Is the $100 2.6GHz CPU upgrade worth it (over the stock 2.3GHz) on the rMBP?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by pgharavi, Aug 3, 2012.

  1. pgharavi macrumors regular

    pgharavi

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    #1
    I noticed, via MacRumors, that you can now upgrade the stock Retina MBP from the 2.3GHz Quad-core CPU to 2.6GHz for $100.00.

    Worth it? Waste of money?
     
  2. terraphantm macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #2
    Most people probably don't need the extra speed... but for only $100, I'd go for it. It'll make a bigger difference than 2.6->2.7
     
  3. pgharavi thread starter macrumors regular

    pgharavi

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    #3
    That's what I was thinking...perhaps not the most needed upgrade on the stock Retina MBP (a cheaper 512 SSD would be #1), but as a long term deal (I've had my current MBP (5,5) for three years now), perhaps the extra CPU horsepower would be welcomed.
     
  4. Dangerous Theory macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Location:
    UK
    #4
    I'd be weary, Engadget and anandtech both seemed to find the 2.6 performing significantly worse in the battery life test compared to the 2.3. It's not necessarily the case always, or something that can't be fixed if it isn't a hardware issue, but it does add an extra reason not to spend more money (for me anyway).
     
  5. Speedy Gonzalez macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Location:
    Alligator Bayou
    #5
    Not to mention the 3615QM is running 10C cooler at load mine top at 90C and I saw some 3720QM owners reporting 100C
     
  6. Fandongo macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Location:
    Space
    #6
    I like sixes.
    Hate threes.

    2.6Ghz, 16GB ram, 256GB.
    Hopefully OWC will offer retina SSDs soon and use the 256 as an external.

    Edit: Fun fact - BTO PC companies (xoticpc) can charge up to $350 to upgrade from 2.3-2.6.
     
  7. pgharavi thread starter macrumors regular

    pgharavi

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    #7
    I'm unfamiliar with the codes/model numbers you've listed...are those the stock rMBP and the $100 1.6Ghz upgrade?

    So the consensus is that not only is it more expensive, but it comes at the additional cost of lower battery time and increased heat?
     
  8. Fandongo macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Location:
    Space
    #8
    You're choosing between a v6 and a v8.
    Horsepower or gas milage?
     
  9. Speedy Gonzalez macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Location:
    Alligator Bayou
    #9
    exactly 2.3ghz is the 3615QM and 2.6ghz is the 3720QM the upgrade price is good only $100 bucks because most notebook retailers are charging $150 but with the limited rMBP cooling you better get the base CPU if you want to get more life out of your system because 10C less is a big difference specially if you are going to run CPU intensive apps :)
     
  10. Slivortal macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2012
    #10
    Not really. The 2.7 may not be as inexpensive as the 2.6, but with 2MB extra of L3 cache, many would make an argument for the 2.7 upgrade being the better one.

    I'd be wary of those reporting vastly different battery life, though. I'm personally waiting for some form of scientific evidence.
     
  11. ixodes macrumors 601

    ixodes

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2012
    Location:
    Pacific Coast, USA
    #11
    Unless you truly have a need for speed, like gaming or some resource intense apps, I'd go with the 2.3GHz. Cooler, still fast and efficient. It has nothing to do with price, and everything to do with performance. The 2.3GHz is a highly capable processor.

    That's my take on it :)
     
  12. MCAsan macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #12
    I went with 2.7 as it becomes my new desktop and I want it to still be a great machine in 3 year at the end of Apple Care. To me the CPU and memory upgrades are not bad. What is bad is the cost of going to 768SSD. :eek:
     
  13. PCWebbJR macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #13
  14. terraphantm macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #14
    2MB cache will have minimal impact for most real tasks. It's really only useful for major number crunching and other processes that can run in a limited amount of memory. For the more "typical" CPU intensive tasks, i.e. video rendering, the cache will have next to no impact.

    ----------

    Both are 45W TDP processors. Ambient temperatures probably played a role. You can't draw any conclusions about the heat difference without running both computers in the same setting with the same task.
     
  15. pgharavi thread starter macrumors regular

    pgharavi

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    #15
    Odd...even through the .edu store I get this:

    2.6GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz [Add $100.00]

    You sure it was only $90? Thanks for the Anandtech link.
     
  16. boto macrumors 6502

    boto

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    #16
    Yes, they changed it 2 days ago to resolve the $60+ refund requests from everyone who purchased it on the 2 days they made that option available.
     
  17. ohbrilliance macrumors 6502a

    ohbrilliance

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #17
    There's a bit more than just the difference in GHz between the chips. The 2.7 has 8MB of L3 cache, while the 2.3 and 2.6 have 6MB. I don't know how much difference that extra cache makes.
     
  18. M-X macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    #18
    Integrated graphics

    According to Intel's spec page the HD4000 graphics in the 2.6 have a faster max clock speck 1.25ghz vs 1.1 in the 2.3. Could this lead to a slightly smoother experience on the 2.6 vs 2.3?

    I'm a wondering whether to return my 2.3/16/256 for a 2.6/16/256 within the grace period. The machine i have is perfect other than a slightly creaky case. With the shipping times down to about 2 weeks to your door, I could live with the wait, but it kinda of annoys me that apple changed the bto options so close after release.

    Has anyone else switched from 2.3 to 2.6 and noticed improved scrolling etc on iGPU - for me that would be more important than a slight bump in cpu speed.

    Thanks!: cool:
     
  19. Fed macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Location:
    Liverpool.
    #19
    +1. I'd rather have the power.
     
  20. swamyg1 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2007
    #20
    I'm in the exact same boat as you and I'm wondering the same thing.

    I recieve my machine on Monday but I do t want to keep having doubles and end up regretting my 2.3 purchase.
     
  21. AZREOSpecialist macrumors 68000

    AZREOSpecialist

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    #21
    How can a 10% increase in performance at a 5% increase in cost not be "worth it"?
     
  22. gentlefury macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2011
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #22
    depends what you do with your computer....for me, its well worth it. For most...probably not.
     
  23. appletechpro macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2012
    #23
    The new BTO options piss me off considering I just bought a base 2.3 on Monday. Granted, I only paid $2,000 for a brand new base rMBP, a $100 upgrade to 2.6 would have been SWEETTT

    I think the upgrade itself from 2.3 --> 2.6 for $100 is a great deal, and negligible considering how much we're spending for a rMBP anyway.
     
  24. PS65 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2008
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #24
    Meh, $100 for a few seconds. Not worth it.
     
  25. pgharavi thread starter macrumors regular

    pgharavi

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    #25
    This is really interesting, I didn't know the clock difference at the GPU as well.

    One final question: if I go the custom BTO route, my only option is ordering via Apple.com as opposed to walking into a store, correct?
     

Share This Page