Intel i5 vs Intel i7

thiagoah

macrumors member
Original poster
Jul 21, 2014
57
0
Canada
Which of the following 2 rMBPs would you consider "better" in terms of performance, usability, etc? Also how important is the processor speed compared to the ram, the intel i5 chip vs the intel i7...what outweighs what?

Usage would be for intensive graphic design work, web development, photo editing, multiple tab browsing, and video streaming. Please keep in mind the the price for both are identical**

13.3-inch MacBook Pro 2.8GHz Dual-core Intel i7 with Retina Display
Originally released October 2013
13.3-inch (diagonal) Retina display; 2560-by-1600 resolution at 227 pixels per inch
8GB of 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM
512GB Flash Storage
720p FaceTime HD camera
Intel Iris Graphics


13.3-inch MacBook Pro 2.6GHz Dual-core Intel i5 with Retina Display
Originally released October 2013
13.3-inch (diagonal) Retina display; 2560-by-1600 resolution at 227 pixels per inch
16GB of 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM
512GB Flash Storage
720p FaceTime HD camera
Intel Iris Graphics


Any input would be greatly appreciated :) Thanks in advance!
 
Last edited:

TheIguana

macrumors 6502a
Sep 26, 2004
650
381
Canada
What are you going to be using it for?

Generally, I would say for most people the $200 upgrade cost is pretty hard to justify for the performance increase you get.
 

thiagoah

macrumors member
Original poster
Jul 21, 2014
57
0
Canada
What are you going to be using it for?

Generally, I would say for most people the $200 upgrade cost is pretty hard to justify for the performance increase you get.
Usage would be for intensive graphic design work, web development, photo editing, multiple tab browsing, and video streaming.
 

thiagoah

macrumors member
Original poster
Jul 21, 2014
57
0
Canada
I'd go with option 2 myself.
Even though option 1 has a 2.8GHz Dual-core Intel i7, while option 2 has a 2.6GHz Dual-core Intel i5 would you say that 16GB RAM of option 2 plays a more significant role than the processor speed and intel i7 of option 1?
 

leman

macrumors G3
Oct 14, 2008
9,964
4,550
They're the exact same price. Which would you take now?
Then the second one. I think that its more likely to run into a situation where more RAM will be beneficial than into one where a marginally faster CPU makes a difference.
 
Last edited:

thiagoah

macrumors member
Original poster
Jul 21, 2014
57
0
Canada
Then the second one. I think that its more likely to run into a situation where more RAM will be beneficial then into one where a marginally faster CPU makes a difference.
Yeah I think I am leaning more towards that one as well! I think overtime I'll be in need of the extra RAM not CPU:)
 

DJJAZZYJET

macrumors 6502
Jun 4, 2011
400
0
Certainly the RAM. For heavy multitasking and application use, 16GB of RAM is going to be much better than the i7 option. The i5 has hyper threading anyway, its going to be able to utilise those two cores better, so I would go with 16GB
 

MarvinHC

macrumors 6502a
Jan 9, 2014
756
221
Belgium
Double RAM vs 7% clock speed increase? Hardly a conundrum in my book.
I would go for the second option (i5 with 16GB) RAM myself but your comment about 7% clock speed increase is missing out the fact that an i7 is not an i5. Even at the same clock speed the i7 would outperform the i5 by quite a bit at processor intensive tasks. But as said I would still go for option 2 and I think for most people the processor speed does not make such a big difference.

Maybe some helpful reading here:
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/features/389635/whats-the-difference-between-an-intel-core-i3-core-i5-and-core-i7-haswell-processor
 

rrl

macrumors 6502a
Jul 27, 2009
511
56
I would go for the second option (i5 with 16GB) RAM myself but your comment about 7% clock speed increase is missing out the fact that an i7 is not an i5. Even at the same clock speed the i7 would outperform the i5 by quite a bit at processor intensive tasks.
From what I've read, all dual core i5s support Hyper Threading, but another advantage the i7 would have is a larger L3 cache.
 

Asuriyan

macrumors 6502a
Feb 4, 2013
622
16
Indiana
I would go for the second option (i5 with 16GB) RAM myself but your comment about 7% clock speed increase is missing out the fact that an i7 is not an i5. Even at the same clock speed the i7 would outperform the i5 by quite a bit at processor intensive tasks. But as said I would still go for option 2 and I think for most people the processor speed does not make such a big difference.

Maybe some helpful reading here:
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/features/389635/whats-the-difference-between-an-intel-core-i3-core-i5-and-core-i7-haswell-processor
Literally the only difference in the dual-core models is an extra 1MB of L3 cache (4 vs 3). Hardly earth-shattering. The quad-cores come with 6MB standard and 8MB in the higher-end models.
 

thunng8

macrumors 6502a
Feb 8, 2006
816
204
Literally the only difference in the dual-core models is an extra 1MB of L3 cache (4 vs 3). Hardly earth-shattering. The quad-cores come with 6MB standard and 8MB in the higher-end models.
All current mbp quad cores are 6mb
 

dickydoo

macrumors newbie
May 9, 2014
21
0
If you're going for a refurb, you might be pleasantly surprised -- I ordered option 2, and ended up getting an i7 for free, so got the best of both worlds.
 

pragmatous

macrumors 65816
May 23, 2012
1,378
96
You will not notice the difference between the 2.6ghz and the 2.8ghz.

You will notice the difference however between 8GB of RAM and 16GB of RAM based on the fact you'll be doing art work. Graphics always sucks up the RAM as you'll be loading large amounts of graphics into memory. Especially since these 13" do not have a dGPU.

Which of the following 2 rMBPs would you consider "better" in terms of performance, usability, etc? Also how important is the processor speed compared to the ram, the intel i5 chip vs the intel i7...what outweighs what?

Usage would be for intensive graphic design work, web development, photo editing, multiple tab browsing, and video streaming. Please keep in mind the the price for both are identical**

13.3-inch MacBook Pro 2.8GHz Dual-core Intel i7 with Retina Display
Originally released October 2013
13.3-inch (diagonal) Retina display; 2560-by-1600 resolution at 227 pixels per inch
8GB of 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM
512GB Flash Storage
720p FaceTime HD camera
Intel Iris Graphics


13.3-inch MacBook Pro 2.6GHz Dual-core Intel i5 with Retina Display
Originally released October 2013
13.3-inch (diagonal) Retina display; 2560-by-1600 resolution at 227 pixels per inch
16GB of 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM
512GB Flash Storage
720p FaceTime HD camera
Intel Iris Graphics


Any input would be greatly appreciated :) Thanks in advance!


----------

yes option 2 indeed. The more RAM will be better for you with what you do.

Option 2 it is! Thanks for your input everyone, appreciate it :)
 

obtusemind

macrumors newbie
Aug 8, 2014
5
0
Is there any concrete data on how significantly different the speeds of the 2.8 GHz i5 and 3.0 GHz i7 processors in the new batch of 13 inch rMBPs are?
 

maflynn

Moderator
Staff member
May 3, 2009
63,851
30,366
Boston
Even though option 1 has a 2.8GHz Dual-core Intel i7, while option 2 has a 2.6GHz Dual-core Intel i5 would you say that 16GB RAM of option 2 plays a more significant role than the processor speed and intel i7 of option 1?
For most uses, I think option 2 is a better choice. I don't think the tiny increase in GHz will be noticeable and the I5 vs I7 debate depends on your usage. If you're not fully using all the cores with your apps with an I5, the I7 won't be that much of a benefit imo.
 

z3razerviper

macrumors newbie
Nov 1, 2014
3
0
For most uses, I think option 2 is a better choice. I don't think the tiny increase in GHz will be noticeable and the I5 vs I7 debate depends on your usage. If you're not fully using all the cores with your apps with an I5, the I7 won't be that much of a benefit imo.
If you can do both do both but ram is more important if you can only do 1 thing.
 

CausticPuppy

macrumors 65816
May 1, 2012
1,483
18
Definitely the one with 16GB ram.

You won't notice the speed difference between the processors at all.

I got both the memory upgrade and i7 upgrade, but if I could do it again I would have skipped the CPU upgrade and had more beer money.