2 Replies Latest reply: Oct 28, 2013 12:19 PM by just another dude
Empire_1 Level 1 (20 points)

What is the difference in terms of performance between the 2.3 Ghz and 2.6 Ghz processor for the new 2013 MacBook Pro Retina?


I'm going to use it for basic computer functions for projects and essays, along with some occasional graphically demanding games (ie: Titanfall when it comes out). The main thing though, is that I need this computer to be "future-proof," as in that it will last me at least 5 years running smoothly and still be able to keep up with the pace of new tech.


Any thoughts? 

  • Matt9817 Level 1 (0 points)

    I know I'm late but I'll still leave my input. In tests the 2.6 is about 6% faster which you will only see in applications like Photoshop or heavy video editing softwares. During normal tests you will not see a difference. If you want to "future proof" you laptop then get 16gb ram. That will increase your speeds in many ways. If your a heavy gamer then get the high end 15" model as it has a better gpu, (actually the early 2013 model has a better gpu then the baseline new one). So, as in my case, I'm going to be using this for years, I got the high end model. I wasn't going to get the 2.6gpu processor but my education discount saved $200 and was worth it to me. In the end you really don't need the 2.6ghz processor unless you are going be using extreme programs.

  • just another dude Level 1 (0 points)

    I had asked a similar question, but didn't get a response that I was hoping for.  I still haven't found a good answer.


    In the end, I bought the $2600 model and am thinking it will be "future proof."


    2.3ghz quad core isn't bad, but the major selling points were the discrete graphics.  16gb ram should last a while.  512gb ssd isn't bad, but ideally a 1tb ssd would have been great, but i'm not made of money.