Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

idyll

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jun 5, 2007
502
19
I have the opportunity to buy either one of these machines for the same price. I use a NAS for my storage needs so the space issue is not that big of a deal - I am much more concerned with performance.The 3.3GHz model also has a m395 video card vs the m390 in the 3.2GHz model. My primary use will be working in Photoshop and Illustrator.

Which would be better performance wise, the 3.3GHz with the 2TB Fusion drive or the 3.2GHz with a 256GB SSD drive?
 
I just bought the 3.3ghz and 2TB hd. The better video card is important for graphics. I think this is the better setup. I couldn't bring myself to go the Adobe subscription route. So, I bought Affinity Photo instead. It works well for my nonprofessional needs.
 
Which would be better performance wise, the 3.3GHz with the 2TB Fusion drive or the 3.2GHz with a 256GB SSD drive?

I would think overall performance of the OS will be better with the M395 version because of the better GPU. I found the Fusion storage to be near the performance of a full SSD. Of course with any data blocks sitting on the spinning platter, it will be slow, but my usage was such that I didn't notice it.

While I disagree with opening up a new computer, you can change out the Fusion drive if you need too, but you cannot change the GPU, so from that perspective the M395/2 TB Fusion drive may be the best long term solution
 
I would think overall performance of the OS will be better with the M395 version because of the better GPU. I found the Fusion storage to be near the performance of a full SSD. Of course with any data blocks sitting on the spinning platter, it will be slow, but my usage was such that I didn't notice it.

While I disagree with opening up a new computer, you can change out the Fusion drive if you need too, but you cannot change the GPU, so from that perspective the M395/2 TB Fusion drive may be the best long term solution


Ahh interesting. Does OS X rely that heavily on the video card, and if so, in what instances? I have been using a MacBook Pro with Iris Pro graphics and find it to be pretty fluid, but I do not game.
 
It seems like nearly everything you do in OS X utilizes the video card, certainly any type of animation.

A decent video card is necessary for OS X to run correctly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlexGraphicD
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.