Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Opinion on which spec MBP 16” to get

CYB3RBYTE

CYB3RBYTE

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Sep 2, 2014
454
293
Midwest
Hello all,

I currently have a 2018 MBP 15” with the 2.6 i7, 16 GB of ram, and 512 GB of storage with the Vega 16. As of late I have been heavily considering getting the 16 inch, however I am at an impass of what spec to get.

My two options are:

The base i7 model EXCEPT with the 8GB 5500m

OR

The step up confit with the i9, 16gb, 1tb of storage, and 5500m 4GB.

The first option is most similar to what config I have now, which is base model with the upgraded graphics (I play some casual games so I’d like a good GPU).

16GB of ram is fine for me. 512 is fine as well, I’m pretty clean about my data. However for what is an extra $200 between the two (I get a good discount through my work) I’m wondering if I should spring for the nicer one.

Any thoughts or opinions? Not looking for “WhY dO yOu GaMe On A mAc” comments. I bootcamp for the majority of them.
 
What else will you use the machine for? To make it more gaming capable, the 4GB version will be fine as well, especially at resolutions that pro 5500M can handle.

Personally, I think that the higher-tier standard MBP confit (with 2.3ghz i9) is the sweet spot in terms of what you get for money. But the base model is also very good if you don’t necessarily need that CPU power.
 
  • Like
Reactions: teerexx52
I use the machine for light code work, I am a computer science student, as well as affinity photo and designer, and some garageband as well. So I know I would be fine with an i7 and to this point I have been happy with the power it has. With the old 15 inch cooling was a problem so I was fine with the i7. Has this been resolved with the i9 on the 16inch?
 
CYB3RBYTE said:
I use the machine for light code work, I am a computer science student, as well as affinity photo and designer, and some garageband as well. So I know I would be fine with an i7 and to this point I have been happy with the power it has. With the old 15 inch cooling was a problem so I was fine with the i7. Has this been resolved with the i9 on the 16inch?
Click to expand...


What do you mean cooling was a problem? Was it crashing? Or just that the fans made a lot of noise.

If it is fan noise, the 16 inch fans do run and make a lot of noise under stress. i7 less so, but i9 definitely. If is a small package and those chips generate heat, so the fans must run to get rid of it.

If you meant thermal throttling of the i9, then that seems to be much better with the new 16". There are plenty of YouTube videos that provide the differences, but they are considerable. No more running the i9 in a freezer.
 
CYB3RBYTE said:
With the old 15 inch cooling was a problem so I was fine with the i7. Has this been resolved with the i9 on the 16inch?
Click to expand...

Depends on how one defines "problem". Both the 15" and the 16" are perfectly able to maintain above base clocks in sustained multithreaded workloads on the i9 CPUs so technically they are both operating as advertised. The 15" is able to dissipate around 45-50Watts on the CPU (sustained) while for the 16" this has been raised to about 60W (sustained) — so the 16" will generally be able to maintain approx 5-10% higher clock in multithreaded workloads. Neither are able to maintain full turbo on all the CPU cores under sustained load — there are some desktop replacement class laptops that can (they have desktop-class cooling and offer 120Watts+ sustained power delivery to the CPU). Compared to other laptops on the market, the 15" tended to slightly underperform, the 16" is top-tier (but again not able to compete with larger laptops that have desktop-class cooling).

Regardless of all this, the i9 outperforms the i7 in multithreaded workloads no matter whether we are talking about the 15" or the 16" chassis, so if you were satisfied with the 6-core CPU in your 15" chassis, the i7 in the 16" will perform slightly better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cooltony
I keep going back and forth on this myself because my planned use is for recording in logic, and I want to make sure it runs cool and quiet, and I know the i7 can handle my use just fine.

But on the other hand the i9 base offering is only what, $400 more, and it gets you a better processor, video card, and doubles the ssd size. Seems like the best value when you consider the cost of all of the other upgrades. So I think I’m going to go with that option, see how it runs, and if it has heat/noise problems then I’ll reconsider.

