MacBook Pro 2.5GHz vs. 2.8GHz. Worth the $200 more?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by UDigger, Aug 4, 2014.

  1. UDigger macrumors newbie

    Aug 4, 2014
    Hi guys,

    Thanks in advance your advisement!

    I've been a graphic designer for about 5 years; using Photoshop and Illustrator, mostly at web resolution, but occasionally for print res as well.

    However, I'm about to get into digital painting -- in Photoshop and ArtRage. I'll be working on canvases of at least 10" x 15" at 300 DPI; possibly larger in both canvas size and resolution.

    In evaluating the new 15" MacBook Pros to have enough processing speed (no lags) to handle digital painting at hi-res, the MBP I'm looking at is already configured with 16GB of RAM, and a 2.5GH processor. The question is, is it worth spending an additional $200 to bump that up to a 2.8GH processor?

    Will I see a noticeable difference in speed at 2.8? Or does it really come down to the RAM? (Also please keep in mind that the upcoming ArtRage 4.5 is 64 bit, and promised to be significantly faster to work on large canvases in print resolution.)

    So, 2.8 worth going for? Or will 2.5 be more than enough, as-is?

    Thanks again!

  2. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Apr 23, 2011
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    The standard 2.5/16/512/750M variant will do you fine.

    Bumping to 2.8GHz only gives you an unnoticeable increase, plus a larger cache.

    They both score similarly in Geekbench 3.
  3. capathy21 macrumors 65816


    Jun 16, 2014
    Houston, Texas
  4. UDigger thread starter macrumors newbie

    Aug 4, 2014
  5. thunng8 macrumors 6502a

    Feb 8, 2006
    There is no larger cache

Share This Page