rMBP: 2.8 i7 dual core 13" vs 2.3 i7 quad core 15"?

[tirexstorm]

I am deciding between 2 computers off of craigslist. One is a 13" late 2013 retina MBP with a 1TB SSD, 16GB ram, with a 2.8 ghz dual core i7 processor. The other is a 15" retina MBP with a 512gb SSD, 2.3 ghz i7 quad core processor and 16 GB of RAM. both have apple care remaining.

Both are the same price (around $1600.) All things equal, I would prefer a 15" monitor, but this doesn't mean too much to me because this will be used as a "desktop" 95% of the time hooked up to an external monitor. The 1 TB drive is certainly very appealing to me. How do the 2.3 quad core vs 2.8 dual core stack up vs each other? I don't do much with resource hungry apps (little time on PS or video editing.) I would like to eventually hook this up to a 4k monitor down the road, once that becomes the standard.

All those things considered, which would you go for?

 

[yjchua95]

I am deciding between 2 computers off of craigslist. One is a 13" late 2013 retina MBP with a 1TB SSD, 16GB ram, with a 2.8 ghz dual core i7 processor. The other is a 15" retina MBP with a 512gb SSD, 2.3 ghz i7 quad core processor and 16 GB of RAM. both have apple care remaining.

Both are the same price (around $1600.) All things equal, I would prefer a 15" monitor, but this doesn't mean too much to me because this will be used as a "desktop" 95% of the time hooked up to an external monitor. The 1 TB drive is certainly very appealing to me. How do the 2.3 quad core vs 2.8 dual core stack up vs each other? I don't do much with resource hungry apps (little time on PS or video editing.) I would like to eventually hook this up to a 4k monitor down the road, once that becomes the standard.

All those things considered, which would you go for?

The 2.3GHz i7-4850HQ quad core is at least twice as fast as the 2.8GHz i7-4558U dual core processor, because of the double number of cores and threads on the 15". Besides, the 15" has a 2GB GT 750M GPU, which makes it way more capable.

The 15" also supports 4K @ 60 Hz. The 13" doesn't.

 

[Meister]

The 2.3GHz i7-4850HQ quad core is at least twice as fast as the 2.8GHz i7-4558U dual core processor, because of the double number of cores and threads on the 15".

This is only true for apps that can actually utilize eight threads.
You might want to tell the OP that most apps don't utilize that many threads.
Most common apps use two threads and then the dual core is faster.

 

[nobodyjustwalks]

For the same price, personally, Iʻd go for the 15" simply because it just seems like "more" laptop for the money. Discrete graphics, slightly better speakers, larger screen (even though you use an external monitor), quad core processor. If 512 GB isnʻt enough, external HDs are fairly inexpensive.

If the computer is going to be used on your desk most of the time, I really donʻt see a reason to get the 13". To each his/her own though...everyone has different needs. Good luck.

 

[yjchua95]

This is only true for apps that can actually utilize eight threads.
You might want to tell the OP that most apps don't utilize that many threads.
Most common apps use two threads and then the dual core is faster.

Nope, the quad core is still faster because it TurboBoosts to 3.5-3.7GHz in single/dual physical cores (2-4 threads) tasks.

The dual core variant can only reach 3.2GHz at its maximum boost.

 

[Meister]

Nope, the quad core is still faster because it TurboBoosts to 3.5-3.7GHz in single/dual physical cores (2-4 threads) tasks.

The dual core variant can only reach 3.2GHz at its maximum boost.

You have a good point!
For common tasks it won't make a difference anyway.

 

[blooperz]

I'd go with the 15 inch if they are the same price...the 13 inch has always been more on the overpriced side for the performance it offers. Id suggest meeting in an apple store if your buying off of craigslist to make sure its not stolen