Initially I wanted to BTO and go for the 2.4 with 32g ram, but then we’re looking at spending like an extra thousand dollars over the base 1.7, not to mention I have to wait a couple weeks to get it, and I may never notice the difference for my use, which isn’t that processor intensive. I also feel like trying to ‘future proof’ a computer is stupid, because in a year or two they’ll have some new processors that will make these irrelevant anyway. I’ve been getting by recording my music on a 2011 i5 13” mbp, with 16g ram, so I think 16g in this new computer should be fine for my purposes. I close all other programs and turn off WiFi while recording anyway.


In comparing the i7 to i9 I prioritize heat and fan noise over power for my purposes. Does anybody believe or know that the i7 base model will stay cooler and produce less fan noise while I’m recording in Logic Pro X? That’s really the only thing I care about at this point as I know both can handle my workload with ease. And I’d believe it if the opposite were true, if the i7 version is going to run hotter and make more noise - I really don’t know, that’s why I’m asking, and I keep reading conflicting information and opinions, so I’m open to anybody’s input, especially anybody who has used both the i7 and i9 16” and paid attention to the heat and fan noise.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: adeelrahman
I was originally planning to get the base i7. However, I wanted 32 GB RAM and 1 TB SSD. If you do this then the i9 becomes better value for money.
 
Camarillo Brillo said:
I keep going back and forth on this myself because my planned use is for recording in logic, and I want to make sure it runs cool and quiet, and I know the i7 can handle my use just fine.

But on the other hand the i9 base offering is only what, $400 more, and it gets you a better processor, video card, and doubles the ssd size. Seems like the best value when you consider the cost of all of the other upgrades. So I think I’m going to go with that option, see how it runs, and if it has heat/noise problems then I’ll reconsider.

Initially I wanted to BTO and go for the 2.4 with 32g ram, but then we’re looking at spending like an extra thousand dollars over the base 1.7, not to mention I have to wait a couple weeks to get it, and I may never notice the difference for my use, which isn’t that processor intensive. I also feel like trying to ‘future proof’ a computer is stupid, because in a year or two they’ll have some new processors that will make these irrelevant anyway. I’ve been getting by recording my music on a 2011 i5 13” mbp, with 16g ram, so I think 16g in this new computer should be fine for my purposes. I close all other programs and turn off WiFi while recording anyway.


In comparing the i7 to i9 I prioritize heat and fan noise over power for my purposes. Does anybody believe or know that the i7 base model will stay cooler and produce less fan noise while I’m recording in Logic Pro X? That’s really the only thing I care about at this point as I know both can handle my workload with ease. And I’d believe it if the opposite were true, if the i7 version is going to run hotter and make more noise - I really don’t know, that’s why I’m asking, and I keep reading conflicting information and opinions, so I’m open to anybody’s input, especially anybody who has used both the i7 and i9 16” and paid attention to the heat and fan noise.
Click to expand...
I have the same question, if someone could answer it that would be great.
 
topcat001 said:
I was originally planning to get the base i7. However, I wanted 32 GB RAM and 1 TB SSD. If you do this then the i9 becomes better value for money.
Click to expand...
The price gap between i7 and 2.3 GHz i9 closes when picking the 5500M GPU and 1 TB SSD. With 32 GB RAM it remains the same.
 
CYB3RBYTE said:
I use the machine for light code work, I am a computer science student, as well as affinity photo and designer, and some garageband as well. So I know I would be fine with an i7 and to this point I have been happy with the power it has. With the old 15 inch cooling was a problem so I was fine with the i7. Has this been resolved with the i9 on the 16inch?
Click to expand...

For light gaming are you really going to put that 8GB of GDDR5 to use over the 4GB base? Everything else seems like it won't use it. I'd probably go with the base i9 config if I were you I guess. Or, if you are happy with 512GB of storage, you could do the base config, then upgrade to the i7 to the 2.4 i9 and the 5300M to the 4GB 5500M. That's the same price as the base config on the 2.3 i9, but you're swapping the 2.3 for the 2.4 i9 in exchange for the 512 GB storage.
 
