New MBP versus custom build Win PC

[laurihoefs]

You can configure most of the HP Z-series, Lenovo ThinkPad W-series, or Dell mobile workstations to similar specifications as the MBPr, and they will end up costing about the same. So no clear winner there. The workstation laptops are a bit more rugged than the MBPs, but also larger and heavier, so if you have not had any issues with the MBP build quality, and prefer a lighter laptop, then the workstations might not sound that appealing.

IMHO the Windows workstations have two advantages tough: exchangeable batteries, and a wide variety of care/warranty/support packages. If you work a lot on the road, being able to extend your working hours with additional batteries may, or may not be a big deal, depending on your needs. But the care packs are quite impressive. For example, from HP you can get an international 5 year next business day onsite support pack (meaning, for the next five years someone will come and repair your laptop, almost anywhere in the world, within the next business day from your initial support request) for ~270€, which makes the 249€ AppleCare, with its 3 year carry in service, sound ridiculous. Some of the packages even include protection against accidental damage. And even without any extra service packs, the higher end workstation laptops often already include an international 3 year next business day onsite support.

Of course, with the student discounts AppleCare is cheaper, 149€ if I remember correctly, which is not that bad.

 

[leenak]

Obviously you just want a MBP. I'd just say that if someone is using Windows frequently, then a MBP is not the way to go. I don't know what would make sense pricewise where you live but it isn't like you will find a non-MBP to be half the price with similar specs. It will still cost a bit but it'd fit your requirement for running windows and being portable.

Or another option, why not just get a desktop, system, then get something small like a MB Air, then remote desktop into the Windows system when you want to do something that requires computational power.

 

[barnettgs]

Powerwise, a Desktop i3 is roughly the same as i7 laptop so i5 Desktop would be faster than i7 laptop. Only if you are interested in some raw power.

You might find this useful: http://www.bit-tech.net/blog/2013/05/25/don-t-be-fooled-by-laptop-cpus/


However, if you look at the whole picture, maybe the difference isn't that big but consider the cost of i7 laptop in comparsion with i3 or i5 Desktop.

 

[yjchua95]

Powerwise, a Desktop i3 is roughly the same as i7 laptop so i5 Desktop would be faster than i7 laptop. Only if you are interested in some raw power.

You might find this useful: http://www.bit-tech.net/blog/2013/05/25/don-t-be-fooled-by-laptop-cpus/


However, if you look at the whole picture, maybe the difference isn't that big but consider the cost of i7 laptop in comparsion with i3 or i5 Desktop.

Are you sure?

An i5 desktop can't be more powerful than an i7 laptop as the i5 desktop only has 4 threads, while the i7 laptop has 8 threads.

The link provided is substantially inaccurate, because you aren't supposed to over clock it (beyond TurboBoost figures, that is). Unless you want to void the warranty.

All this "test" proves is that a laptop i7 Quad core CPU - clocked about the same as a dual core i3 with the same architecture - performs about the same in a test that doesn't utilise multiple cores/threads.

Sure the desktop i5 may be faster in single threaded tasks, but when in multithreaded tasks, the laptop i7 practically outperforms it.

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/373341?baseline=385409

(3.4GHz i5-4570R 27" iMac vs 2.6GHz i7-4960HQ 15" rMBP)

CPC bench is old, outdated, and doesn't utilize all cores and threads. Geekbench runs each tests on one core first, and then on all cores and threads.

 

[joebingo]

Powerwise, a Desktop i3 is roughly the same as i7 laptop so i5 Desktop would be faster than i7 laptop. Only if you are interested in some raw power.

You might find this useful: http://www.bit-tech.net/blog/2013/05/25/don-t-be-fooled-by-laptop-cpus/


However, if you look at the whole picture, maybe the difference isn't that big but consider the cost of i7 laptop in comparsion with i3 or i5 Desktop.

Please don't spread misinformation mate. If that were true, my laptop would be falling over on the things which my desktop i7 can do. It doesn't, The processor runs at probably 25% over what it does on my desktop.

The desktop is clocked at 4.5GHz btw, and the mbp is 2.3...

**edit - just looked at your link.
Where are the multithreaded benchmarks? Does bit-tech only ever run one benchmark for a cpu test? Or do they leave out the ones which don't prove the point they're trying to make?

 

[laurihoefs]

Powerwise, a Desktop i3 is roughly the same as i7 laptop so i5 Desktop would be faster than i7 laptop. Only if you are interested in some raw power.

