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

Can Someone Translate in "Real Terms" What More Ram & Ghz will Do For Me?

V

VideoNewbie

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Feb 6, 2009
476
6
im a student (with a lot of projects on my plate) i dont understand all this tech jargon can someone just simplify in real world terms (meaning describe a scenario where more RAM and more GHZ would be worth the $600 price difference)

i was currently interested in buying the 15 mb retina with 8gb ram & 2.3 ghz

but now it seems like with all things considered the 15 mb retina w 16gb ram & 2.6ghz might be better (Everyone is saying its worth it?) but 600 is a lot of money and i need help understanding in what scenarios the extra ram and extra ghz would be helpful

i will be editing a lot...short films, videos, pictures, running multiple applications at one time etc.

thanks so much everyone
 
For your brief description the base 15" mbp retina will do just fine.

You got hyper threading (8 threads on both models so thats good)

You loose some ssd space and some mhz, but for your needs, i dont think its worth it. For video editing needs, the base can do anything you throw at it.

Its a matter of it taking 30 seconds seconds longer to decode a film.


SSD will load all your apps quickly and u can run all your apps at once without problems.
The increased ram is only beneficial if you are doing heavy video or photo editing.
 
henrikrox said:
For your brief description the base 15" mbp retina will do just fine.

You got hyper threading (8 threads on both models so thats good)

You loose some ssd space and some mhz, but for your needs, i dont think its worth it. For video editing needs, the base can do anything you throw at it.

Its a matter of it taking 30 seconds seconds longer to decode a film.
Click to expand...

thanks i think i am a bit clearer-

what about the base model but with an upgraded 16gb of ram

how would that help me out in say real world terms?


is ghz and ram just more speed is that all it is? would upgrading from 8gb to 16 gb of ram be worthless if the ghz is still at 2.3ghz?
 
VideoNewbie said:
thanks i think i am a bit clearer-

what about the base model but with an upgraded 16gb of ram

how would that help me out in say real world terms?


is ghz and ram just more speed is that all it is? would upgrading from 8gb to 16 gb of ram be worthless if the ghz is still at 2.3ghz?
Click to expand...

Nope (for the last Q). I would say upgrade to 16gb of RAM (on the retina it seems non replaceable, unlike apples other laptops). As you cannot change it later, this would be the way to go.

Basically, more programs open = More RAM used. While 8 is enough for a basic user, 16 will keep it future proof, as newer programs generally use more RAM.

To me, I figure spend the extra $200 now instead of deciding later you wanted 16, because at that point you cant change it.


CPU Ghz, at base it is OK for most uses. If you are doing some serious photo/video editing/converting, or 3d rendering, a processor upgrade might be in order. But if you plan to use it for browsing/email 90% of the time, and just throw it the occasional video, you should be fine
 
get the 2.3. I guarantee you you will not be able to tell the difference from the 2.6 in real world applications. Not even during heavy gaming. The only time you can tell the two apart is when you sit down and measure the milliseconds between the two.

The more ram you have, the more stuff you can have open on the screen at once without slow down. For video work, that means you can have more of that temporarily stored in the ram, for faster access. Having said that, 8gb should be enough for you, as I do heavy graphics work here at work with 8gb, and I work with huge 1gig(storage size, not ram size) photoshop files, and I'm still able to have multiples files open, and have tons of other programs open in the background. Unless you're editing videos using Adobe After Effects, you probably won't need 16gb of ram..
 
Ocasional video?

What?

Its a quad core ivy bridge cpu, it can do any video tasks well. Just saying.

If you are going to upgrade your ram trough apple (all though i dont think you need it, 8gb is plenty enough) u should just go for the high end model, since its not that much more.

All though as i said, the base will suit you just fine.

Edit; it seems the poster above me edited his answer.
 
Make sure you order through the Apple Store for Education

VideoNewbie,

I just ordered my MacBook Pro with Retina display 15-inch through the Apple Store for Education.

(You also save $110 on the AppleCare Protection Plan)

15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display
2.6GHz quad-core Intel Core i7
Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
8GB 1600MHz memory
512GB flash storage

Back to School Gift Card $100 (FREE)
15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display $2,599.00 ($200 off)
AppleCare Protection Plan $239.00 ($110 off)

Cart subtotal $2,938.00
Savings $100.00
Estimated Tax $201.24
Order Total $3,039.24

Delivers Jun 22 - Jun 26
 
sunsluv said:
VideoNewbie,

I just ordered my MacBook Pro with Retina display 15-inch through the Apple Store for Education.

(You also save $110 on the AppleCare Protection Plan)

15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display
2.6GHz quad-core Intel Core i7
Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
8GB 1600MHz memory
512GB flash storage

Back to School Gift Card $100 (FREE)
15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display $2,599.00 ($200 off)
AppleCare Protection Plan $239.00 ($110 off)

Cart subtotal $2,938.00
Savings $100.00
Estimated Tax $201.24
Order Total $3,039.24

Delivers Jun 22 - Jun 26
Click to expand...



so u went for the 2.6 as opposed to the 2.3 u paid an extra 400 dollars for that feature so why didnt u also upgrade the ram from 8gb to 16gb?

----------
fiveainone said:
get the 2.3. I guarantee you you will not be able to tell the difference from the 2.6 in real world applications. Not even during heavy gaming. The only time you can tell the two apart is when you sit down and measure the milliseconds between the two.

The more ram you have, the more stuff you can have open on the screen at once without slow down. For video work, that means you can have more of that temporarily stored in the ram, for faster access. Having said that, 8gb should be enough for you, as I do heavy graphics work here at work with 8gb, and I work with huge 1gig(storage size, not ram size) photoshop files, and I'm still able to have multiples files open, and have tons of other programs open in the background. Unless you're editing videos using Adobe After Effects, you probably won't need 16gb of ram..
Click to expand...



so r u saying the $400 from 2.3 to 2.6 is just to save a few milliseconds?
-_- seems like a scam tactic to milk more money from consumers which is fine but i mean jesus why would anyone care if something is off by a few milliseconds let alone pay an extra 400 dollars for it?

is it just to give an internal feeling of satisfaction that "i have the best model available"? anybody else want to chime in and put their 2 cents ?

im curious what type of person doing what type of work would benefit from the 0.3 difference in ghz?
 
VideoNewbie said:
so u went for the 2.6 as opposed to the 2.3 u paid an extra 400 dollars for that feature so why didnt u also upgrade the ram from 8gb to 16gb?

----------





so r u saying the $400 from 2.3 to 2.6 is just to save a few milliseconds?
-_- seems like a scam tactic to milk more money from consumers which is fine but i mean jesus why would anyone care if something is off by a few milliseconds let alone pay an extra 400 dollars for it?

is it just to give an internal feeling of satisfaction that "i have the best model available"? anybody else want to chime in and put their 2 cents ?

im curious what type of person doing what type of work would benefit from the 0.3 difference in ghz?
Click to expand...

Bragging rights. Vanity. You said it your self. Someone just want the best.

Some people actually do need the extra processing power. But for 99% of the users in this forum. They dont need it.

But hey if you got the money go crazy, but i would save that money for something else. But then again, thats me.

----------
w00t951 said:
Gamers and others who render things in real time.

If you underclock a CPU by 300MHz while playing a game, you notice it.
Click to expand...

Since when are most games CPU intensive, hell most games still only take advantage of 2 cores. So no you wont notice it.

We already had this discussion last year when sandy bridge launched. Lower clocked i5 did better in some test then higher clocked HT enabled i7.

35049.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back