Retina MacBook - 2.3ghz vs 2.6ghz option?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by iLikeTurtles!, Aug 10, 2012.

  1. iLikeTurtles!, Aug 10, 2012
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2012

    iLikeTurtles! macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    #1
    so i ordered the base retina model with 16gb of ram.

    didnt realized there was a processor options to, and it was only 100 dollars extra for the 2.6ghz over the 2.3

    is there any major differences? should i cancell and upgrade to it?
    thanks

    my retina macbook just got prepared for shipment today since i ordered on aug 6...kinda quick!
     
  2. simsaladimbamba

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Location:
    located
    #2
    The difference is hardly noticeable.
    Can your unstated computational needs profit from 300 more MHz?
     
  3. geoffreak macrumors 68020

    geoffreak

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2008
    #3
    What do you normally do on your computer? I've seen some people on these forums suggest that the speed difference is around 10-15%, but only in cases where the CPU is really being utilized.

    PS: Check your thread title ;)
     
  4. GGJstudios macrumors Westmere

    GGJstudios

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    #4
    Most users won't notice a difference of .3GHz in day-to-day usage.
     
  5. iLikeTurtles! thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    #5
    well with that kind ofmoney, my as well blow the extra 100 for the difference. though i didnt notice that option for some reason. i was focused on upgrading the ram to 16gb lol.

    its already been prepared for shipment so im reluctant to cancell and change lol
     
  6. uhslax24 macrumors 6502

    uhslax24

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Location:
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA
    #6
    You aren't able to cancel or change once it's preparing for shipment anyways. ;)
     
  7. iLikeTurtles! thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    #7
    i know....in general though would it have made a difference
     
  8. BergerFan macrumors 68020

    BergerFan

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Location:
    Mos Eisley
    #8
    My MacBook Pro is a 2.7 Ghz core i7 with 16GB RAM.
    I'm not planning to get a new computer for 4-5 years, so I went for as fast as I could get today.
     
  9. noteple macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2011
    #9
    If you are asking the question you are not going to notice the difference.
    The memory makes the biggest difference and you saved yourself $100.

    If it still bugs you there is a 14 day return window and you can always order another.
     
  10. keviikev macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010
    #10
    It depends on how you plan to use your rMBP. I got the base Model with 2.3 and 8GB RAM which more than enough for my usage LR4, PS and web browsing. I primary use LR and do not have external monitors. User's with multiple monitors or video editors should get 2.7 16GB but for me $2000 (gov discount) was most I wanted to pay for my laptop I plan to keep for 4 years.
     
  11. omgitscro macrumors 6502a

    omgitscro

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    #11
    My 1.4GHz Core 2 Duo holds up fine. I run processor-intensive statistical simulations for research and I figure that waiting half an hour less for a sample to run isn't worth $2000 for a new computer, nor is waiting three minutes less worth $100 for a processor upgrade. I'm sure you'll be fine.
     
  12. Woodcrest64 macrumors 6502a

    Woodcrest64

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    #12
    The only benchmarks I have seen between the 2.3ghz and the 2.6ghz model was done by Engadget.com but from what I can remember they were only synthetic. The difference there was small at best. At times the 13% difference in clock speed between the 2.3ghz and 2.6ghz model was only 4% better.

    It be more telling if some one actually did a real world test with applications like photoshop or final cut pro.

    Day to day activities like email, surfing the net won't show any noticeable difference at all.
     
  13. beamer8912 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    #13
    Some of the reviews I've read indicated the biggest difference is ~2 hours of battery life.
     
  14. iLikeTurtles! thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    #14
    u mean the 2.3 uses 2hours less battery life then the 2.6? that doesnt sound right lol
     
  15. beamer8912 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    #15
    2.3 got ~9 hours where as the 2.6 got ~7 hours.

    When I order mine this weekend I'm going to stick with the 2.3.

    Minor performance boost for $100 and 2 hours of battery...not worth it IMO.
     
  16. iLikeTurtles! thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    #16
    where did u hear that?
     
  17. Simoquasimo macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    Location:
    Finland
    #17

    That was only in engadget's test. I don't think it is right. But there might be slight benefit in battery life in favour of 2.3. Not 2 hours definitely.
     
  18. beamer8912, Aug 10, 2012
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2012

    beamer8912 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    #18
    I think it was engadgets test. I'll try to find it.

    edit: Here's their review

    Cnet had 7 hours from the 2.3, no claim on the 2.6
     
  19. shorty66 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2012
    #19
  20. Centsy macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    #20
    If you happen to be gaming, the 2.6 allows for better overclocking of the GPU.
     
  21. beamer8912 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    #21
    I don't get it.
     
  22. shorty66 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2012
    #22
    The result of the 0.3 GHz more CPU Power is 90 minutes less battery life.
     
  23. iLikeTurtles! thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    #23
    2.3 model had 9 hours and the 2.6 had apples estimated 7......wow
     
  24. beamer8912 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    #24
    I think it really comes down to whether you actually will benefit from the increase or not. Gamers, media editors and other computationally heavy users will probably benefit enough to justify the upgrade. Not to mention they'll most likely be near an outlet.

    If you're unsure if you need the upgrade, you probably don't. And you'll benefit more from the battery life increase.
     
  25. iLikeTurtles! thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    #25
    when i firs tposted this thread, i didnt realize having a higher clocked CPU would effect battery life, or atleast that dramatically?
     

Share This Page