You might find this useful: http://www.bit-tech.net/blog/2013/05/25/don-t-be-fooled-by-laptop-cpus/


However, if you look at the whole picture, maybe the difference isn't that big but consider the cost of i7 laptop in comparsion with i3 or i5 Desktop.

The test data in the linked blog actually shows, that a similarly clocked mobile and desktop CPUs from the same generation would have similar performance in single threaded benchmarks. But they tested a 2,3GHz mobile CPU against a 3,4GHz and 5GHz (OC'd) desktop counterpart, and concluded, that the desktop counterparts are faster... The difference in performance is exactly what you should expect from the difference in clock speeds, but the blogger neglected to mention that in the conclusion.

The blog post was meant to demonstrate, that the Intel model numbering is misleading (which it is, if you just go by the 'it's got a bigger number, it must be faster' -logic). Unfortunately the post is poorly worded, and is being misunderstood and mis-quoted very often.

A desktop dual core i3 will not outperform a mobile quad core in multithreaded performance. Geekbench is a good way to compare the real world performance of those processors: i3-3220 and i7-3630QM. Take note of the clock speeds, as the fastest i3-3220 scores were achieved with over clocked CPUs at 3,45GHz, where the i7-3630QM are stock. The difference is similar with current generation CPUs.

 

[The Mercurian]

Obviously you just want a MBP. I'd just say that if someone is using Windows frequently, then a MBP is not the way to go. I don't know what would make sense pricewise where you live but it isn't like you will find a non-MBP to be half the price with similar specs. It will still cost a bit but it'd fit your requirement for running windows and being portable.

Or another option, why not just get a desktop, system, then get something small like a MB Air, then remote desktop into the Windows system when you want to do something that requires computational power.

I don't use windows that frequently however I just cannot avoid it for the most intensive stuff. The remote desktop thing - not tried it before but if I inherently don't like the idea - if I am abroad and the remote machine crashes nothing I can do about it til I get back. Also there might be data protection issues with that.

Powerwise, a Desktop i3 is roughly the same as i7 laptop so i5 Desktop would be faster than i7 laptop. Only if you are interested in some raw power.

You might find this useful: http://www.bit-tech.net/blog/2013/05/25/don-t-be-fooled-by-laptop-cpus/


However, if you look at the whole picture, maybe the difference isn't that big but consider the cost of i7 laptop in comparison with i3 or i5 Desktop.

Rubbish. For the reasons other have pointed out. If I were to build a desktop in any case I'd put at least a hex core i7 in it.

 

[laurihoefs]

I don't use windows that frequently however I just cannot avoid it for the most intensive stuff. The remote desktop thing - not tried it before but if I inherently don't like the idea - if I am abroad and the remote machine crashes nothing I can do about it til I get back. Also there might be data protection issues with that.

Network and power outages, and crashes might be problematic if you hosted the computer yourself.

Have you considered renting hardware or computing time from a managed hosting service like GoDaddy or Rackspace, or even a cloud service like Amazon EC2 or Google Compute Engine? If your applications could run on a server in a data center somewhere, or on a cloud platform, you could just use a very compact and cheap laptop, and remotely connect to your applications.

Renting dedicated hardware with performance comparable to a MBP might cost 100€-300€/month, depending on the exact configuration you need. For example, GoDaddy has a Value Deal, Windows Server running on quad core i5 for 135,99/month. It may sound a tad expensive, but compare that to the >3000€ MBPr. For the price of the maxed out laptop you can rent the server for almost two years.

The advantage is, that you could have your software running on the server regardless to your, and your laptops whereabouts.

Edit: This might of course not be an option, if you have to process sensitive or regulated data.

 

[The Mercurian]

Edit: This might of course not be an option, if you have to process sensitive or regulated data.

This!

 

[laurihoefs]

This!

Ok, would securely remoting to a server you own and control also be a problem?

3000€ could get you a UPS, a guad core HP Proliant with iLo (you can remotely manage the server even if the OS has crashed, etc.) and a MacBook Air to carry with you. You could use a VPN tunnel to securely connect to the server.

Other manufacturers have lights-out management tools too, I'm just mentioning HP, because I'm most familiar with their products.

This solution could get you more computing power than the MBPr, but is a lot more hassle to set up and maintain.

One issue to consider is, whether it is more secure to keep the data on a server and access it remotely, or carry it with you on a laptop that might get stolen. With a server you could access your applications and data even if the laptop fails or is lost.

