MBP 1.4 bs 2.4 - seem very close on benchmarks

MrMister111

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 28, 2009
2,679
173
UK
Looking for MBP. Was going to go basic, but 128Gb at this price point, in my opinion is poor, so probably have to go for 256Gb version.

So looking at benchmarks, and I know they are not everything, but a good gauge, the 1.4 vs 2.4 isn’t massive, the lot slower 1.4 seems to be really close to the 2.4. The 2.4 works out £300 more in UK, for ensuring the same bar the 1.4 vs 2.4.

2.4 single core 969
1.4 single core 942

2.4 multi core 3969
1.4 multi core 3899

Is this correct? Anyone tried both, had hands on with both?
 

brucewayne

macrumors regular
Nov 8, 2005
114
82
They benchmark close because the turbo boost speed is nearly the same. I have the 1.4 and next to a 2018 2.3 they are nearly the same - the 2.4 2019 should be similar) I think for most tasks for most people there won't be much difference.

That said, on a long process like video encoding you may hit thermals that will cause the 1.4 to throttle back more. Also the 1.4 has a single fan which may be less efficient and may run more often. I haven't run into either issue.

Keep in mind that the price difference to the 2.4 also includes 2 more TB3 ports, the second fan, a step up on the integrated graphics and faster ssd I/O.

I bought a 2019 1.4 with 16GB / 256GB and if I did it again I would have got the 128GB. I have an iMac for main storage and anything large (like video editing) I do on the laptop is likely going to be off an external drive - a Samsung 1TB @ $160 /2TB @ $270 T5 SSD is a much better value than the internal ssds Apple offers.

As far as the ports, the only place I really need more than 2 is at my desk, and I bought a CalDigit TS3 Plus to handle everything with one connection (i.e. 4k display, Gig ethernet, power, usb etc)

Hope that helps
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrMister111

MrMister111

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 28, 2009
2,679
173
UK
Some really good points and explanations there, thanks a lot.

Didn’t know, or even think, about the single fan and longer encode example.

So the 2.4 SSD is faster than the 1.4, I would have thought they’d be the same SSD in all. Is it much faster? Where’s this info please.

Interesting that good go to 128Gb if a choice. I’ve had to move my photos library to an external USB as it’s over 800Gb now, so really there’s not much I need space wise. I just am worried for future so thought 256Gb, even though the upgrade price is really expensive would be better.
 

brucewayne

macrumors regular
Nov 8, 2005
114
82
I suppose I upgraded to 256GB because I thought it silly that my phone would have more storage than my laptop. As I sit here with all my apps and stuff I keep local I am only using 56GB.

If it is your main computer 128GB will be cramped. Actually, if you do anything with final cut 256GB might be also.

I would def get 16GB though - probably the cheapest way to keep it relevant as the OS bloats.

There are a lot of comparisons on youtube with the 1.4ghz MBP that all seem positive.

Or if you can hold out the rumors point to a new form factor mid-2020.

Good luck with whatever you decide
 

Ruggy

macrumors regular
Jan 11, 2017
247
154
The way to look at this is to compare it to driving a car.
So, you've got two cars, one has a top speed of 180mph and the other one has a top speed of 80mph (forget acceleration).
Now if you are on a road with a speed limit of 70, then you will see no difference and that's what you're seeing when you look at the processor speed.
Most of the time, you'll see little difference either because the process doesn't require the speed or possibly because the whole thing is limited by the bus or something.
It should make a difference eventually when you are pushing the machine to the limit doing something that uses masses of processing like rendering video or applying an unsharp mask.
Then you might see several minutes difference on something that might take an hour or more, but most of the time for short things, the difference is a second or so and you just don't notice.
The real differences are seen in the multi core. How many and how they perform.
If you are on a single road in your car and you are stuck behind a tractor doing 20, then you can only do 20 and that's the problem with single core.
As soon as you have 2 cores then that's a dual carriageway and you can overtake if a process is slow.
When you have 8 then that's an 8 lane highway and that means 8 processes can all go at the speed they want and hyper threading means they can overtake on both sides.
But machines are so powerful for what they have to do these days, unless you know you are going to be doing something that really pushes them to the limit, you aren't really going to notice the difference.
A fast SSD and high bus speed, good internet connection speed will affect you more often.