rMBP 2.3 + TBD or rMBP 2.6 w/ accessories

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Jacobwilson99, Jul 1, 2012.

  1. Jacobwilson99 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2012
    #1
    Hey guys. I've been so torn between this decision.

    I do lots of web and Word. Minecraft. And the biggest thing is photo editing. Lightroom and Photoshop simultaneously.

    Either set up will have 16GB upgraded. I like the appeal of the 512GB capacity on the 2.6, but it's not entirely necessary.

    I have $2500 and a 25% discount.

    Options:

    1) rMBP 2.3, 16GB, 256. And a thunderbolt display for editing and such.

    2) rMBP 2.6, 16GB, 512. Also with a SuperDrive and a magic mouse.

    Both with apple care.

    Both of these deals are somewhat around my budget. If I got 1) then I'd buy the SuperDrive and Mouse later on.

    I know the .3 difference in processing speed is only about a 10-14% increase, so I'm wondering if it's even worth it or if I would notice it in use.

    I also heard something about The 2.3 battery being better than the 2.6.

    Lemme know what you think!

    Thx
     
  2. dlimes13 macrumors 6502a

    dlimes13

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Location:
    Perrysburg, OH
    #2
    I would honestly get the 2.3 + ATD. You will not notice the difference between a 2.3 and a 2.6, and with USB 3.0 you can get additional fast storage is 256 GB is not enough. The battery life may be better on the 2.3 due to not as powerful of a processor but nothing you would notice (e.g. less than 15 minutes).
     
  3. Slivortal macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2012
    #3
    The 10-14% difference is really only noticeable on benchmarks. It's hard to really see a difference in CPU unless the change is really large. 16GB of RAM is the important part, and you seem to have that down. I'd consider the main reason one would choose to upgrade to the 2.6 would be for the 512GB storage, with the 2.6 as more of a bonus.

    So yeah. Option 1. Get that Thunderbolt Display or what not.
     
  4. Xian Zhu Xuande macrumors 6502a

    Xian Zhu Xuande

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    #4
    If I were in your position and I thought I'd put the 512 GBs to use, I'd go for the storage over the display, and go for the display down the road if I found I still wanted it. Much more difficult to approach things the other way around.

    That, and the display will look poor compared to the RMBP. My cinema display is jarring after using the RMBP for a while. I'd wonder about the 16 GBs RAM for what you're doing but being permanent it might be a good move, and should also help with resale value.
     
  5. Fortimir macrumors 6502a

    Fortimir

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2007
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    #5
    As a photographer, I would have been fine with 256GB if I hadn't recently added a Nikon D800 to my arsenal. Thirty-six megapixels will tax your internal drive to no end. I don't plan on having stuff on the local drive for long, but I really wanted more flexibility than 256.

    TWO WEDDINGS. That's it. Shooting with a 36mp beast, two weddings would fill a 256GB drive, and that's not leaving room for anything but the applications you need to process them. I say this because you need to look ahead. OWC has said they will probably have rMBP replacement drives out by October, but they won't be cheap, and I doubt their controllers will be as good as the factory drives.

    Not to mention there are some GREAT 24" monitors on the market for (less than) 1/3rd the price of the TBdisplay. That could at least get you by.
     
  6. ppone, Jul 1, 2012
    Last edited: Jul 2, 2012

    ppone macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2011
    #6
    The geekbench for the 2.3 is around 11000 and the 2.6 is around 12000

    11/12 = .916666667

    So 2.3 is almost 92% as fast as the 2.6 on CPU related tasks.

    Your not gonna notice something that is 8% faster, unless what you are doing is pushing the system so hard that you notice that 8%.

    Even Anandtech agrees the 2.3 is the best price/performance ratio.

    The only reason to get the 2.6 is that you need more than 256GB of hard disk space.

     
  7. BlazednSleepy macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    #7
    Higher end model and then get the display later. That's what I'm doing.
     
  8. Xian Zhu Xuande macrumors 6502a

    Xian Zhu Xuande

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    #8
    If I were a wedding photographer I'd have reservations about using the RMBP SSD for my photo workhorse. Throwing that kind of data through it regularly might actually put that AppleCare plan to good use. This would depend on how much money was coming in and how much convenience paid for the setup, but one option I'd consider is a library on the RMBP for on-the-go editing and a regular library on an external drive for standard work. Obviously complete jobs would be stored elsewhere. And that workhorse drive could be Thunderbolt SSD.

    I imagine OWC will come out with something but as you say, it will probably be inferior to the Apple-included drives for various reasons. Their SSDs have led to more mixed experiences based on reviews and what I've seen people go through compared to some other brands.
     
  9. lannisters4life macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 14, 2012
    Location:
    Sydney
    #9
    If you're publishing your photos on the web I'd almost use the word need to describe option 1. The retina display is freaking phenomenal, but from my limited use of it, there's a dramatic difference between how photos appear on its superman screen and on a more conventional display, and considering the huge majority of your audience won't have an rMBP, you could find yourself in some trouble without the ATD (or a similar non-Apple screen).
     