 

[The Mercurian]

Ok, would securely remoting to a server you own and control also be a problem?

3000€ could get you a UPS, a guad core HP Proliant with iLo (you can remotely manage the server even if the OS has crashed, etc.) and a MacBook Air to carry with you. You could use a VPN tunnel to securely connect to the server.

Other manufacturers have lights-out management tools too, I'm just mentioning HP, because I'm most familiar with their products.

This solution could get you more computing power than the MBPr, but is a lot more hassle to set up and maintain.

Honestly I'm not sure I have the skills for this.

One issue to consider is, whether it is more secure to keep the data on a server and access it remotely, or carry it with you on a laptop that might get stolen. With a server you could access your applications and data even if the laptop fails or is lost.

Indeed. See at the moment I have nothing super sensitive on it - but with the new work coming up I just won't know what the data protection rules will be until I get over there in about 6 months time and get stuck in.

But ok - thanks everyone for the input. It has helped me think it different ways and consider various pros and cons I would not have thought of myself. I will let it sit for a while, before I decide.

 

[MacFoYoAzz]

Here are a few things to consider when choosing a laptop over ANY desktop.

1. Pound for pound, the desktop will win. Why? Because of the power needed to run it. Let us say I build a system like a MacBook Pro

2.3GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 processor
16GB memory
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M

Notice the obvious. The power supply on the MBP will be around 100watts. If I were to build this in a desktop, I would need at least a 500watt power supply minimum. How can this be? It all has to do with Thermal Conductivity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_conductivity

Which means, things have to be managed differently in a laptop to due to battery life, heat, weight, etc. This being said, components in laptops are often not running at their full capability most of the time. A desktop can run 100% almost all of the time if it is designed right.

2. Software. Because of number example 1., you have to decide what kind of duty cycle is needed to run what you wish to run. Laptops are not meant to run on a high percentage duty cycle(I know, people do this all of the time...still not wise!). Extensive 3D rendering is a great example. Do this type of thing on a laptop all day, it will eventually burn up.

3. Backup. Desktops do not move. Laptops move. No brainer! Do not leave private sh** on your laptop. For that matter, do not even transport such material if at all possible. Anything you carry can be lost of stolen.

4. OSX or Windows. A Mac can run both. A Windows machine legally cant. Performance is a mute point since both machines have very similar hardware these days.

5. Retna...Please step away. If you want pretty pictures, get the Retna. If you want performance, run quickly!...FLAME ON! More pixels = more system resources that are taken away from running your software.

6. Budget. You can get WAY more bang for the buck on a Windows machine from a hardware stand point. You will do better in the long run buying a Mac.

Everything is a trade off. You will have to figure out what is the best trade off for you.

 

[Badrottie]

Custom built Windows PC + 11" Haswell-based MBA = PERFECT!!

 

[laurihoefs]

Here are a few things to consider when choosing a laptop over ANY desktop.

1. Pound for pound, the desktop will win. Why? Because of the power needed to run it. Let us say I build a system like a MacBook Pro

2.3GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 processor
16GB memory
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M

Notice the obvious. The power supply on the MBP will be around 100watts. If I were to build this in a desktop, I would need at least a 500watt power supply minimum. How can this be? It all has to do with Thermal Conductivity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_conductivity

Which means, things have to be managed differently in a laptop to due to battery life, heat, weight, etc. This being said, components in laptops are often not running at their full capability most of the time. A desktop can run 100% almost all of the time if it is designed right.

Mobile parts are also lower voltage, so the power consumption and heat are lower than those of the desktop counterparts.

That said, it's possible, and fairly easy, to make the CPU and GPU exceed the capability of the MBPr cooling system and power supply, and make them both throttle. But whether this happens in the OP's case, is a different question. I'd say it's unlikely, if the OP mostly utilizes just the CPU.

2. Software. Because of number example 1., you have to decide what kind of duty cycle is needed to run what you wish to run. Laptops are not meant to run on a high percentage duty cycle(I know, people do this all of the time...still not wise!). Extensive 3D rendering is a great example. Do this type of thing on a laptop all day, it will eventually burn up.

Mobile parts will not 'burn up' any more than the desktop parts.

If you are referring to the failing GPUs, the desktop versions of those GPUs have been just as prone to fail.

5. Retna...Please step away. If you want pretty pictures, get the Retna. If you want performance, run quickly!...FLAME ON! More pixels = more system resources that are taken away from running your software.

