alphaod has a point. Try to get it as cheap as possible. Specs are irrelevant for your needs.
Also the 2.4/4/128 can be had for a cheap price new. If you can live with 128g storage that is.
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.
Is 2.6GHz i5 upgrade worth it?
- Thread starter pk314
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Also the 2.4/4/128 can be had for a cheap price new. If you can live with 128g storage that is.
For the most part, educational pricing for Applecare is far lower than anywhere else. I'd lean toward buying a refurbished Mac from Apple and then getting the Applecare separately through the educational Apple store.
Is 2.6GHz i5 upgrade worth it?
I am still using my 2008 macbook for these and much more (photoshop, xcode etc) and it is still capable of doing the job pretty well since almost 7 years of nonstop labor. It is running mavericks pretty well by the way. My only problems are about hard drive.
I am still using my 2008 macbook for these and much more (photoshop, xcode etc) and it is still capable of doing the job pretty well since almost 7 years of nonstop labor. It is running mavericks pretty well by the way. My only problems are about hard drive.
It's amusing to see people recommending 16GB RAM without any input from OP about what he's going to do with his notebook.
OP, 8GB of RAM is plenty and is still going to be plenty in next few years. You might find 16GB RAM useful only if you run SEVERAL virtual machines at once or you tend to run SEVERAL RAM intensive applications at once (Adobe applications, CADs etc, games).
The CPU cannot and shouldn't be rated only based on its frequency. It's like rating cars based on their maxmimum speed. There's cache, architecture and many other features to take into account.
The two CPUs you're thinking about are VERY similar. The frequency is the only thing different about them. You can expect to notice minor, and I mean really minor, improvement while under 100% stress. For example - rendering family video in iMovie may take 28 minutes instead of 31 minutes. That's about it.
With 2.4GHz CPU there's basically nothing you won't be able to do that would be possible on 2.6GHz. As soon as 2.4GHz becomes inadequate, the 2.6GHz will too.
From my understanding you don't stress your computer too much. The middle shelf rMBP is great. It's got the best value/price ratio and I bet you'll love it.
OP, 8GB of RAM is plenty and is still going to be plenty in next few years. You might find 16GB RAM useful only if you run SEVERAL virtual machines at once or you tend to run SEVERAL RAM intensive applications at once (Adobe applications, CADs etc, games).
The CPU cannot and shouldn't be rated only based on its frequency. It's like rating cars based on their maxmimum speed. There's cache, architecture and many other features to take into account.
The two CPUs you're thinking about are VERY similar. The frequency is the only thing different about them. You can expect to notice minor, and I mean really minor, improvement while under 100% stress. For example - rendering family video in iMovie may take 28 minutes instead of 31 minutes. That's about it.
With 2.4GHz CPU there's basically nothing you won't be able to do that would be possible on 2.6GHz. As soon as 2.4GHz becomes inadequate, the 2.6GHz will too.
From my understanding you don't stress your computer too much. The middle shelf rMBP is great. It's got the best value/price ratio and I bet you'll love it.
8 GB of RAM is good enough and I think 16 GB of RAM is a little too much for an average user. I had to upgrade from 2 GB to 8 GB of RAM few years ago and it improved the speed and performance on my late 2009 Mac Mini. As for processor speed, it's lot faster compared to my 2.26 GHz Intel Duo Core. I would say 3-4 generations ahead.
Actually with your described needs, a $1500 MacBook Pro itself is overkill. You can waltz through all these activities on a MacBook Air saving at least $500.
What I would like to know is if the 2.6GHz i7 upgrade on the 15" Retina MacBook Pro is worth it, over the 2.3GHz...
The 2.3GHz is worth it because of the video card, 16GB of RAM, etc...
But is the 2.6GHz i7 option really worth the extra money?
The 2.3GHz is worth it because of the video card, 16GB of RAM, etc...
But is the 2.6GHz i7 option really worth the extra money?
Both the ram upgrade and the cpu upgrade will be useless for your stated needs.....save your money. By the time any app needs 16gig of ram your laptop will be ancient and in need of replacement anyways.
Thanks everyone for the input!
After hearing all you guys, I was stuck between 13in MBA and 13in rMBP but have decided to go with the rMBP 2.4/256gb/8gb only because of the HDMI port, Retina Display, and 128gb is too less as my current laptop is already filled upto 200gb. I will most likely go ahead and buy it after WWDC.
After hearing all you guys, I was stuck between 13in MBA and 13in rMBP but have decided to go with the rMBP 2.4/256gb/8gb only because of the HDMI port, Retina Display, and 128gb is too less as my current laptop is already filled upto 200gb. I will most likely go ahead and buy it after WWDC.
The midbase rmbp is very nice. I recommend you still take a close look at the macbook air.
For your tasks it will be snappier than the rmbp. Go to the store and try it for yourself!
----------
If you run several intensive apps at once, your bootleneck will also be the cpu, since the two cores will have to split the workload.
16gb of ram only make sense in very rare specific cases.
The high end 15" rmbp is for you then, because its engineered for these tasks.
Still people will recommend 16gb ram just to anyone.
The 2.6mhz update doesnt make much sense for most folks either, but you will feel have more of a speed increase than from the ram.