude faster. I have an SSD now, and I have too little RAM. So I know that while the statement ("matters less than it did") may be technically correct, RAM only doesn't matter while you have enough of it.
[automerge]1574838266[/automerge]


He didn't really say that. He said that users who use their MBP as a fashion accessoire in the coffee shop are fine with the i7. I'm not yet sure it applies to you or me. People who work with their machines may see a 20 second difference as significant.

so hope U could.do.a.detailed comparison between the two for editing usage once get the.i9 mode

 

[gxxr]

so hope U could.do.a.detailed comparison between the two for editing usage once get the.i9 mode

It won't be scientific or valid for everyone, but I will try to do some comparisons.
Currently I'm a bit stressed about protecting a MBP I'm probably going to send back from the cat, who has recognized it as something new in her territory and thus should be poked and scratched at and walked over. (Hasn't happened, but attempts have been made) How are my nerves going to handle that for another week?

 

[vebruce123]

It won't be scientific or valid for everyone, but I will try to do some comparisons.
Currently I'm a bit stressed about protecting a MBP I'm probably going to send back from the cat, who has recognized it as something new in her territory and thus should be poked and scratched at and walked over. (Hasn't happened, but attempts have been made) How are my nerves going to handle that for another week?

ha ha ha
that's funny,i had such case back 2 years ago
god bless your mac

 

[tekmoe]

When I bought my 17" back in 2010 I had to choose between the i5 and i7. I never anticipated on using it for as long as I did but sure am glad I went with the i7. I think had I gone with the i5 I probably would have replaced it much sooner. Even the i7 was starting to show its age recently but to get almost 10 years out of a computer is almost unheard of. Fingers crossed my new 16" i9 can do the same.

All that said - go with the i9.

 

[MrGunnyPT]

When I bought my 17" back in 2010 I had to choose between the i5 and i7. I never anticipated on using it for as long as I did but sure am glad I went with the i7. I think had I gone with the i5 I probably would have replaced it much sooner. Even the i7 was starting to show its age recently but to get almost 10 years out of a computer is almost unheard of. Fingers crossed my new 16" i9 can do the same.

All that said - go with the i9.

I bought my 2017 TB 13" I'm replacing it now with the 16" bloody thing is always at 60c when working connected to an external display and have 2 VMs running lol

 

[Krevnik]

I originally grabbed the "in-store BTO" SKU, and took it back for the i7. No regrets, but I have a couple reasons:

1) I was hoping I could use it as a Mac mini replacement with a dock, but it's just too loud when under load for me. I'd rather have the Mac mini running long encodes/etc, even if it's 5-10% slower.
2) The i7 is still very fast for the things I need it for away from the desk: compiling my smaller Swift projects is about 7% faster on the i9. Photo editing is similar. But the cost difference was huge. And even including the cost of the Mac mini I've been using, I'm still coming out ahead.

If you do tend to drive machines into the ground though, I would recommend spending a bit more for sure. And in the face of the other things like RAM, the CPU isn't that expensive for what you get. But I'd personally value RAM more, TBH.

 

[filmak]

I bought my 2017 TB 13" I'm replacing it now with the 16" bloody thing is always at 60c when working connected to an external display and have 2 VMs running lol

Is it running cooler (with 2 VMs) without the external display? (are these win10 VMs?)
[automerge]1574883981[/automerge]

I originally grabbed the "in-store BTO" SKU, and took it back for the i7. No regrets, but I have a couple reasons:

1) I was hoping I could use it as a Mac mini replacement with a dock, but it's just too loud when under load for me. I'd rather have the Mac mini running long encodes/etc, even if it's 5-10% slower.
2) The i7 is still very fast for the things I need it for away from the desk: compiling my smaller Swift projects is about 7% faster on the i9. Photo editing is similar. But the cost difference was huge. And even including the cost of the Mac mini I've been using, I'm still coming out ahead.

If you do tend to drive machines into the ground though, I would recommend spending a bit more for sure. And in the face of the other things like RAM, the CPU isn't that expensive for what you get. But I'd personally value RAM more, TBH.

So is the i7 running cooler than the i9, with and without an external display?

