Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New 2017 MacBook Pro 2.9 or 3.1
- Thread starter dan9700
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There's a clear speed benefit in benchmarks, but whether or not its beneficial for you and if you'll see any real-world gains is dependent on what you're doing with the MBP. I believe that the 2.9 will be good enough for 98% of MBPs purchasers, and I personally would go for SSD/Graphics upgrades before processing in any circumstance but that's up to you and your needs.
I asked the same question in Reddit and all the three replies said "3.1 is not worth it".
https://www.reddit.com/r/macbookpro/comments/6hrtl8/which_processor_to_choose_for_15_2017_mbp/?
st=J44LCW8Q&sh=dcaaf74a
https://www.reddit.com/r/macbookpro/comments/6hrtl8/which_processor_to_choose_for_15_2017_mbp/?
st=J44LCW8Q&sh=dcaaf74a
It really isn't unless you absolutely need the most power you can get.
In terms of noticeable difference then no, I think you're looking a 5% at most faster renders. Day to day use you'd never notice.
Apple don't do poor/average/amazing CPUs, it's more brilliant/brillianter/brilliantest.
I certainly wouldn't. If it were like 3.5 GHz and/or a different architecture (like i5 vs. i7), or if it were $100 instead of $200, then it would be a harder decision, but there's a very minimal benefit there.
In another thread there was a vid that showed heavy throttling of the Kaby lake 2,9 when pushed with a cinebench test. I would wait for realworld performance tests of the 3,1, because it could very well be that performance isn't actually higher when the cpu is actually pushed (even when compared to skylake).
The 2.9 and 3.1 use exactly the same chip (i7-7920HQ), just clocked slightly differently, so I would not expect any dramatic difference in throttling characteristics.
They should throttle in a similar manner giving similar max clock speeds in use under load. I'm wondering if the new mbp's with the hotter kaby lake cpu's and perhaps gpu's are actually trespassing the heat dissipation limits, an issue the generations before the 2016 mbp also had. We should wait for realworld performance tests.
I don't think any upgrades have resale value to be honest. I find alot of 2nd hand buyers are trying to buy their first mac and aren't that familiar with upgrade pricings. Inmy opinion at least
It's not worth it, but it could be worth it to you. If you feel it's worth it then it is, if you're struggling to justify the upgrade and questioning it's value then it probably isn't worth it to you. For those $200 you could get a case, some new cables, and other accessories. Which may be more valuable to you than a 5% top end performance increase that you are extremely unlikely to ever notice.
Where did you sell your 2016? I have a brand new sealed 2016, a 2.9/512/460 that I want to sell but don't want to lose too much on..
I just swapped my 2.9 for 3.1 and am already regretting it. The 2.9 worked like a charm but I wanted to have as much power as I could since I intend to use the computer as my primary machine for as long as I can (Hoping 4-5 years). But am seeing weird buggy behavior already on the 3.1, perhaps because its BTO or just less of these are manufactured. I should not have underestimated the value of having a machine in my hands that I already knew was defect-free.
Oh sorry, you had mentioned sold, so I thought you sold it.
But that sucks! I'm sorry for your experience there! If it makes you feel any better, my 2.9 went to apple 3 times until they finally gave me a new one which took 1 month from when I shipped it in until I received a new one which is now outdated hence I'd love to sell it. These 2016/2017 laptops have really been giving us a hard time. Gosh!
What do you do with the computer? Are you constantly performing tasks that are essentially maxing out the CPU to a point where a 1-4% performance improvement will improve your workflow?
Most benchmarks suggest there is a very small difference between the 2.8 (770), 2.9 (7820), and 3.1 (7820) models
Most benchmarks suggest there is a very small difference between the 2.8 (770), 2.9 (7820), and 3.1 (7820) models
I find top spec machines are more relevant for a longer period of time... if you upgrade every few years, then it doesn't matter. Both are great chips... its not like i5 vs i7
yea I like having the most power but to be honest cos the 3.1 is built to order its so hard to swap if theres a problem takes 2 weeks to get new one where as with the 2.9 you can just goto apple and swap, I do use video editing a lot but Im thinking 2.9 to 3.1 won't be crazy difference and to be fair maybe the built to order ones I keep having go wrong as they are less made
I have an answer to this. Most Apple stores carry a small number of "specced out" models in stock that live in a gray area between stock and BTO. They are a little hard to find but not impossible. The specced out "stock" 15" is a 3.1Ghz 1 terabyte model, which I purchased rather than a truly BTO 3.1 Ghz 512GB model for precisely for the reasons you suggested.