Is it worth it to spend $500+ to go from 1.4ghz to 2.8ghz (2019 13")?


Howard2k

macrumors 68030
Mar 10, 2016
2,538
1,818
I think 1.4 to 2.4 is well worth it.

* faster CPU
* faster SSD
* faster wifi

But then going from 2.4 to 2.7 is only an increase in CPU, and not a huge one. But if you’re gaming... maybe.
 

Winstonp

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 2, 2005
790
21
Boston
I think 1.4 to 2.4 is well worth it.

* faster CPU
* faster SSD
* faster wifi

But then going from 2.4 to 2.7 is only an increase in CPU, and not a huge one. But if you’re gaming... maybe.
Yeah and they're not simple games, either. Was not aware the SSD was faster. That's a big deal, actually
 
  • Like
Reactions: psymac

Howard2k

macrumors 68030
Mar 10, 2016
2,538
1,818
Yeah and they're not simple games, either. Was not aware the SSD was faster. That's a big deal, actually

Yeah we’re still waiting for a proper review from someone like notebookcheck, but comments on here certainly indicate that the SSD is faster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psymac

Apple Fritter

macrumors regular
Oct 20, 2017
113
107
127.0.0.1
If battery life is important, I’d go for the base 15W model. The CPU is only marginally slower and what you’re really paying for in the top model is the 4 ports you’re not using. The 128 GB SSD in the base model seems to be a real lemon, though, so I’d opt for an upgrade there.
 

hooper2

macrumors member
Oct 31, 2008
73
5
From my understanding the larger the SSD, the faster it performs. So while the 128 is slower, we need more info on larger options.
 

psymac

macrumors 6502a
Jul 17, 2002
508
114
I think 1.4 to 2.4 is well worth it.

* faster CPU
* faster SSD
* faster wifi

But then going from 2.4 to 2.7 is only an increase in CPU, and not a huge one. But if you’re gaming... maybe.
Certainly agree, especially faster SSD, and also two cooling fans instead of one, so most likely quieter.
 

psymac

macrumors 6502a
Jul 17, 2002
508
114
Why do you think these components are any different between models?
This review on Youtube (@8:08) showed the base 1.4ghz with 128GB SSD at about 500/1200mbs write/read speeds, almost twice as slow as larger SSDs.

 

Winstonp

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 2, 2005
790
21
Boston
If battery life is important, I’d go for the base 15W model. The CPU is only marginally slower and what you’re really paying for in the top model is the 4 ports you’re not using. The 128 GB SSD in the base model seems to be a real lemon, though, so I’d opt for an upgrade there.
interesting. Yeah lower voltage would be more optimal for battery life, then. And one fan. Definitely going 2TB (RIP my wallet) as I'm going to make a Windows 10 partition.

From my understanding the larger the SSD, the faster it performs. So while the 128 is slower, we need more info on larger options.
that's nuts. You'd think it'd be the opposite.
This review on Youtube (@8:08) showed the base 1.4ghz with 128GB SSD at about 500/1200mbs write/read speeds, almost twice as slow as larger SSDs.

yikes
 

kp98077

macrumors 6502a
Oct 26, 2010
938
237
This review on Youtube (@8:08) showed the base 1.4ghz with 128GB SSD at about 500/1200mbs write/read speeds, almost twice as slow as larger SSDs.

but he said the read SSD was very impressive, so the issue is the write speeds? would that mainly affect downloads etc?
[doublepost=1563122357][/doublepost]
I think 1.4 to 2.4 is well worth it.

* faster CPU
* faster SSD
* faster wifi

But then going from 2.4 to 2.7 is only an increase in CPU, and not a huge one. But if you’re gaming... maybe.
So you feel in the 1.4 model versus the 2.4 model you are going to see a large difference in general speed such as browsing, MS office, tabs etc?
 

BLBL

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2018
690
98
Has anyone compared display and speaker sound quality between new entry level Pro and advanced 2.4/2.8 GHz 4x TB port models? Do you get as good display and sound quality in cheaper version?

Also is there difference in build quality and keyboard feel / typing sound (is it solid as in other earlier released 2018/2019 Pro models you or do you get cheaper hollow sounds from keyboard)? I mean by hollow sound that if you compare Air and Pro 2018 high specs models, you will notice that keyboards do feel and sound much different between the two being much more solid in Pro models.
 

Howard2k

macrumors 68030
Mar 10, 2016
2,538
1,818
but he said the read SSD was very impressive, so the issue is the write speeds? would that mainly affect downloads etc?
[doublepost=1563122357][/doublepost]

So you feel in the 1.4 model versus the 2.4 model you are going to see a large difference in general speed such as browsing, MS office, tabs etc?

I wouldn’t say “large”. I think they’re both ridiculously capable of that task. But if for some reason I figured that the 1.4 wasn’t then I’d take the 2.4, not the 1.7. It’s not many dollars between the 2.4 and the 1.7 but it’s better performance from several angles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kp98077

kp98077

macrumors 6502a
Oct 26, 2010
938
237
Has anyone compared display and speaker sound quality between new entry level Pro and advanced 2.4/2.8 GHz 4x TB port models? Do you get as good display and sound quality in cheaper version?

