how much to upgrade to 1.3 ghz? (speculation)

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by dmac20, Mar 12, 2015.

  1. dmac20 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2015
    #1
    Hi all, so I'm pretty sure I want to get this macbook. I definitely want to max out the processor, but I'm bummed that I can't see how much that will run me. It's interesting that you can configure either tier to be 1.3 GHz. So depending how much that costs to do, I can decide whether I need to save that $300 and not double the storage at the same time, and just use the cloud and my external drive.

    How much extra do you guys think it will cost to upgrade to the 1.3 processor? And do you think it will be the same amount to upgrade the 1.1, lower tier to that processor as it will cost to upgrade the 1.2 higher tier version?

    (this is my first post in these forums) Thanks!
     
  2. lchlch, Mar 12, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2015

    lchlch macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2015
  3. AppleWarMachine macrumors 6502a

    AppleWarMachine

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Location:
    Michigan, US
    #4
    I think it will be $199...(from the base model) $100 (from the higher model)

    ...if the price difference from the 2 models are $300, I assume its $200 extra to go from 256 to 512 storage and the other $100 is to go from 1.2 to 1.3 processor, so in theory to go from the base 1.1 to 1.2, it will be $100 and to go from 1.2 to 1.3, it will be $100, so to go from 1.1 to 1.3 + $200 :)

    I am planning on buying the Space Grey base model with BTO 1.3 :D
     
  4. Gav2k macrumors G3

    Gav2k

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    #5
    There only changing the base/turbo clock on the cpu there already using so really it costs Apple nothing.
     
  5. lchlch macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2015
    #6
    I think that is wrong. Because these are not k series cpus so you can't change the multiplier not the clock speed of the cpu. They should be different cpus.
     
  6. draughn101 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    #7
    I think the 1.1 is a different chip from the 1.2 and 1.3. The 1.1 is the 5Y70 and the 1.2 and 1.3 are 5Y71. I don't know much about them but when you compare the two on Intels website, it looks like the 5Y71 is a bit better.

    I'm going Space Gray 256gb with 1.2 or 1.3, not sure which.
     
  7. Gav2k macrumors G3

    Gav2k

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    #8
    The 5y71 is the highest spec core m chip and has a base speed of 1.2ghz. There isn't an off the shelf 1.3. But if you check the 5y71's spec sheet you'll see it can have a base speed set between 1.2 and 1.4 (technically 600Mhz - 1.4ghz is possible)
     
  8. dmac20 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2015
    #9
    thanks for the replies!

    you guys who are going 256 - why not opting for the larger size? you feel comfortable with the cloud and external drives?
     
  9. draughn101 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    #10
    It'll all depend on the price to upgrade the processor. I really want the 5Y71. I keep all my music in iTunes Match, so I really only have pictures and documents on my laptop. I've been good with 128gb for the last few years, so the bump to 256Gb will be a bonus.
     
  10. magamo macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    #11
    The TDPs and clock speeds of some variants of Core M are configurable. For example, the standard TDP of Core M 5Y71 is 4.5W, and it runs at 1.2 GHz. But it can be configured to as low as 3.5W or as high as 6W. The base clock speed can also be from 600MHz to 1.4 GHz. Apparently, Apple uses this variant configured at 5W TDP with 1.3GHz base frequency for the high-end BTO option.
     
  11. dmac20 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2015
    #12
    I'm getting my own thread off topic here haha, but where do you keep the original files for itunes match? can they be on an external HDD? I haven't used my old macbook pro much recently, hence my interest in this new macbook, so i'm not up on some of the latest apple environment specific functionality (have been basically just using my dell work laptop for everything -_- )
     
  12. draughn101 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    #13
    lol, just a bit, but there's been some good info shared, which is more than most threads. I delete the original files once they are on iTunes Match. When you want to listen to them, and you have an Internet connection, they stream seamlessly. You can also access them from all your Apple devices. If I want some songs and know I wont have a connection, maybe in the car, I just download them before I leave. That freed a ton of storage space.

    As far as price speculation, I think it'll be $199 to upgrade from 1.1 to 1.3. In that case I'll get the 1.2/512gb option. I think it'll be $100 to upgrade the 1.2 to 1.3.
     
  13. pasadena macrumors 6502a

    pasadena

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2012
    Location:
    Socal
    #14
    My MBA has 128Gb. I don't store much on it. I use my phone for music, so no music on the laptop. Most of the files I share between computers are in Dropbox. On the MBA, I use select Sync so I don't have the full Dropbox on there, just the files I really need. If I need anything else, I can download it from the website or select it to sync. Most of my files are small (office or web dev so mostly text files, web-optimized images/pictures, development databases and documentations/ebooks)

    I don't keep movies either. I delete them after watching them, but its very rare that I use the MBA for that, and when I do, well, one movie is only a few Gb.

    So 256Gb is enough, and I will probably use part of that to install Win10 in Bootcamp.
     
  14. PDFierro macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    #15
    Apple would be crazy to make it more than $100.
     
  15. mtneer macrumors 68020

    mtneer

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2012
    #16
    Apple has no reason to track its customer prices to component prices. The only reason Apple is offering such a tiny increment in processor speed is to rake in the margin $$ - by drawing in the "fully loaded" crowd with a step up so tiny, that even Intel does not bother to charge extra.
     
  16. Cloudsurfer macrumors 65816

    Cloudsurfer

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Location:
    Netherlands
    #17
    Am I correct to assume Apple uses the following chips?

    5Y31 (configured to 1.1GHz from 900MHz / Turbo 2.4GHz)
    5Y51 (configured to 1.2GHz from 1.1GHz / Turbo 2.6GHz)
    5Y71 (configured to 1.3GHz from 1.1GHz / Turbo 2.9 GHz)

    I can't wait for the benchmarks to roll in, but from what I have gathered you're best off with the Y71. It scores as high as 5600 in GB3, which is really impressive for a 5W dual core processor.
     
  17. Gav2k macrumors G3

    Gav2k

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    #18
    Chances are they are but it would be better for them to use the 5y51 for the 1.1 and 1.2 but that's on the assumption that the 5y31 would need the wattage turning up to make it from 900-1.1.
     
  18. Aphid Acer macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2015
    #19
    hey folks, I'm new here but I'd like to point out another big difference between M-5Y71 and M-5Y70, which is Intel TSX instruction set support.

    So on top of 1.3 vs 1.2 there is an additional multicore performance boost with TSX. It's a new instruction set so it will take a some time to take off, but I think it's worth it. Any thoughts on the role of TSX in the future?

    Also, in the first link another difference is the base frequency of the GPU being 100 Mhz and 300 Mhz in M-5Y70 and M-5Y71, respectively. Any word on whether Apple adjusts this if it affects battery performance?
     

Share This Page