i5 v i7 purchases.

Discussion in 'MacBook Air' started by warriorz, Jul 11, 2013.

  1. warriorz macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2010
    #1
    Hi all,

    Anyone bought an i5 or i7 based in the trickle of reports now in, coming in, such as the obvious Anandtech comparison report? If so which processor did you end up deciding to go for and why? I'm edging toward the i5 just to eek out a bit more battery and keep low heat/ fans hopefully!
     
  2. mattferg macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    #2
    i5. i7 is a waste of money - minimum performance gains or none for most users, plus a lower battery life and louder fans.

    Also, on another note we've had a bazillion of these i5 vs i7 threads, please stop creating them, just search in future.
     
  3. Jazwire macrumors 6502a

    Jazwire

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #3
    I have both, wife has i5 , I have i7.

    I do occasionally game on mine, and its a decent FPS boost for the games I play. (Minecraft, LoL, Diablo3, example LoL has roughly 8-10 fps more than my wifes i5.)

    Under normal circumstances my i7 doesn't get hotter than the i5, nor are the fans louder, since they don't come on really on either unit. Unless the CPU is being heavily stressed, unless I am gaming the fan never comes on.

    Both units when just doing light work, browsing email etc, literally stay almost cold to the touch.

    The whole i7 getting "hot" is imo a bunch of people justifying there stance on picking the i5.

    To the touch my i7 doesn't get any warmer to the touch than the i5, now if you are stressing both machines out maybe the i5 will get to 90 and the i7 to 93 but at that temp its not like, you can differentiate that much. Both feel dang warm.

    I do agree with not buying the i7 if you dont need it, why waste the money, if you arent going to game ever, if you arent going to do extremely cpu intensive tasks where you are pushing CPU to near 100% range. Then the i7 is a waste of money.

    But the whole i7 is hot like a frying pan, is pure crap.
     
  4. ZBoater macrumors G3

    ZBoater

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Location:
    Sunny Florida
    #4
    That's last year's old news. This year, the i7 is easily worth $150.

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/7113/2013-macbook-air-core-i5-4250u-vs-core-i7-4650u/5
     
  5. mattferg macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    #5
    lol no it isn't. It's more expensive than last year's i7 AND the review you linked me to actually says the i5 is better! Hahahahaha

    As for gaming, since the CPU isn't the bottleneck, it actually doesn't add any extra performance over the i5.
     
  6. scaredpoet, Jul 11, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2013

    scaredpoet macrumors 604

    scaredpoet

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    #6
    That's your opinion. And if you feel that the extra cash is a waste, then don't spend it. But please don't "lololololololololo" and "Hahahahaha" at others because they did spend the money. That's their decision to make, and if you have to belittle them for it, then that suggest you're trying really hard to justify your own decision.

    Wrong. It doesn't say, concretely, if either CPU is better. It correctly states the case that each CPU is better at different things, and will appeal to different users... meaning that you have to think about your intent with the MacBook Air, and decide that way... not based on what a bunch of loll'ing trolls on forums try to humiliate you into deciding, one way or the other.

    These two sentences from the anandtech article say it all:

    "If you want ultimate battery life regardless of usage model, stick with the base Core i5. If you need performance, the Core i7 upgrade is absolutely worth it."
     
  7. thedomus macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2007
    Location:
    Nr.London
    #7
    Horribly generalised statement. As far as audio (DAW's - Logic, Cubase etc) i7 is far superior... despite the extra heat!
     
  8. Jazwire macrumors 6502a

    Jazwire

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #8

    1000% wrong.

    Not only is there extra performance, there is noticeable performance.
     
  9. ZBoater macrumors G3

    ZBoater

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Location:
    Sunny Florida
    #9
    I don't understand the confusion. i5 < i7. Period. The difference in battery life is minimal, and only if you are pushing the system hard. And with the i7 you have more horsepower to push. If you want to sit at Starbucks and browse the web, both will give you about the same time.
     
  10. ylrd, Jul 11, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2013

    ylrd macrumors member

    ylrd

    Joined:
    May 25, 2013
    Location:
    Europe
    #10
    You're trying too hard. If you wanna cover your ears and shout "lalala the i5 I bought is better than the i7", that's fine, but it doesn't make it true.

    Heck, you're even saying the CPU isn't the bottleneck for gaming! Good thing you didn't buy a 2012 model or you'd be preaching why Haswell is a waste of money too.
     
  11. mattferg macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    #11
    I didn't know most users used Logic and Cubase?

    ----------

    100000000% wrong. The GPU is the bottleneck for gaming, so having extra mhz adds no noticeable framerate leaps. Feel free to prove me wrong.

    ----------

    The CPU isn't the bottleneck for gaming. The GPU is. Any game that needs more mhz for the CPU, it'll require a faster GPU FIRST. It's computing 101. Come on.
     
  12. Jazwire, Jul 11, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2013

    Jazwire macrumors 6502a

    Jazwire

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #12
    Lol I have both machines, you don't, I know this 1st hand, I am not repeating what others have assumed.


