MacBook Pro June 2012 Vs Oct 2013

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by mas123, Nov 3, 2013.

  1. mas123 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2008
    #1
    I'm looking to buy a Macbook Pro and wanted to know the main differences between the June 2012 model: http://store.apple.com/uk/product/FC975B/A/refurbished-macbook-pro-23ghz-quad-core-intel-i7-with-retina-display
    And the current Oct 2013 equivalent.

    Are they really that different?
     
  2. James Cole macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2007
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
  3. Shubbeh macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2013
    #3
    I'd say the battery life is probably the biggest differentiator. The newer Intel Haswell CPUs really make a difference.
     
  4. UBS28 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2012
    #4
    - better WIFI
    - Thunderbolt 2
    - better battery life
    - faster CPU & GPU
    - much faster SSD's
    - new screens (LG apparently uses new screens which might have fixed IR, however this isn't confirmed yet since IR issues can show up after many months)

    However, I suspect there are nice deals out there for the 2012 rMBP.
     
  5. mas123 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2008
    #5
    Thanks for the prompt replies! Basically I can get that model in my original post for £1000 or the 2013 equivalent for £500 more. Is it really worth the extra £500?
     
  6. john123 macrumors 68000

    john123

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2001
    #6
    Since the OP is looking at the base model for the 2012, I have to assume he is also looking at the base model for the October 2013s. As such, this list is incorrect, partially misleading, and incomplete.

    The CPU speeds for the two are going to be roughly equivalent, with the current model (2.0Ghz) being a couple precent faster.

    The new GPU is a downgrade and is definitely not faster. The 650M from the previous generation offers superior performance to the Iris Pro 5200 in the current generation.

    You left off the faster Wifi 802.11ac in the new models, although that only matters if the OP will be using an 802.11ac router.

    The screens are always a crapshoot, but sometimes the luck will actually be better with the refurbished models. I would not give the edge to one generation versus the other.

    ----------

    If that's the price difference in the UK, I'd say certainly not, unless TB2 or 802.11ac are big deals to you.
     
  7. mas123 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2008
    #7
    Thanks john123! Those two aspects are certainly not a big deal for me, so it seems like the £1000 deal is best for me.
     
  8. bigpoppamac31 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #8


    I am also wondering this. I have an early 2011 MBP 15" "low end" and was wondering if I should go with a refurb cMBP 2012 or a new 2013 rMBP 15".

    Here's the refurb I'm looking at. I would upgrade the hard drive to a 1TB SSD.
    http://store.apple.com/ca/product/G0MWALL/A/refurbished-macbook-pro-27ghz-quad-core-intel-i7

    Compare that to the new 15" rMBP with upgraded storage to 1TB. Which would be better.
     
  9. -Eden macrumors member

    -Eden

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2010
    #9
    Of course the new 15" rMBP is going to be better. There have been reports and tests that show the 1TB SSD from Apple has amazing read/write speeds, but thats probably not noticeable with everyday use.

    Does weight and form factor matter for you?
    Do you care about how many pixels are on the screen?
    Comparing the cMBP 2012 to a 2013 rMBP are not the same..
     
  10. john123 macrumors 68000

    john123

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2001
    #10
    It's apples to oranges, no pun intended. I personally loved the high-res antiglare screens. If the Retina didn't support 1920x1200, which is what I use, I'd still be using a high-res antiglare MBP at 1680x1050.

    It's a heck of a lot cheaper to go with the cMBP and upgrade its SSD. In US prices, something like the Samsung 840 EVO 1TB can be had for around $580 (less if you keep an eye out for deals), versus $800 to upgrade from 256GB to 1TB on the Retinas.

    I think it comes down to personal preference. Both options would be stellar. It's just a question of what matters more—the money, or the slimmer form factor and Retina screen.

    ----------

    Er, if he's comparing the refurb cMBP that he linked to a 2013 base model, the cMBP will actually offer better performance in everything except disk I/O.
     
  11. mas123 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2008
    #11
    I think it's obvious that the newer model will be better but the question is, is it £500 better?
     
  12. bigpoppamac31 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #12
    Well I was actually comparing it to the high end new rMBP which has a dGPU. But money matter more to me then a super slim form factor. Besides with a cMBP I can remove the optical drive and put in a second HDD or SSD. Something one cannot do with a rMBP sadly. The retina screen is awesome but my hi-res antiglare is plenty clear and crisp for me. Also I want FW800 cause there doesn't seem to be that great of support for TB even though Apple now has TB2 on it's new rMBPs. I'm likely going to go with the refurb cMBP but I was just curious on how they stack up spec wise against each other. Once I pop in an SSD it'll be plenty fast for me.
     

Share This Page