pretty sure it's gonna be better. the i7 can handle more logic tracks than the i9 that's scoring similar in geekbench. Out of all Macs released in 2018 i think the Mac Mini's CPU upgrade is worth it the most.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
i5 or i7?
- Thread starter Mavimao
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There is also the psychological point.
I'd rather sit here with a fast computer, possibly wondering if I've over-specced, than sit here wondering if the i5 or i7 would have been faster. By selecting the i7, this concern disappears. It *is* the fastest.
Having said that, if budget is limited, an i3 with 16GB Apple RAM is probably better than an i7 with 8GB RAM - particularly if you are driving 4K or 5K displays. But of course, the RAM can be upgraded down the line...an i7 can't.
I'd rather sit here with a fast computer, possibly wondering if I've over-specced, than sit here wondering if the i5 or i7 would have been faster. By selecting the i7, this concern disappears. It *is* the fastest.
Having said that, if budget is limited, an i3 with 16GB Apple RAM is probably better than an i7 with 8GB RAM - particularly if you are driving 4K or 5K displays. But of course, the RAM can be upgraded down the line...an i7 can't.
Last edited:
It is less then a 20% premium to upgrade from the i5 to i7, even if you directly did so on the Apple's website. The heads up some were trying to make was that you can basically get the i7 for just trading 128gb of hard drive space (i3 to i7 BTO). Since you can buy an external 128gb set up (or more) for $30, this means the premium for an i7 is 0.027% and not 20%... though it wasn't 20% even directly (more like 18%)
While the i7 shines on multitasking, since it provides 5-35% better improvement depending on the situation, it will always be worth more than 0.027% premium. If you are already using an external hard drive, or don't need the extra space, then a 0% premium. But since some people get a hissyfit about it being a free upgrade, let's just say 0.027% ie: almost nothing.
Aside from performance, it will also have better resale value. People are welcome to get the stock i5 model if it fits their needs, but buying it for the best value is a false premise.
I agree with this. For me, 128GB internal storage is not enough as I plan to run Windows via Bootcamp, so it became a decision between the 1100$ i5 model or 1300$ i7 model (both with 256GB). I was able to get lots of helpful benchmarks in this thread and was debating heavily whether i7 is required for my use. And then, a 200$ off promotion on the i5 came along and threw all debates out of the park
I pulled the trigger on the i5. Compared to my 2012 i7 Mini, the performance is significantly better and my Lightroom Exports and Edits are much faster.
I would say, that if you are on budget, and are okay with 128GB internal SSD and are able to keep it lean and clean, then the i7 1100$ version would give you better CPU Performance. But if you believe you may install Windows or need worry-free space for your Adobe Scatch drives, then the i5 with 256GB offers a better value.
If you get a sale price on the stock i5, that changes the story. I've even previously mentioned that it would be good in that situation. Just one thing to add, it's possible to have both bootcamp and mac os on a 128gb drive (ie: the 256gb doesn't magically enable this function or add the value of such).
Memory or Ram from Apple is never bought on a value premise but a need one. That said, you don't need to obtain either from Apple's stock config. Even 256 is anemic for content creators. While they could spend the insane apple premium, a cheap external SSD would do about the same.
Memory or Ram from Apple is never bought on a value premise but a need one. That said, you don't need to obtain either from Apple's stock config. Even 256 is anemic for content creators. While they could spend the insane apple premium, a cheap external SSD would do about the same.
Sorry, I don’t want to debate with you on this. If anyone is able to sustain with macOS and Bootcamp on a 128GB Internal drive, good for them. I can’t.
It was just a heads up that you can (and I don't intend to debate whether you are willing to or not). By the way, there are plenty of guides to do it externally too. 9-5 mac made a video about it:
Read my comment carefully. I said ''a
If actually you read my comment I said ''with all other specs being equal''.
I don't even really wanna get into this debate about storage since that's not what this thread is about but seriously, what do you call cheap? To get an external SSD that's on par with the Mac Mini one you'd have to get an PCIe SSD M.2 enclosure with ATLEAST thunderbolt 3 (since USB C only gets you 1000MB/s) and those are not cheap at all. starting from €150,- and then you'd have to get the actual PCIe SSD which starts at around €450,- depending on the size. Not saying that's an entirely bad idea but it's definitely not cheap!
I did read your comment and that's why I said "even directly it's not 20%", you quoted a higher cost then actual.
Anyway, since it related to performance and you mentioned it, the extra speed for going to thunderbolt from usb c is almost non-existent for most tasks. There is a merit for it and you mentioned a good option (which isn't cheap), but people need to focus on IOPS performance and not consecutive megabytes per second.
As a car analogy (not exact, I know, it's to provide awareness): I don't care if the car can go 10,000 RPMs, I care if the car go 120 MPH, and how fast can it get to 60 MPH from 0.