    Not all games are GPU bound,

    Here is my League of Legends results.(From Jul 1)

    *************************************

    ** League of Legends Test**

    Setting on both machines.
    Resolution - 1368x768
    Character Quality - High
    Effect Quality - Medium
    Environment Quality - High
    Shadows - Off

    i5 results:
    Avg FPS:41
    FPS Range:37-50
    Heat: Warm, maybe slightly less warm than i7 , fans running fairly loud

    i7 results:
    Avg FPS: 48
    FPS Range:44-58
    Heat: Warm - No Fans (Actually ran i7 test twice, because thought maybe I didn't hear fan on 1st run.)
    ***********************.


    Also i is well known and documented even by Blizzard, that their games WoW, SC2, Diablo3 are indeed in fact impacted by CPU speed.

    http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/6787819464

    http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/3646384611

    http://www.techspot.com/review/305-starcraft2-performance/page14.html

    http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...9-CPU-or-GPU-priority-for-StarCraft-II-new-pc




    http://www.overclock.net/t/1268825/...lly-gpu-intensive-and-which-are-cpu-intensive

    This post says it best;

    "Most games are GPU dependent at the moment.
    Besides..
    Starcraft 2, World of Warcraft, CIV 5, Battlefield 3, GTA 4, Flight Simulators, Bad Company 2, basically most modern RPG, RTS, and free roaming games.
    "

    http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/1258142-single-GPU-config-7970-vs-680
    When talking about Blizzard games they are not that GPU intensive. In WoW you need a very good CPU (as much GHz and cache as possible) and in Diablo 3 you need a very fast HDD. Starcraft 2 runs perfect on almost every system out there.

    I could list a few hundred more, but these are the 1st few i grabbed.
     
  13. Suraj R. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    Canada
    #13
    DAWs are not processor intensive at all...Logic ran smoothly on my C2D 2008 iMac and it also runs very smoothly on my i5 2013 MBA 13"
     
  14. kap09 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    #14
    Curious how many tracks you were handling?
     
  15. mattferg macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    #15
    30fps is pretty damn playable, thus emphasising my point that spending the $140 isn't really worth it.
     
  16. Suraj R. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    Canada
    #16
    Between 15 and 40, mostly digital.

    Sure 40 wasn't IDEAL but it was definitely workable. Eventually I had to replace the mere 1 GB of RAM that it came with to 3 GB where it became more usable. Eventually the computer got too slow so I got the new MBA.
     
  17. antjefferson macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2013
    #17
    Wow - this thread sure did turn into a flame-war. :rolleyes:

    I was torn between the i5 and the i7 - even after several very helpful posts here as well as reading several reviews (including anandtech's). I decided on the i5. I decided that since 90% of the work I will be doing on this machine (web browsing, answering emails, light photoshop touch ups, ID using captivate) aren't terribly CPU intensive tasks, the i5 would be more than sufficient. Sure - the i7 would have been nice to have - but I don't imagine that I will ever notice the difference (excepts perhaps when I rip DVDs now and then...but even then were only talking about waiting a few extra minutes for the task to complete...no big deal).

    I ordered the i5/8GB/256GB - and I'm not looking back. In the end the deciding factor for me was cost vs perceived value. As is, I spent about $1,400 :eek: YMMV.
     
  18. Ifti macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2010
    Location:
    UK
    #18
    Went with the i7.

    Never ad this thing heat up on me and havent ever heard the fans just yet.
    Basic use and Im hitting around 8-9 hours anyway - so the same as the i5. However, I know i have the extra power as and when I need it.

    Do not regret my purchase at all.

    I still stand by my original comments in another thread:

     
  19. bhags8 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
  20. warriorz thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2010
    #20
    Lol: frying pan, that was pretty funny. Not sure anyone's saying that but I do you understand your overall point. However, if there had to be a choice, an answer, I'd say most would go for i5 > i7 for battery power based on historical theory on processors. But off course I'm acknowledging the point you make about "going at full throttle". Good point.
     
  21. mattferg macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    #21
    Mad at saving money!
     
  22. warriorz thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2010
    #22
    I agree with you ZBoater. In the context of the $100's you're paying for a premium machine, a further $150 is a relatively small percentage to pay for the extra processing power if you'll use it. The extra horsepower will do the job quicker, and a few minutes saved each day, over the course of the lifetime you'll keep the machine is priceless.
     
  23. iloveair macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2013
    #23
    If you can afford it why go for second best when you can get i7. I have the 13inch and i dont even know what the fan sounds like. Never turned on or my laptop got hot and i have been backing up encrypting and watching all at once.
     
  24. mattferg macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    #24
    Yeah but most users won't use it, so spending $150 on something you'll never use is a huge waste.

    ----------

    Because you can spend $150 on other things?
     
  25. falconeight Guest

    falconeight

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    #25
    I would never have the lesser processor. I like asking people what they have then I slap down a I7 processor on that arse.....at starbucks I do this.
     

Share This Page