Difference b/t rMBP 15" (Mid 2012) 2.7Mhz vs. 15" (Early 2013) 2.7Mhz

You are comparing a top-of-the-line 2012 machine that has 8 MB of L3 cache, against a middle-of-the-line early 2013 machine with only 6 MB of L3 cache.

The 2012 model is superior.

The actual change from 2012 to 2013 was simply to increase the clock speeds by 0.1 GHz across the line, from 2.3, 2.6, and 2.7 to 2.4, 2.7, and 2.8 GHz.

 

I think to do a better comparisson would have to be the top of the line 2.7 model from 2012 (8MB cache) versus the 2013 2.8 model, which has a 8mb cache as well.

 

Yes, you should be comparing apples with apples. The BTO 2.8 option available for 2013 also includes 8MB cache. The 2013 refresh had several other improvements over the 2012, including better cooling. Technically the early rMBP 2013 is clearly a better machine than the equivalent rMBP 2012. Dunno about the cMBP. The cost difference is subjective. You probably won't notice the speed or cache difference unless you are doing tons of encoding or rendering.

 

What is the price you get on each case? If the difference is not that big, the 2013 would be a better value.

 

The MSRP of the max out 2012 rMBP (2.7 / 16 / 768GB) was $3900 if not mistaken. I paid $2400 for my mine (Samsung Display / September 2012 built) with Applecare from a private seller through Ebay like 2 months ago, so the refurbished price sounds good. For a $500 difference the 2.8 might be the way to go if they have better internals as said here by others. You could wait for Haswell, but won't get a similar deal (up to 40-50% off retail) for at least 6-12 months after they are launched. If I were you, would buy the 2012 or 2013 version and deep discount prices.

 

Samsung display is the way to go, good luck in your decision!

 

Some here dislike the samsung color and clarity. The LG SA2 (which are in rMBPS built since sometime in Jan - Feb time frame) does not seem to have the image retention a few SA1s had experienced. They have been out 4 months now.