MBP 2018 15 - 2.2 or 2.6?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Shredder-, Aug 2, 2018.

Tags:
  1. Shredder- macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    #1
    Hello,

    I'm considering upgrading from my 2011 13" MBP to a 2018 15" model - not really sure which one to get though. The most "intense" things I do on my current macbook is web development (Node.JS and JavaScript in general)

    What machine would you guys suggest me getting? Will the the 2.2 Ghz "suffice"? I'm not that hardware-tech savvy to really know the difference between the two machines

    I also don't plan on upgrading for at least 4 years
     
  2. dannyar macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    #2
    There are a ton of videos and articles comparing the 2 speeds up against even the i9. It seems That there really isn't a huge difference amongst the 3 speeds and that you are better served saving your money or putting that extra cost towards a larger SSD and faster graphics card.
     
  3. Ma2k5 macrumors 68020

    Ma2k5

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2012
    Location:
    London
    #3
    Do you want 256GB space or 512GB space? As it isn't upgradable, I'd go for 512GB minimum - in which case the price difference between the two models once you upgrade the 2.2ghz to 512GB is around ~$100/£80, in which case you may as well get the 2.6ghz in my opinion.
     
  4. anthdci macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    #4
    this way my thinking too. Which is why ill be going for the 2.6/16/512/560x. Cant justify the extra for the 32gb. Makes more sense to save money now and if it becomes and issue in a few years ill sell and buy whatever is the current model.
     
  5. jerryk macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2011
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    #5
    With the 2.6 model you get a faster CPU and GPU for $100 more than just upgrading the drive size. So IMHO it is good value for the money
     
  6. Newtons Apple macrumors Core

    Newtons Apple

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    #6
    I doubt anyone would notice the difference in speed between the two.
     
  7. vaugha macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2011
    #7
    The other thing I'm interested in knowing is the delta in battery life for the slightly increased speed. I haven't seen much info on this.
     
  8. roland.g macrumors 603

    roland.g

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    #8
    Incorrect.

    The 2.2 16GB 555X 512GB SSD is $2,599.

    The 2.6 16GB 560X 512GB SSD which is the base 2.6 with no options bumped is $2,799.

    $200 difference. You only get a $100 difference if you bring up the GPU to the 560X on the 2.2. Arguably anyone ordering the 2.2 is going to leave the 555X in place.

    So it is a $200 price increase to get the higher end CPU and GPU at any same RAM and storage config from 512 up.

    I am considering a 1TB 2.2 for $2,999. The same 2.6 would be $3,199.
     
  9. Petetastic macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2018
    #9
    Given that the 2.2 can *easily* turbo past 2.9 ghz and the limiting factor of the chips is always heat, I’d stick with the 2.2. That’s what I’m doing, anyway.

    I don’t plan on gaming or doing graphics work so upgrading the video card didn’t make much sense.
     
  10. zoom25 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2018
    #10
    Also interested in this figure.
     
  11. deeddawg macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Location:
    US
    #11
    Not what I'm seeing here. Need to upgrade both SSD and GPU to get to a $100 delta.

    The 2.2/555x/256GB is $2399, 560x GPU is +$100, 512GB SSD is +200. 2.6/560x/512GB is $2799

    Just posting this so folks don't forget to consider whether the GPU upgrade would be worthwhile to them. More complex question in 2018 than 2017 since both GPU options have 4GB memory instead of last year's 2GB vs 4GB decider.

    EDIT - dang, I see someone else already covered the price part.

    I'd be curious as to the real world differences in the GPUs for folks who don't do 3D modelling and who don't play games.
     
  12. ghostface147 macrumors 68030

    ghostface147

    Joined:
    May 28, 2008
    #12
    Just ordered the 2018 MB Pro 2.2 Ghz, 16 GB RAM, and 1 TB SSD. Should be here 8/14. I don't do heavy graphics or modeling, so an i9 won't do much for me. Took an Apple employee discount (a friend) and came out to $2759 with taxes. I'm stoked. Replaces my 7 year old MB Pro.
     
  13. drvelocity macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    #13
    FWIW I had an i9 and sent it back in favor of a 2.2Ghz i7 that was running cooler and faster, not to mention with better battery life. I also stuck with the 555X. The base model pro this year is incredibly fast and the best value in a Macbook Pro in a long time. Love it.
     