 

[hajime]

For ram, that matters less now than it ever did. The read/write speed of the internal drive is so fast that it's really not a big deal if you exeed the available ram and it needs to use the internal disc. It was a huge slow down in like 2010 but those days are long gone.

Hoe effective it is to use internal or thunderbolt external ssd as extra memory for a 64GB MBP 16"?

 

[Krevnik]

So is the i7 running cooler than the i9, with and without an external display?

These machines are going to run hot under load, period. The CPUs and GPUs these days are configured to ramp up to max thermals if there's a load and running faster/hotter will help.

Yay Turbo Boost.

EDIT: Apple can configure a power limit if they want, at the cost of max performance, to get better temps and noise, but they don't.

 

[MrGunnyPT]

Is it running cooler (with 2 VMs) without the external display? (are these win10 VMs?)
[automerge]1574883981[/automerge]

So is the i7 running cooler than the i9, with and without an external display?

It only runs between 40-50c when not using a VM or connected to an external display.

I'm never coming back to the 13" ever again, really poor performance outside "office suite"

 

[impulse462]

i7 and i9 have the same TDP. my maxed out i9 runs quite cool at idle

 

[Krevnik]

i7 and i9 have the same TDP. my maxed out i9 runs quite cool at idle

TDP is getting to be less useful these days. Despite being 45W, I've seen spikes over 80W and sustained of 60W under boost. These chips eat all the thermal headroom they can under load.

I'd hope an idle CPU is cool, or there's something seriously wrong.

 

[impulse462]

TDP is getting to be less useful these days. Despite being 45W, I've seen spikes over 80W and sustained of 60W under boost. These chips eat all the thermal headroom they can under load.

I'd hope an idle CPU is cool, or there's something seriously wrong.

i mean sure, thats because the TDP is unlocked. but whether youre pushing a 6-core i7 or 8-core i9 in this chassis both are going to reach 90+. at that point what difference does it make? going from quad to 8-core has monumentally improved my computer experience. i guess someone who isn't gonna push their computer that hard is better off with the i7 just because its cheaper, but at least in my experience, the i9s run quite cool.

 

[gxxr]

Newest findings: After two days, the battery life increased significantly. Activity monitor showed something like 6 hours remaining on a full charge on the first day, 8 hours on the second day, but today it's suddenly showing 16 hours while idle and goes down to about 14 while browsing the web. Still only guesstimates, don't have time to run it for 10 hours straight during the week, but with that battery life I'd be happy.
(I have read that people think the system is doing some indexing during the first days, but I thought it wasn't because I couldn't see any load anywhere.)

 

[filmak]

These machines are going to run hot under load, period. The CPUs and GPUs these days are configured to ramp up to max thermals if there's a load and running faster/hotter will help.

Yay Turbo Boost.

EDIT: Apple can configure a power limit if they want, at the cost of max performance, to get better temps and noise, but they don't.

It only runs between 40-50c when not using a VM or connected to an external display.

I'm never coming back to the 13" ever again, really poor performance outside "office suite"

Thank you both!

i7 and i9 have the same TDP. my maxed out i9 runs quite cool at idle

i mean sure, thats because the TDP is unlocked. but whether youre pushing a 6-core i7 or 8-core i9 in this chassis both are going to reach 90+. at that point what difference does it make? going from quad to 8-core has monumentally improved my computer experience. i guess someone who isn't gonna push their computer that hard is better off with the i7 just because its cheaper, but at least in my experience, the i9s run quite cool.

Thank you impulse462!

 

[BeatWilson]

interesting

 

[-narcan-]

So is the i7 running cooler than the i9, with and without an external display?

Yeah i7 is the one to get if you want it quiet / cooler. I9 better performance, but sounds like a jet engine on these 16” machines

 

[newtperc]

Look up Max Yuryev and Max Tech on YouTube. He has done 6 or 7 videos about this very topic

 

[filmak]

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Just-...6-with-Core-i9-Radeon-Pro-5500M.443889.0.html

reports that "After our first day of testing, we cannot notice any issues with macOS. Temperatures stay below 40 °C even under load and the fans are quiet as usual." (this is for an i9 2.3)