If you don't use the scaled resolutions, the performance impact is negligible. And even if you do, it's not going to make any difference in running R.

I challenge you to spot the difference in the performance of most software running in 1440*900 and 2880*1800 'Optimized for Retina' scaling. Software like Photoshop or Lightroom are affected, and many graphics intensive applications will likely suffer slightly, especially from the scaled resolutions, but even then the difference is nothing that should make anyone step away

 

[The Mercurian]

4. OSX or Windows. A Mac can run both. A Windows machine legally cant. Performance is a mute point since both machines have very similar hardware these days.

Completely agree.

5. Retna...Please step away. If you want pretty pictures, get the Retna. If you want performance, run quickly!...FLAME ON! More pixels = more system resources that are taken away from running your software.

Not a worry for me really.

Everything is a trade off. You will have to figure out what is the best trade off for you.

This is the heart of the issue. I actually came into this knowing I msut make a compromise - the purpose of the thread was for me to tease out the best compromise. And with the benefit of everyone's useful and thought provoking input I honestly think a high spec MBP is the best compromise.

 

[yjchua95]

Completely agree.


Not a worry for me really.



This is the heart of the issue. I actually came into this knowing I msut make a compromise - the purpose of the thread was for me to tease out the best compromise. And with the benefit of everyone's useful and thought provoking input I honestly think a high spec MBP is the best compromise.

Read this: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1727783/

BF4 runs pretty good on the 15" rMBP.

 

[The Mercurian]

Read this: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1727783/

BF4 runs pretty good on the 15" rMBP.

?? Don't game so have no concept of whether that is good or bad. Don't care about GPU - not useful for the kindof problems I work on. (Unfortunately)

 

[Dweez]

I'd go with building the windows based workhorse machine for cheap if you're looking for raw compute power. Other things come into play with a hand-built box - think overclocking of CPU and memory.

I built another home lab box (linux & windows) about a year ago around an i7 3770k which has been OC'ed to 4.4 ghz and running flawlessly since day 1. SSDs and enough memory are more or less "cheap" and easily modified or upgraded in such a box.

 

[The Mercurian]

I'd go with building the windows based workhorse machine for cheap if you're looking for raw compute power. Other things come into play with a hand-built box - think overclocking of CPU and memory.

I built another home lab box (linux & windows) about a year ago around an i7 3770k which has been OC'ed to 4.4 ghz and running flawlessly since day 1. SSDs and enough memory are more or less "cheap" and easily modified or upgraded in such a box.

Oh yeah I definitely see the benefits of this, but like I say has drawbacks (portabiltiy - having to run two machines). I see the MBP as a best compromise.

Funnily enough - this I was not expecting::
https://www.macrumors.com/2014/04/24/updated-macbook-airs-next-week/

Perhaps I should wait a month - if they pec bump air's they may do pros also.

 

[Dweez]

FWIW my work laptop is a 15" HP Zbook, 2.7 ghz i7, 32 gig of ram and an SSD. The thing flat out screams for a windows laptop. It's not as easily portable as the MBA or MBP due to it's dimensions and weight, but it is portable nonetheless.

My preference is always to go with a mac unless there's a very compelling reason not to. Wait and see what happens with regards to the rumors circulating about upcoming upgrades...

 

[The Mercurian]

FWIW my work laptop is a 15" HP Zbook, 2.7 ghz i7, 32 gig of ram and an SSD. The thing flat out screams for a windows laptop. It's not as easily portable as the MBA or MBP due to it's dimensions and weight, but it is portable nonetheless.

My preference is always to go with a mac unless there's a very compelling reason not to. Wait and see what happens with regards to the rumors circulating about upcoming upgrades...

Yeah that does sound like a beast!
Thanks I will probably wait and see all right

 

[glenthompson]

3. Backup. Desktops do not move. Laptops move. No brainer! Do not leave private sh** on your laptop. For that matter, do not even transport such material if at all possible. Anything you carry can be lost of stolen.

Anything can be stolen. Desktops get taken from house breakins all the time. Harder to steal a laptop that's with me all the time. Laptops suffer more because leave them on the seat of their car or similar dumb stunts.

If you have sensitive info, encrypt it with a good password. Applies to both desktop or laptop.

 

[Hexaea]

Best solution: Build a desktop, and buy a macbook. Macbook couldn't replace my desktop are far as processing power, and my desktop is definitely not portable.