  14. jerryk macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2011
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    #14
    Thanks for pointing out my error. I was rushing out the door to get my 2.6/ 560/ 512Gb and did not double check the numbers.
     
  15. MadCar macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2014
    Location:
    The internet
    #15
    Just got my 2.2 today. Did the test (see benchmarks thread) and its as quick for many things as the 2.6 and I'm pretty sure the thermals long term are going to be a bit more friendly.
     
  16. roland.g macrumors 603

    roland.g

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    #16
    I’m looking at replacing my 2012 Air. That’s the config I am considering. Though knowing it will be a 5-7 year machine I don’t know if should also consider the 32GB. I don’t see needing it now, but 16 may be an issue in 3-5 years making me regret that. I just don’t want to spend another $400 if I can avoid it and I feel like the storage is really important.
     
  17. Starlights macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2011
    #17
    My sweet spot was 2.2/512/32. I figured that if i needed more storage then I could always use an external SSD such as Samsung T5 or Sandisk, memory on the other hand would be fixed for the life of the laptop. In anycase I use my internal drive mostly for applications and as transitory storage. Longer term storage is relegated to external drives. Your needs and priorities may be different so go with what works best for you.
     
  18. Csayno macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2018
    #18
    I went ahead and got the 2.2 base and upgraded my storage to 512. Doing some video and photo editing. Stoked to get it in next week. I think those specs would be just enough for me.
     
  19. deeddawg macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Location:
    US
    #19
    What do you currently have, 4GB or 8GB RAM? How well is it working for you with what you do? Do you have reason to expect that your system usage will substantially change in the next 5-7 years?

    Run Activity Monitor and look at memory pressure while doing your usual daily stuff. What do you see?

    IMHO unless you have a specific reason today for the upgrade, it's improbable that 32GB RAM would do anything but make you $400 poorer.
     
  20. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #20
    Personally, I'd say any MBP would work well for your stated needs.

    I don't think you could go wrong with the 2.2GHz, if you want a more powerful GPU, then upgrade to the 2.6 model, but I'm very pleased with my 2.2GHz
     
  21. deeddawg macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Location:
    US
    #21
    My view is the opposite: RAM isn't strictly limited since computers use virtual memory. Generally speaking, if a specific workload of various applications exceeds the physical memory the computer pages to swap (on disk). As the physical memory fills up performance will reduce a bit due to moving stuff to/from disk. The actual performance degradation today with our super-fast SSDs is far less than it was back in the spindle-HDD days. Plus you can close a couple apps you're not really using, though they'd likely be swapped and quiescent anyway.

    In contrast, when you fill up the SSD, you have to start carrying around an external.

    I'd encourage anyone considering a memory upgrade to look at their current actual use during their typical workload and also during their heaviest workload. Run Activity Monitor and watch the memory pressure.

    While RAM utilization will typically go up over time, I don't anticipate any sea-changes in system/app needs in the next few years like we had going from 32bit to 64bit. Most folks, IMHO, simply won't realize any discernible difference from a memory upgrade.
    --- Post Merged, Aug 3, 2018 ---
    The 2.2 can get the 560x GPU for $100 if one wants.
     
  22. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #22
    I know, but then if you upgrade the storage, you have a slower processor but the same configuration as the 2.6, so why not just upgrade to that model :)
     
  23. deeddawg macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Location:
    US
    #23
    $100 here, $100 there, pretty soon you're talking real money! :D

    I'm still pondering where I stand in the want vs need regarding buying a MBP15. In all honesty the 2.2 would be plenty of CPU for my needs, but I will definitely go to 1TB SSD despite the high cost. Logically I don't see that 2.6/560x would bring me $200 in benefit over 2.2/555x, but there's that nagging "It's only $200..." voice in the back of my head... :cool:
     
  24. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #24
    I'm not a gamer, and my task list doesn't really push the GPU, but I hear the 560X is a better GPU.
     
  25. deeddawg macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Location:
    US
    #25
    Which of course begs the eternal question: What does better mean to those saying it is, and does that apply to my usage?

    I really haven't looked at the differences in the GPUs -- the above is just a rhetorical question/comment.
     

Share This Page

81 August 2, 2018