You're still high. I already told you it was about 18%, and that was the worse case scenario of $200 extra on a 1099 system. It's even less in any other config with more ram or storage. It's only a 5% premium for people who config with 2tb SSD and 64GB memory on the high end.OK you win. If you wanna be exact it's 19,88% .
You can be a smartass about it, but this is about you spreading misinformation.
I agree with this. For me, 128GB internal storage is not enough as I plan to run Windows via Bootcamp, so it became a decision between the 1100$ i5 model or 1300$ i7 model (both with 256GB). I was able to get lots of helpful benchmarks in this thread and was debating heavily whether i7 is required for my use. And then, a 200$ off promotion on the i5 came along and threw all debates out of the park
I pulled the trigger on the i5. Compared to my 2012 i7 Mini, the performance is significantly better and my Lightroom Exports and Edits are much faster.
I would say, that if you are on budget, and are okay with 128GB internal SSD and are able to keep it lean and clean, then the i7 1100$ version would give you better CPU Performance. But if you believe you may install Windows or need worry-free space for your Adobe Scatch drives, then the i5 with 256GB offers a better value.
exactly. Not the point of this thread but I think most people shouldn't even consider 128GBs.
dude.. stop it already ok?
I'm just telling you about my personal experience. My core i5 model was €1249 and my core i7 model was €1489,- I get that prices may vary a little but no need to be so pedantic about it.
The guy you're replying to will do this all day - he'll never let up - he'll just keep going around in circles with you - it's fun for him - and completely pointless for everyone else.exactly. Not the point of this thread but I think most people shouldn't even consider 128GBs.
dude.. stop it already ok?
I'm just telling you about my personal experience. My core i5 model was €1249 and my core i7 model was €1489,- I get that prices may vary a little but no need to be so pedantic about it.
We're not allowed to talk about what's really going on here on the forums, otherwise the mods suspend you.
Although you're literally describing about the other guy, I know you're referring to me. I suppose my rep is the cost of getting the other guy to stop. I've been involved in other posts since and haven't kept going with Hessel. Just saying.
Don't be bitter just because I called you out on something false.
See folks, this is what he does. I have literally no idea what he's talking about in reference to me, but he doesn't care whether he's making sense or not... he just looking to drag anyone into one of those back-and-forth arguments to keep himself entertained.. he doesn't care what it's about or whether it's under made-up pretenses.
Whatever, you clearly instigated and still directly attacking me. It seems like you're being entertained at least. I'm not amused, but I'll bite.
I don't care whether he is right or wrong, but both @Cheapassmac and @pl1984 despite disagreeing contributed something to the discussion.
You however chimed in just to do a passive aggressive ad hominem? What's the point of your posts? It looks like you have a personal agenda..
I like many read all the reports that the average user (which I am) will not see the difference and unfort. I purchased two i5 Macs. Currently at home I have two i5 IMacs (2015), 1 i7 Mac Mini (2011), two Mac Airs both i7 (2011 and 2014) for travel and the i5 are HANDS DOWN SLOWER AND FRUSTRATING. If you find the death spiral relaxing, get an i5, if you don't then spend the extra 200 and get an i7. I regret buying the i5 every time I boot up.
That's inaccurate.
i5 nad i7 are marketing monikers.
It used to mean that i5 were NOT hyper threaded, and often had LESS CORES than the i7 counterparts, and indeed had significantly less performance.
In the case of Mac Mini, that is still somewhat true (the i5 is not hyperthread, however it does have 6 cores).
In the case of 2018+ MacBook Pros, it's absolutely untrue, as both i5 and i7 are hyperthreaded and quad-core, so the performance difference boils down to minuscule clock speed gains.
Check benchmarks and specs, they tell you tons more about a chip than "i5 or i7" ever does.
Are you sure, that the 2018+ MBPros have hyperthreaded i5s?
Because I never heard of i5 CPUs, that have HT enabled.
2018+ with touchbar, so all the quadcores.
(That includes the 1,4GHz 2019s)
here's my 2018 i5
edit:
these i5 are great btw. I consciously picked the i5 because I didn't feel i7 wasn't justified for 300$. I'd rather upgrade a year or two early on that account. (It's my 2nd machine tho, first is i7 mini)
Attachments
Both i5 and i7 MBPros have been hyper-threaded for years. It is confusing.
Even some of the early i3 iMacs were hyper-threaded! (we have one):
iMac "Core i3" 3.06 21.5" (Mid-2010) Specs (Mid-2010, MC508LL/A, iMac11,2, A1311, 2389): EveryMac.com
Technical specifications for the iMac "Core i3" 3.06 21.5" (Mid-2010). Dates sold, processor type, memory info, hard drive details, price and more.
everymac.com