GPU is worse tho.
not true. base model was radeon 450, OP has 460 (built to order) and its better than the 555x
my experience as well.
GPU is worse tho.
not true. base model was radeon 450, OP has 460 (built to order) and its better than the 555x
[doublepost=1548424949][/doublepost]
my experience as well.
they offered me a refund for my issues with the i9. If they wrote it in email, i could put it online and people could jump on it and use it as proof for their cases, now i have no proof of anything that happened.
I would take 550 over 560, frankly. And I am not just saying this. GPU performance delta between the two is insignificant, in my opinion, but the machine would run a lot cooler, and the CPU would throttle less. Less heat generated by the 550 gives the i7's cores more headroom. This is what I value the most. The real jump in performance for GPU-intensive tasks is from 5xxx series to Vega series. Honestly, if I were buying entry level now I would get the 550.OP had issues during the warranty. Apple clearly should have replaced OPs machine earlier. And no, it is not entitled to expect a replacement to be on-par, spec wise, with what is being replaced. This is not generosity on Apples part, just fair business practice.
Replacement should be apples to apples (no pun...)
BTW (and I don't mean this as a political statement) - Donald Trump is objectively shameless and incapable of embarrassment so bad example
I would be pushing for what is best for my needs. The difference between what Apple is offering him and what he has is night and day. There is no comparison. The two machines are not on the same level. GPU speed only comes into play in vary narrow scenarios. Things like Final Cut, for example, do not really care about how beefy discreet GPUs are (to a degree). The QuickSync on the new 6-core i7 is what's important. Along with the number of cores and efficiency of those cores. In every day use the 560 is actually a liability, in my opinion-- it robs the CPU of headroom, and hampers my workflows, namely virtualization.
Especially, since it's a lousy $100 upgrade.My guess is the last thing they would want to do is refund the original machines purchase price when the difference in cost to Apple between the 555X and 560X is probably about $10. Give the man his GPU
the i7 2.2 with AMD 555x is the optimal MacBook Pro 15 to buy for general use. For me there are only 2 options: i7 2.2/16/555 or i9/32/V20 (I have the latter.). Nothing in between makes any sense.
Maybe. I think, if you are going to shell out all this money, you might as well go with the i9. And if budget is a consideration, the entry level is the best all around choice. If cooling was not a consideration, then entry level with a 560 would be a better choice, but seeing how performance improvements between 555 and 560 are minimal -- and are only meaningful in video creation workflows, where you would get a Vega 20 anyway -- and cooling takes a big hit, the stock 2.2 entry level machine makes the most sense to me. Let's be honest, once Vega 20 came out, it made 560x (and, frankly, Vega 16) a supernumerary option -- either get 550x and get the best cooling, or get Vega 20 and get the best performance.
The number of returned machines with 560X purchased 14 days before Vega 20 was announced must have been horrendous. And then apple had to deal with all the appeals to exchange for a better model from people outside of the 14 day window. The whole thing was so poorly handled. Dave Lee's review of the Vega 20 equipped MBP was titled ...So much better!...Multiple positive reviews from the army of prolific youtubers followed extolling the power efficiency and performance virtues of the Vega chip. If I had to be stuck with 560X, I would be furious.
I was
Good for you. My i9/32/v20/1TB is great! I have yet to see the flickering. Mine does not flicker. I tried multiple scaling modes. Temps are not bad. For what I do, Vega 20 makes perfect sense. Since I don't hit the video much, the i9 processor has more breathing room. And I do need the extra cache and higher core boost of the i9, since my workflows are not those of a video creator. My only beef with it is the screen. Why can't apple make sure that these damn screens have uniform backlighting and tint. Mine has the pink to blue tint shift from left to right that every 2018 15-inch exhibits. Thankfully, the problem with mine is minimal, and I think I can live with it.I was
but when the i9/560x was refunded (for issues, not vega) i didn't buy a vega.
15" was a botched release. throttling, the vega chip that should've been there to begin with (seriously, 560x is a 3y old chip) haphazardly announced a few months later... flickering displays. ouchy
the 13" and the mini+ultrafine that replaced the i9 both have better screens... I don't know what's with the 15" screens, i noticed something was off first time i tried it, compared to my old rMBP ... sure it had more contrast and colors, but viewing angle and look of it were kinda off.
I know. I have a 2.7/16/1TB 2018 13-inch as well. I take that one off site, because it's so damn portable. The screen has the best color uniformity I've ever seen on a MacBook, and I've had a ton. I mean, it's Eizo quality!
I run virtual machines. When I work with clients, is simply fire up a Windows VM that's joined to their domain and connected via VPN. I often run 2 or 3 VMs at a time. Perfect scenario for maximizing single core performance (while still leveraging multicore power) and only minimally getting video involved.
Oh, by the way, I know that most people will say that spending 4,500 on a machine to stand up VMs is silly, as a Windows laptop would do the same thing for half the price. I agree. And I have a windows laptop designed for that purpose. But using Windows causes reverse peristalsis in me. I hate the esthetic, I hate its innate lack of security, I hate the fonts, I hate most things about it. Ironically, my income comes primarily from clients with Windows environments. Oh, well. I have a robust Windows 10 box (i9 7900x-based) I built it to "play" and "test" games. I turn it on once a week to update it, and that's about it. Using Windows (no matter how hardened) in Internet facing scenarios is less than advisable, in my opinion, when other options, such as Mac OS, are available. So I will always use Macs for production. Windows is for VMs, which can be discarded when problems occur and replaced by copies.
Haha you don’t mind going off topic at all do you? Ah well it gives the visitor something interesting to read so just go ahead
