2016 vs 2016 13" Pro Retina

A

AndrewCjDuong

macrumors member
I'm an avid photographer, however this won't be my main computer for editing. I'm looking for a portable computer for my traveling and editing of photos in raw format and will be using Lightroom and Photoshop heavily.

I can't decide between the 2016 non-touchbar 13" Retina or the 2015 13" Retina. Both will be 8gb RAM 256gb SSD. Spec wise, all I can tell is the new one is 2.0GHz while the old 2015 is 2.7GHz which seems to be a winner. I can deal with dongles, but I can't really tell which ones better than the other performance wise. Any suggestions?

Thanks!
 
AndrewCjDuong said:
I'm an avid photographer, however this won't be my main computer for editing. I'm looking for a portable computer for my traveling and editing of photos in raw format and will be using Lightroom and Photoshop heavily.

I can't decide between the 2016 non-touchbar 13" Retina or the 2015 13" Retina. Both will be 8gb RAM 256gb SSD. Spec wise, all I can tell is the new one is 2.0GHz while the old 2015 is 2.7GHz which seems to be a winner. I can deal with dongles, but I can't really tell which ones better than the other performance wise. Any suggestions?

Thanks!
Click to expand...
They boost to the same speed: 3.1 GHz. Don't give base speeds much thought. In Geekbench 4 the 2016 13" scores slightly higher than the 2015 13" despite being half the TDP (15W vs 28W). Plus the iGPU is supposed to be a lot better. Plus you get a faster SSD, a great screen (I have one and its stunning, very bright and colors pop) and better speakers. Only real downside is the lack of ports, but if thats not a problem for you it's really a no-brainer.
 
keviig said:
They boost to the same speed: 3.1 GHz. Don't give base speeds much thought. In Geekbench 4 the 2016 13" scores slightly higher than the 2015 13" despite being half the TDP (15W vs 28W). Plus the iGPU is supposed to be a lot better. Plus you get a faster SSD, a great screen (I have one and its stunning, very bright and colors pop) and better speakers. Only real downside is the lack of ports, but if thats not a problem for you it's really a no-brainer.
Click to expand...
Perfect. That's all the information I really needed. Thanks so much.
 
If the applications you use can utilise the GPU for processing, then the 2016 model will be better suited for your needs. If they rely more on CPU processing, the older model will most likely be faster under prolonged operation (the new one is less likely to maintain higher frequencies under prolonged load). But don't forget the incredible display you get with the new MBP! I think a photographer might benefit from it a lot.
 
leman said:
If the applications you use can utilise the GPU for processing, then the 2016 model will be better suited for your needs. If they rely more on CPU processing, the older model will most likely be faster under prolonged operation (the new one is less likely to maintain higher frequencies under prolonged load). But don't forget the incredible display you get with the new MBP! I think a photographer might benefit from it a lot.
Click to expand...
The new one keeps turbo speed for as long as you'd like it to. I just did a 15 min video conversion using Handbrake and it didn't throttle once :)
 
Perfect. Thanks for all the info guys. Just basing off the Apple site, it didn't give much information. I was skeptical on the no-sd card reader either, but found this all in one dongle on Amazon so it'll work just fine for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top