Will I noticed a performance difference between processor upgrade 2.7 to 2.9ghz option?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by RandomRazer, Nov 19, 2016.

  1. RandomRazer Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2016
    #1
    15" macbook pro 2016 has option of upgrding from 2.7 to 2.9ghz for 210 dollars more.

    is it worth it?

    i use imovie/final cut , thats about the most heavy intensive app I prob use
     
  2. cmaier macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #2
    If you had the two side-by-side you'd probably notice a bit of difference in final cut now and again. Otherwise, probably not.
     
  3. RandomRazer thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2016
    #3
    like 200 dollar difference?
     
  4. cmaier macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #4
    I can't answer that for you. If you make a living with your computer then you would probably save $200 worth of time at least by the time you are done. Otherwise, probably not.
     
  5. recurrence macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
  6. RandomRazer thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2016
    #6
    what about resale value
     
  7. dugbug macrumors 65816

    dugbug

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2008
    Location:
    Somewhere in Florida
    #7
    The storage and gpu are both much more valuable imho for that $200
     
  8. BBD90 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    #8
    Hell no. None of the MacBooks have a worthwhile CPU upgrade for the price.
     
  9. RandomRazer thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2016
    #9
    so difference between 2.7ghz i7 and a 2.9ghz i7 is negligible?
     
  10. dugbug macrumors 65816

    dugbug

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2008
    Location:
    Somewhere in Florida
    #10
    very
     
  11. BasicGreatGuy Contributor

    BasicGreatGuy

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2012
    Location:
    In the middle of several books.
    #11
    In regards to the resale value, you will not get what you paid out of it. You will be throwing good money after bad.
     
  12. flyinmac macrumors 68030

    flyinmac

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Location:
    United States
    #12
    Here's my experience for the approximate difference in performance.

    You are talking about a 200 MHz difference on a machine already running at 2700 MHz.

    That is a minor bump relatively speaking.

    200 MHz is very noticeable if you are talking the difference between a system running at only 4 or 5 MHz and one running at 200 MHz.

    But when you're already at 2700 MHz, I'd say save your money and spend it on something else (like memory).

    For a rough comparison, though on an older design, I'll tell you about my recent upgrade.

    The Mac Pro in my signature used to be a quad-core 2.66 GHz machine. I upgraded it to an 8-core 3.0 GHz machine.

    That's essentially increasing its speed by 340 MHz and adding 4 more processors.

    In my minor tasks, the difference isn't really noticeable.

    But, then again, I also do a lot of tasks that will fully max out all cores 100%.

    So, with my use case, a task that would use 100% of my 4 processors and previously took 90 minutes to complete, now maximizes all 8 of my processor cores, and takes 25 to 30 minutes to complete.

    But that is with not only increasing the speed by 340 MHz, but also doubling the number of processor cores working at that higher speed.

    So on the system you're talking about.... For small tasks, you won't see any difference. And if you push your machine hard like mine, perhaps expect to shave 5 minutes off of an hour task (because you're not increasing the number of processors, just the speed).
     
  13. RandomRazer thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2016
    #13
    Thank you for your detailed example. very helpful!

    final cut is prob the most intensive app iil use. but even then so, it doesnt sound like it would make much of a difference unless i start doing 4k video or something. even then so, maybe a minute or 2 of time saved.

    i doubt it would "future proof" the computer much either?

    i guess i shal put that 200 dollars towards.... dongles? lol
     
  14. flyinmac macrumors 68030

    flyinmac

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Location:
    United States
    #14
    Yes, in your usage, I don't expect you'd see much difference.

    As for future proofing... the only benefit I'd expect would be in marketing it to a future buyer if you chose to sell it. Higher specs are usually more desirable on the used market.

    But for application use, if a program won't run on that machine, it's going to be a design or generation or graphics capability reason, not because it is 200 MHz slower.
     
  15. RandomRazer thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2016
    #15
    thanks man! well it just went into preparing for shipping mode so i guess its to late now! and i aint cancelling and reoreering since it prob wont be here till next year if i did that!
     
  16. flyinmac macrumors 68030

    flyinmac

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Location:
    United States
    #16
    You're welcome. Enjoy your new machine.
     

Share This Page