  10. Xian Zhu Xuande macrumors 6502a

    Xian Zhu Xuande

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    #10
    I don't see why that would be a problem for photographs because the degradation is predictable and the ultimate medium isn't the screen in most cases. And when it is, there's not much more to it. It will display the photograph as well as it can.

    It comes into play a little bit for what I do, though. For example, when designing a 16x16 px icon for a website every pixel matters. You can't simply scale down a graphic and move on. For the Retina display, you pretty much can with minor considerations for proper precision and sharpness. If you're using some kind of vector icon, like a symbol font, what works beautifully on the Retina may not translate as nicely on a lesser screen. Also, there's a huge divide between type on the Retina screen, type in OS X, and type in, say Windows XP.
     
  11. Jacobwilson99 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2012
    #11
    I've got a full 500gb external, and about 150 on my computer now. Maybe the extra space is a good idea.

    Dang! Well, I'm not a professional photog. More of a hobbyist with gigs from time to time. I'm not shooting 36mp, nor can I imagine myself shooting two weddings without an external.


    My main reason for the ATD is for editing. I've been editing on my 15" '07 MBP for 5 years and have never used a larger display to work on. I'm definitely comfortable editing on my laptop, which makes me hesitant if I'll use it fully.

    Im interested in hearing of some other displays that anyone would recommend over the ATD. Something with comprable resolution. Do any utilize TB ports yet?

    Is it possible to clamshell with displays other than ATD?
     
  12. mexico macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2011
    #12
    I'm waiting on the display to see if Apple increases the resolution to closer match the rmbp
     
  13. TopToffee macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    #13
    Does it really need it though? I asked for the TBD to be hooked up to a rMBP in the Apple Store the other day. Yes there's a slight difference in how they look, but when you factor in the increased distance you (should!) sit from a 27" screen compared to a 15" laptop, the different really is slightly.

    I'd prefer them to upgrade it with USB 3 on the back :p
     
  14. mexico macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2011
    #14
    Perhaps it won't need it. but if it is not a compelling update this current version will at least be cheaper. I didn't think of USB 3, that actually would be sick!
     
  15. Xian Zhu Xuande macrumors 6502a

    Xian Zhu Xuande

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    #15
    I'm sure everyone will have a different experience, but after using my RMBP for a while and firing up my Mac Pro, the difference between the beautiful RMBP screen and my much-loved cinema display is stark. It's like all the pixels jump out at me as clear as day. There's definitely a noticeable difference.
     
  16. strausd macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #16
    I do video editing and 3D modeling and I HATE the Apple displays. They are so extremely glossy thanks to the unnecessary piece of glass on top. If I were you, I would look into an eizo, NEC, or even a Dell Ultrasharp monitor. All of which offer IPS panels. And a Dell u2711 will offer much better color accuracy, won't be so dang glossy, and will be cheaper. The only downside is lack of a whole "docking station" with thunderbolt. But since you are a video editor, I am guessing image quality is more important.
     
  17. AlvinNguyen macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    #17
    2.3ghz + TBD

    Best mod ever is that gorgeous display across 27" of real estate :cool: Fashion Photographer here - that SSD is fine if you're smart and know how to properly manage your workflow.
     
  18. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #18
    +1 to all of that. IPS isn't everything, and some of those other brands make better use of the panels in their final design. None of them are as "pretty" as the Apple, but they're not designed for aesthetics.
     
  19. Mr MM macrumors 65816

    Mr MM

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    #19
    if you are looking for color accuracy you should look for eizo and nec, the dell ultrasharp and the hp 27 displays are using the same panel as ACD uses, along with a lot of 2560*1444 panels out there in the 27'' size.

    and if you are really looking into color accuracy you should calibrate the display yourself, not using software but hardware made for that.
     
  20. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #20
    I owned an NEC 2190 with spectraview + a DTP-94 so colorimeter + proprietary software published by NEC. The US version is different from what European NEC uses. Now it's an Eizo CG243W with an i1 display pro. NEC and Eizo no longer use anything but generic panels. It doesn't mean they're no longer worth it. LG sort of became the default for almost everyone, yet those two implement them way better than Apple or HP. I've read a lot of positive reviews on the Dells. For what they cost, I'd try one over the Apple display any day. I would not take a Dell over the Eizo or NEC displays. I find Eizo a little easier to control. They can pretty much hit any brightness target. Their displays don't vary as much in brightness optimizations. Some NECs can go lower than others. With Eizo they balance everything for an 80-120 target range. Low luminance targets + stability make the thing really predictable, and I like that. They're quite expensive, but I can't live without them.

    I wanted to add one of the 24" cintiqs as well, but wacom's quality has been dropping off a cliff, so I'm hesitant to do that. Everything since the intuos 3 era has turned up major problems (intuos3 cord design, intuos 4 surface design and cord issues, intuos 5 numerous issues, lion driver issues).
     

Share This Page