Also is there difference in build quality and keyboard feel / typing sound (is it solid as in other earlier released 2018/2019 Pro models you or do you get cheaper hollow sounds from keyboard)? I mean by hollow sound that if you compare Air and Pro 2018 high specs models, you will notice that keyboards do feel and sound much different between the two being much more solid in Pro models.
good question...
 

Winstonp

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 2, 2005
790
21
Boston
but he said the read SSD was very impressive, so the issue is the write speeds? would that mainly affect downloads etc?
[doublepost=1563122357][/doublepost]

So you feel in the 1.4 model versus the 2.4 model you are going to see a large difference in general speed such as browsing, MS office, tabs etc?
I wouldn’t say “large”. I think they’re both ridiculously capable of that task. But if for some reason I figured that the 1.4 wasn’t then I’d take the 2.4, not the 1.7. It’s not many dollars between the 2.4 and the 1.7 but it’s better performance from several angles.
I can’t imagine basic tasks will be noticeable
 

kp98077

macrumors 6502a
Oct 26, 2010
938
237
I think if you’re keeping it for only a few years I wouldn’t spend the $500 but that’s me. That’s a lot !
 
  • Like
Reactions: teknikal90

Zdigital2015

macrumors 68000
Jul 14, 2015
1,677
1,729
East Coast, United States
but he said the read SSD was very impressive, so the issue is the write speeds? would that mainly affect downloads etc?

So you feel in the 1.4 model versus the 2.4 model you are going to see a large difference in general speed such as browsing, MS office, tabs etc?
The SSD write speed is a function of the size of the SSD and generally the number of NAND chips, so if you want faster write speeds, you need to move up to the 256 model or BTO up to the 512GB or 1TB SSD.

Write speeds are not going to affect downloads...people do still uses HDDs, you’re covered speed wise, even with the base 128GB. If you’re going to do video editing, you will need to pick up some sort of external SSD, either USB 3.0 or USB-C to achieve the speeds needed for dealing with the footage. Check Jonathan Morrison’s review from a couple of days ago.

Tabs and number of Office applications, any applications are as much a function of how much RAM you have as how fast the HDD or SSD speed is inside the computer. Lots of Chrome tabs open, you should have more RAM. Opening lots of apps simultaneously or keeping them open, you should have more RAM. 8GB is workable, and you can see how much DRAM you are using now in your existing computer to see if the upgrade to 16GB is worth it to you. Honestly, I can fly most of the time with just 8GB even with multiple apps open, but I have 16GB minimum on everything for those apps I work in that work better with more RAM.

The 1.4GHz model seems very competent speed wise, but may not have maximum gusto for prolonged renders, transcodes, etc as the TDP on the CPU is about half of the 2.4GHz. It can do the work, but it may take longer. If speed is an important thing in getting those tasks done because ka-ching, ka-ching, you should be buying a 15” MacBook Pro or an eGPU if you are video centric...see MaxTech’s video on YouTube that compares $2K worth of 13”MBP and eGPU to $3549 worth of 15” MBP with Vega 20. It is enlightening.
[doublepost=1563141895][/doublepost]
Has anyone compared display and speaker sound quality between new entry level Pro and advanced 2.4/2.8 GHz 4x TB port models? Do you get as good display and sound quality in cheaper version?

Also is there difference in build quality and keyboard feel / typing sound (is it solid as in other earlier released 2018/2019 Pro models you or do you get cheaper hollow sounds from keyboard)? I mean by hollow sound that if you compare Air and Pro 2018 high specs models, you will notice that keyboards do feel and sound much different between the two being much more solid in Pro models.
The 13” P3 display is the same regardless of the CPU or price. Apple used the same display for the old 2016/2017 13” dual core MBP. The keyboard is the same as the 13” 2019 model they just introduced in May, which is different from the 2018 model in that the materials are different. Go to an Apple Store or a Best Buy and bang on one of the 28w TDP MacBook Pros. The chassis is indentical sans a difference in the number of fake speaker grille holes. Check out iFixit’s teardown.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kp98077

Zdigital2015

macrumors 68000
Jul 14, 2015
1,677
1,729
East Coast, United States
Would be using for 3-4 years. Would be replacing a Dell XPS 9550 with a 6700hq I game with via eGPU. 2 vs 4 ports not critical at all. Battery life important.


http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13240388http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13240388

vs

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?q=8257u
The 1.4Ghz with 16GB of DRAM and either the 512GB or 1TB SSD would be your best bet. The 2.4GHz would only be worth it if your tasks are more processor intensive over a longer period of time where the higher TDP would keep the CPU running at higher Turbo Boost speeds longer as opposed to the 15w TDP of the 1.4GHz and 1.7GHz models. The 2.8GHz Core i7 BTO model is not appreciably faster to make it worth the $300 up charge other than the piece of mind of knowing you left nothing on the table when you bought your MBP. Similarly, the 1.7GHz Core i7 BTO is a complete waste of $$ considering how fast the 1.4GHz is running...unless someone can disprove me with some mystical Geekbench numbers and an actual use case where the 1.7GHz has longer legs. Maybe a transcode, although Jonathan Morrison showed Compressor transcodes of Red RAW footage and the T2 chip was chewing through it like it was nothing.
 

