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.
Macbook Pro 13 or 15
- Thread starter Sdahe
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Luck.
My returned i9 developed an issue after 1 month (double-stroking "i") and I had a cover on since day one.
My 13" however is running fine so far.
I mean.. is it that sensible to dust?.. Do I need to go and pay for the Apple Care because of the keyboard problem...
I don't think so, it's just that butterfly mechanism has very little tolerance for build, dust, anything really.
Applecare: I reckon not.
If the 2018 models prove as unreliable, apple will likely launch a service program.
https://www.apple.com/support/keyboard-service-program-for-macbook-and-macbook-pro/
Hahahaha... I hope!.. It's my second day with my new MBP and Im already seeing this keyboard thingNot yet.
2018 keyboards are better.
Now that the 13" have quadcores, the difference between is less. After using a MBA for 5 years, I moved to a 15" and I don't think I'll go back. The newer models are very portable and not heavy at all. This of course led to some heat issues, but I've had 0 problems with mine (including keyboard). I usually dock my computer at work and at home I connect it to an external monitor. The larger screen is great compared to the 13" imo, you can have a lot more windows and applications taking up the screen.
I have the 2017 15". I bought it a month or so after it was released (so late summer 2017). Haven't had any issues with the computer so far. The only thing annoying about this is when I connect it to an external display the computer heats up because the dGPU is activated, but this isn't due to the model, its more due to the design of the computer. If I treat this as a "mobile Desktop" I'm fine with it.
Oh ok.. got it.. well let's see how I go with this 2018 model..
[doublepost=1548013999][/doublepost]
What happened with your 2018 15" MBP?
I edit photos on my Mac. Lightroom and Photoshop. I couldn't imagine using a 13" I say 15 all the way.
It just didn't work all that well. It was hot as hell (even browsing safari would spin the fans), and it had a display flicker.
Supposedly all the issues that it had were "software" but apple couldn't fix them in two months so they just refunded me.
Happy they did, the 13" + Mini I'm rocking now both work much better. There are plenty of happy 15" users here, but i believe that for the 2018 models, 13" are simply better.
Except in sleep (because non LP DDR4 draws much more power) and doing anything that's not web browsing at 150 nits.
Of course at no-load it should have more battery life, as its battery is quite heftier.
That's when you only look at the CPU. As you are well aware, CPU speed is, for most use cases, irrelevant in future proofing.
In early 2014, I had the choice between an 11" MBA with 4GB-128GB, or a 13" rMBP with 8GB-256GB. I bought the latter. I doubt I'd still be using the MBA today, but the rMBP is doing fine. The most important upgrades for me were RAM, storage and screen. Not so much the CPU.
If your upgrades only give you 6 months extra, then indeed, you shouldn't do them. For me, I'm pretty sure I got 3 more years out of them.
I wasn't talking about pure die shrinks only. We didn't get any serious upgrades for 2-3 years, until this year. The tick-tock gave us an architectural boost every other year, alternating with a small performance boost + major efficiency boost. Intel was way out of its depth when the 10nm hit the wall and it took them 3 years to get back to grips.
I do agree with you, mostly. But for my specific situation, I'd still get at least 16, most likely 32GB. Since I got my late 2013 rMBP, I unexpectedly started working in video capture and processing, software development and AI. I have since moved on to a TV company. So for me, I prefer to be on the safe side. Since it's a machine for work, I can afford to spend a lot. In return, the machine will be much more likely able to cope with whatever comes my way.
Depends on your usage.
In my case, CPU power related audio dropouts were the reason I was opting to upgrade my 2012 rMBP 15" (16GB,768GB,2.7 i7)
the CPU probably gave me less than 6 months extra.
IMO we didn't get serious upgrade since 2012, as far as CPU is concerned :/
Ouch. If you're cpu bound, I can understand why for your use case, future proofing doesn't work. The difference between the offered processors is usually negligible.Depends on your usage.
In my case, CPU power related audio dropouts were the reason I was opting to upgrade my 2012 rMBP 15" (16GB,768GB,2.7 i7)
the CPU probably gave me less than 6 months extra.
IMO we didn't get serious upgrade since 2012, as far as CPU is concerned :/
I fully agree that 2018 is the first exciting cpu upgrade in a long, long time. And Vega and 32gb are serious upgrades, too. I'm tempted to buy, but I promised myself I would wait and see what the 2019 update brings. My budget and my wife will love me for it
RAM usage shown means little with out understanding the context.
If you run Activity Monitor and process X is using 8 GB and Process Y is using 3 GB it just means those process X has X page of memory allocated to it and process Y has 3 GB of memory pages allocated to it. And all of that means little since we don't know if any of that memory is critical to the processes (i.e does the process need that memory to do it's work, or was the memory just allocated and deallocated, but the system has not yet given it to another process.)
To see that you need to look at "Memory pressure", the conditions there (green, yellow, red) show if that memory is really critical to those processes. If you start seeing yellow then you are running short of RAM and are headed toward an issue. It is called trashing. When Process X is having to get memory from Process Y to do some work, and then Process Y has to get memory from Process X to do some work. If it is Red you have a critical issue and processes are starting to stall for lack of memory because they spending all their time having to give and take memory from each other rather than doing real work.
As to why it is different on two machines. Because unless you can create the exact same condition on both machines. Exact same running processes, exact same order of operations in those processes, exact same resource (hard drivers, network, etc) they will be different because they got to where they are along different conditions.
If you run Activity Monitor and process X is using 8 GB and Process Y is using 3 GB it just means those process X has X page of memory allocated to it and process Y has 3 GB of memory pages allocated to it. And all of that means little since we don't know if any of that memory is critical to the processes (i.e does the process need that memory to do it's work, or was the memory just allocated and deallocated, but the system has not yet given it to another process.)
To see that you need to look at "Memory pressure", the conditions there (green, yellow, red) show if that memory is really critical to those processes. If you start seeing yellow then you are running short of RAM and are headed toward an issue. It is called trashing. When Process X is having to get memory from Process Y to do some work, and then Process Y has to get memory from Process X to do some work. If it is Red you have a critical issue and processes are starting to stall for lack of memory because they spending all their time having to give and take memory from each other rather than doing real work.
As to why it is different on two machines. Because unless you can create the exact same condition on both machines. Exact same running processes, exact same order of operations in those processes, exact same resource (hard drivers, network, etc) they will be different because they got to where they are along different conditions.
... which is exactly why I would get the 32gb version. I developed my CS thesis on 3D graphics rendering on a machine with 8 MEGAbytes of RAM and without any 3D accelerated GPU (as they didn't exist yet). Won't be caught out with a lack of RAM, ever.
Now I feel like an old man hoarding because of the war 75 years ago
... which is exactly why I would get the 32gb version. I developed my CS thesis on 3D graphics rendering on a machine with 8 MEGAbytes of RAM and without any 3D accelerated GPU (as they didn't exist yet). Won't be caught out with a lack of RAM, ever.
Now I feel like an old man hoarding because of the war 75 years ago
Sounds like we’re only maybe a generation apart - my first CS courses used an IBM 7094 with 32 K of 36 bit words (wasn’t technically CS - MIT didn’t have that department in those days).
I made my bones (as one of the few undergrads ever appointed to the research staff at MIT) programming a prototype minicomputer with 1 K of 12 bit words to sit up and do magic at the Cambridge Electron Acceelerator for a couple of grad students who went on to have near Nobel-level careers.
Regarding the “old man hoarding” remark, I was born almost exactly nine months after my father was released from Navy service at the end of WWII and returned to his wife
Last edited: