Macbook Pro NTB - 2.0 i5 or 2.4 i7?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by PalidinoDH, Dec 29, 2016.

  1. PalidinoDH, Dec 29, 2016
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2016

    PalidinoDH macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2014
    #1
    As far as I can tell from the Intel website, quite literally the only difference between the two is the base and turbo frequency of 0.4. Everything else is identical. What I'm trying to decide is whether or not the $300 price bump for 0.4 difference is worth the cost.

    I'm currently using a Macbook Air mid 2013 with a 1.7GHz i7 and 8GM of ram. For the most part I only use Sublime Text, Java for building and running applications, and run an old 3D game that uses the CPU instead of GPU (Oldschool RS if anyone is familiar with it).

    For the most part I don't tend to experience any significant "lag" with my Macbook Air, however most of the time when compiling source code things tend to run slow for a few seconds. I usually have Safari open with 1-8 tabs. My fan also runs the majority of the time I use it.

    Also forgot to mention that the reason for considering the NTB is that as you can see from the apps I use, the touch bar would rarely serve a purpose for me. Also the ~10% larger battery and the general online input that the NTB model seems to pull much better battery life than any of the TB models is a pretty big plus for me, and since I already use a Macbook Air as it is, I'm used to the weaker 15w chips.
     
  2. Horizone macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2016
    #2
    I use the nTB base model and it obviously is not a speed demon. Faster CPU option however, will give you only slightly better performance so it is not a game changer. On the other hand $300 is insane to me for a small bump of speed.
     
  3. PalidinoDH, Dec 29, 2016
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2016

    PalidinoDH thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2014
    #3
    I'm unsure how reliable geekbench is, but their website seems to suggest the 2.4GHz outclasses most (all?) of the 13" real macbook pros of last year. I only say real in the sense of the ntb processor being what the macbook air would use.

    MacBook Pro (13-inch Late 2016)
    Intel Core i7-6567U @ 3.3 GHz (2 cores)
    4006

    MacBook Pro (13-inch Late 2016)
    Intel Core i5-6287U @ 3.1 GHz (2 cores)
    3876

    -MacBook Pro (13-inch Late 2016)- Upgraded NTB
    Intel Core i7-6660U @ 2.4 GHz (2 cores)
    3866

    MacBook Pro (13-inch Late 2016)
    Intel Core i5-6267U @ 2.9 GHz (2 cores)
    3772

    MacBook Pro (13-inch Retina Early 2015)
    Intel Core i7-5557U @ 3.1 GHz (2 cores)
    3772

    MacBook Pro (13-inch Retina Early 2015)
    Intel Core i5-5287U @ 2.9 GHz (2 cores)
    3649

    -MacBook Pro (13-inch Late 2016)- Base Model
    Intel Core i5-6360U @ 2.0 GHz (2 cores)
    3612

    MacBook Air (13-inch Early 2015)
    Intel Core i7-5650U @ 2.2 GHz (2 cores)
    3500

    MacBook Pro (13-inch Retina Early 2015)
    Intel Core i5-5257U @ 2.7 GHz (2 cores)
    3482

    -MacBook Air (13-inch Mid 2013)- My current Mac
    Intel Core i7-4650U @ 1.7 GHz (2 cores)
    3279



    I should mention I'm going to Best Buy tomorrow where they'll hopefully have atleast one of the new macbooks on display so I can see the keyboard for myself to decide if I feel I can get used to it. If so, I can either pick up the 2.0 from there right then and there, or order the 2.4 online and wait about a week. Not that my air is going to die on my or anything, but the excitement of getting a new mac after 3 years makes me want to get it as soon as possible lol. 8GB ram and 256GB SSD is plenty for me, so it entirely comes down to which processor to go with. I'm not sure how Java and the CPU get along, but my overall compile times are WELL under 30 seconds (I'd say under 15 even) if that plays a roll in the turbo boost.
     
  4. PalidinoDH thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2014
  5. halfbad macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2014
    #5
    would really not bother with the upgrade, not worth it even compared to where you are now, your performance improvement will be small, but there are other factors like the retina screen, SSD speeds and such, battery,GPU etc... Those are the things you should be factoring in not the power.
     
  6. k2743 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2016
    #6
    I am desperately trying to decide on this too!!
     
  7. PalidinoDH thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2014
    #7
    Most of what I listed that I use my laptop for I'm pretty sure all uses the CPU, which is why while I know the GPU from my current macbook air vs even the base macbook pro is a huge leap, that the CPU improvements are very small each year. The base model CPU is better than the upgraded CPU I have, but then how much does the retina screen factor in and work against the comparison? Do you know anything about the benchmark scores, since they're all pretty close for the ones I listed, how much of a factor do those small changes between each make? For example my air is 3279 whereas the upgraded ntb is 3866 vs 3612 for the base model.
     
  8. halfbad macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2014
    #8
    This is how I kinda see it, overall if you got a new system, you would feel a bit more overall speediness (very small), due to the SSD and CPU integration. For performance your looking at even less of a difference esp going from an i7 1.7 to a i5 2.0, it's really negligible.

    Reality: So we shouldn't really look at perf as a factor here, because really your not getting it, except where the GPU is involved.

    Pro: You do get the Retina screen which is very nice, great for text in your case, bit more battery life maybe, better speakers for sure too, the air speakers are tinny.

    Cons: Gonna have to deal with the dongles, and your out $$$$.

    So the question really is are you willing to pay the entirety of you computer for everything but performance because your not getting improvements there.

    Honestly if your current air is fine, you should keep that and wait a bit. Else if you going to buy, get the entry level.
     
  9. PalidinoDH thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2014
    #9
    Just picked up the entry level macbook. My sound is completely broken, can't use the speakers or headphone jack (believe me I've already tried everything online 100 times over). Also my battery seems to have gone to hell lately on my air for some reason. Claims 80% of it's total charge is still there using apps but it dies 100x faster than it did a few months ago and I have a service battery message. I have to say I'm happy though (haven't even opened it yet), I played around with the one on display with Best Buy and was sold just on the screen alone even if I could have gotten an older pro with a nearly identical screen. I think I got what I paid for, I'm pretty sure my current air cost me close to $2k back when I bought it with 8GB ram, 256GB SSD, and the i7.
     
  10. Qwe9203 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2014
    #10
    Stick with i5 2.0. It will give you additional battery life and run cooler under load vs the i7.
     
  11. halfbad macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2014
    #11
    Grats Op!

    Let's us know how she runs, most likely you have a logic board problem, which will lead to many other issues. So that's a good purchase then.

    The screen is amazing esp for text. I have a normal large monitor at work and I always end up using my mac screen for reference and accuracy.

    Above comment is correct the i5 will give more battery life.
     
  12. Nick521 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2010
  13. vlotty macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2012
    #13
    Been trying to research this topic recently as the 2.0 and 2.4 nTBs are popping up on the Apple Refurb site--

    I'm in a similar boat to OP, and personally, value battery life over raw performance (I'm ok with waiting an extra minute for video to encode, for example).

    Someone upthread mentioned that the 2.0 will probably run cooler and use less energy = better battery life. Are there any links that have looked at the battery life between the 2.0 and 2.4 nTB models? I see lots that compare nTB and TB, but haven't seen anything just between 2.0 and 2.4.

    For the refurbs, the cost difference is $250 vs. $300 as well to bump up to 2.4. It's about a 16% difference in price for about 10% increase in raw performance, which may be ok. I am already getting 16gb RAM so that's not a factor. Main thing is if it also means like 10% less battery, then I'll probably stick to 2.0.

    Anyone have info or experience?
     

Share This Page