BLBL

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2018
690
98
Has anyone found information about battery used in 1.4GHz entry level Pro? I wonder for how many charge cycles it is rated for? That model is not yet mentioned in Apple documents. All recent Pro models used to have battery rated for 1000 charge cycles but since entry model has slightly different sized battery than higher priced Pro models I guess it may be more cost effective part used so I wonder if it is rated for 500 or 300 charge cycles?

The 13” P3 display is the same regardless of the CPU or price. Apple used the same display for the old 2016/2017 13” dual core MBP. The keyboard is the same as the 13” 2019 model they just introduced in May, which is different from the 2018 model in that the materials are different. Go to an Apple Store or a Best Buy and bang on one of the 28w TDP MacBook Pros. The chassis is indentical sans a difference in the number of fake speaker grille holes. Check out iFixit’s teardown.
Don’t they use several vendors for Pro model displays? Or have they moved to use only one vendor for panels?
Also do we know they use the same quality requirements for all Pro models or do they accept lower quality panels (or panels rejected from higher price model production) for entry Pro?
 
Last edited:

kp98077

macrumors 6502a
Oct 26, 2010
938
237
Has anyone found information about battery used in 1.4GHz entry level Pro? I wonder for how many charge cycles it is rated for? That model is not yet mentioned in Apple documents. All recent Pro models used to have battery rated for 1000 charge cycles but since entry model has slightly different sized battery than higher priced Pro models I guess it may be more cost effective part used so I wonder if it is rated for 500 or 300 charge cycles?


Don’t they use several vendors for Pro model displays? Or have they moved to use only one vendor for panels?
Also do we know they use the same quality requirements for all Pro models or do they accept lower quality panels (or panels rejected from higher price model production) for entry Pro?
I really don't think they are "on the cheap" with most part on the "budget pro line" lol... they certainly are not if you look at the 15" base model, which will soon be the real base model... it wouldn't serve apple well within the same exact line to do that... I would be surprised!
 

keiji11

macrumors member
Aug 25, 2018
68
8
why not get the 13 mbp tb 2018 refurbished? compare to the 13 mbp 2019 base model every specs are better accept the keyboard is 1 generation behind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psymac

Winstonp

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 2, 2005
790
21
Boston
The 1.4Ghz with 16GB of DRAM and either the 512GB or 1TB SSD would be your best bet. The 2.4GHz would only be worth it if your tasks are more processor intensive over a longer period of time where the higher TDP would keep the CPU running at higher Turbo Boost speeds longer as opposed to the 15w TDP of the 1.4GHz and 1.7GHz models. The 2.8GHz Core i7 BTO model is not appreciably faster to make it worth the $300 up charge other than the piece of mind of knowing you left nothing on the table when you bought your MBP. Similarly, the 1.7GHz Core i7 BTO is a complete waste of $$ considering how fast the 1.4GHz is running...unless someone can disprove me with some mystical Geekbench numbers and an actual use case where the 1.7GHz has longer legs. Maybe a transcode, although Jonathan Morrison showed Compressor transcodes of Red RAW footage and the T2 chip was chewing through it like it was nothing.
Thanks. So gaming isn't a processor intensive task?
[doublepost=1563185775][/doublepost]
why not get the 13 mbp tb 2018 refurbished? compare to the 13 mbp 2019 base model every specs are better accept the keyboard is 1 generation behind.
Can't get 2tb.
 

Zorori

macrumors newbie
Nov 26, 2017
24
17
Gaming is always GPU > CPU. But there is a point where your GPU is throttled by the CPU not being able to keep up.

Generally, gamers used to upgrade their GPU multiple times before upgrading their CPU -- even when the CPU used the same motherboard, there wasn't much point. My brother was using a Phenom until last year and was playing GTA 4 at 1440p (monitor) and 4k when used on the TV...

No idea with laptop chips. Someone must have tried on Youtube with a Macbook Air or other ultra portable.
 

Winstonp

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 2, 2005
790
21
Boston
Gaming is always GPU > CPU. But there is a point where your GPU is throttled by the CPU not being able to keep up.

Generally, gamers used to upgrade their GPU multiple times before upgrading their CPU -- even when the CPU used the same motherboard, there wasn't much point. My brother was using a Phenom until last year and was playing GTA 4 at 1440p (monitor) and 4k when used on the TV...

No idea with laptop chips. Someone must have tried on Youtube with a Macbook Air or other ultra portable.
I wonder if 1.4ghz causes a throttle with modern games. I'm using a GPU (RX580 8gb).