Macbook Pro for web developer

[dsgnr]

Hi everyone,
I currently have a mid-2010 white unibody macbook - 2.4ghz core 2 duo, 256GB SSD and 8GB RAM. This Macbook has been great for me and never missed a beat. I'm afraid it's now starting to show it's age and I am now looking at a new Macbook.

I am a web developer so most common tasks are various web browsers, Coda2, Terminal for Git and SSH etc, MAMP or Vagrant (running CentOS for local development), sometimes Parallels Desktop running XP but that doesn't need to be fast as it's quite rare I use this now. Also quite a lot of Adobe CS work, in particular Illustrator and Photoshop for designing logos, occasional leaflets/brochures etc and of course websites.

My Macbook now struggles with basic tasks like browsing the net and Photoshop actions are now painfully slow.

I am considering a new 15" MacBook Pro Retina (I need the portability otherwise I'd be going for an iMac). Obviously they all come with 16GB RAM as standard (Are these definitely now soldered onto the logic board so they can't be updated later?) and SSD's.

I just can't decide whether to go for the normal 15" MacBook Pro or whether it's worth the extra few hundred pounds to go for the Radeon Graphics over the Iris. I also can't decide whether I'd feel the difference between the 2.2Ghz, 2.5Ghz or even the 2.8Ghz.

I'm sure whatever I will get will be a massive leap in performance over my unibody but as I only buy a new computer when I need it, I want to make the right decision.

I can understand that the uprated graphics may be better for Photoshop but is it really worth the extra outlay? The most extensive task in Photoshop I'll do is bulk image saving for web. Sometimes only a few hundreds but can go into thousands of images which definitely makes the laptop show it's age.

Any advise would be great.

 

[maflynn]

I think either machine will fit your needs, though the dGPU equipped model will give you a little extra oomph in PS.

 

[dsgnr]

Yeah I understand that'll help a little bit but is it an extra 400 pounds? (sorry I can't use the pound symbol for some reason...)

 

[leman]

For your work, you don't need the dGPU or a fast CPU. You don't even need 16GB. A 13" MBP retina will be enough for your work (but of course the display size might be a bit limiting, depending on what your do).

 

[dsgnr]

Thank you for your answer. I have had a 13" for the since 2010. When at home, I plug it into a 23" Cinema Display but when out and about or if I find myself working in a coffee shop, I do find myself missing the extra screen estate which is why I'm planning on going for the 15".

 

[Rodrigo Yoshida]

Thank you for your answer. I have had a 13" for the since 2010. When at home, I plug it into a 23" Cinema Display but when out and about or if I find myself working in a coffee shop, I do find myself missing the extra screen estate which is why I'm planning on going for the 15".

With the 13 inch retina display you can scale up to 1680x1050, almost full hd. That's enough real estate for most of people, but things look very small though. I usually use in 1440x900 mode.

 

[maflynn]

Yeah I understand that'll help a little bit but is it an extra 400 pounds? (sorry I can't use the pound symbol for some reason...)

Probably not, I can't see giving you all that much benefit. If your main gig was editing large RAW images for 8 hours, then maybe.