Really? I'll have to read up on multithreading. Very strange.

I think I'm going to go with the top pre-config. It will be nice to have 1TB of storage. Don't think I'm going to touch the 5500m if it's true that it's 8GB is not used by many games.

So the i9 is able to run better sustained as well? I occasionally use my current computer for node computing projects when it's not in use by me.
 
Sirmausalot said:
Logic supports multithreading. The new i9s do as well, but the i7 does not.
Click to expand...

Of course, a 6 core CPU without multithreading... :rolleyes:
[automerge]1576361204[/automerge]
CYB3RBYTE said:
Really? I'll have to read up on multithreading. Very strange.
Click to expand...

There is nothing strange here, just a trivial case of a person who doesn't know what they are talking about.

CYB3RBYTE said:
So the i9 is able to run better sustained as well? I occasionally use my current computer for node computing projects when it's not in use by me.
Click to expand...

It has more cores. So if you have workflows that can utilise multi-core CPUs well, the i9 will be faster by very nature of exponential diminishing returns with CPU. You more theoretical computation power will more cores within the same power envelope since increasing the clock linearly will increase the power multiplicatively — you can run more cores at just slightly lower frequency within the same power budget.
 
Just curious...why do you want to upgrade your current machine if you're considering keeping specs nearly as-is? Do you hate the keyboard?
 
Today I went to the Apple store and bought the 2.3 i9 base configuration.

Keyboard is great. Whoever was complaining about the screen being flimsy at Costco is tripping. I must be lucky because so far it seems very quiet. Seems to run nice and cool, played YouTube videos via hdtv on HDMI to usb c hub in clamshell mode for an hour to test it out and it’s still not hot or noisy. I’m guessing it’s 4K and better monitors that get it running hot. Hopefully not for me. Ran Geekbench 5 twice and beat the 2.4 i9 score on there. I don’t know if that means anything. The single core scores I got were 6000 something and would be #2 on the list. So it seems to be performing well. The fans aren’t even that loud and I don’t think they’ll fire up when I’m recording at all really.

So, I wish I spent less time reading people’s complaints here, the computer seems great. It seems to be running cool and quiet so far, I don’t think I made the wrong choice with this configuration. The only thing that worries me is I wonder whether I will need 32g ram
 
Last edited:
hipnetic said:
Just curious...why do you want to upgrade your current machine if you're considering keeping specs nearly as-is? Do you hate the keyboard?
Click to expand...

Well I don't hate the keyboard, but the new one is certainly an improvement and I believe I'll use it a lot more as a result.

I also ran geekbench on a base 16" at the Apple store, and found that it already outperforms my higher spec'd 15" in both single and multi-core, as well as compute (lol and I paid an extra $150 for the Vega 16).

I keep my laptops for 3 years normally, however I feel the 16" has changed the game significantly enough to warrant me trading in my current machine.
[automerge]1576424606[/automerge]
leman said:
Of course, a 6 core CPU without multithreading... :rolleyes:
[automerge]1576361204[/automerge]
It has more cores. So if you have workflows that can utilise multi-core CPUs well, the i9 will be faster by very nature of exponential diminishing returns with CPU. You more theoretical computation power will more cores within the same power envelope since increasing the clock linearly will increase the power multiplicatively — you can run more cores at just slightly lower frequency within the same power budget.
Click to expand...

Well I knew it had more cores, I was just wondering if it was a true competitor. According to Geekbench the mid-tier i9 16" can hang with the last gen Mac Pro when it comes to multi-core.
 
Last edited:
What did you end up getting? I got the i9 base model and happy. Benchmarks for me where the same performance scores as the spec’d out i9’s. The price difference between the i7 base and i9 base was well worth it- better graphics card, 2 more cores for cpu and double the storage with 1tb. Machines is a FAST! I left Apple after my mid 2014 purchase cause of all the complaints I saw. I'm back with Mac with this 16”.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back