which macbook pro configuration should i buy for the non retina line?

Contact the store from where you plan on purchasing your MBP from. Tell the staff your needs, interests, etc. They will be happy to help you make your final decision.

Actually the Non Retina model can have 16GBs of RAM. Apple never tested that model line with more than the 8GBs stated in the specs but the, as you call it the CPU but actually the ChipSet, can and does support 16GBs of RAM. you have to buy it and install it yourself so if you are buying one get it with only 4GBs of RAM because to put 16GBs in you have to remove both of the Apple supply RAM modules. No sense wasting money on RAM you are going to remove and replace.

Crucial.com for RAM.

When Apple first started making the current line of Non Retina screen MBPs, back in early 2011 (all models since then have used basically the same chipset and updated CPUs), there was no 8GBs per module available, no RAM manufacture made them. So they test it with the maximum amount of RAM available which was 2 x 4GBs per module. Since then they haven't bother Re-Testing as they are phasing out that line of notebooks. The only one left is the 13" model. Both the 17" and 15" have been discontinued.

colep22 wrote:

question why wouldnt they test it with 16gbs of ram?

Someone please check my math. The data I see places the rMBP with higher performance and lower cost than the MBP.

I looked at the MaBook Air (MBA), MacBook Pro (MBP), and Retina MBP (rMBP) price and performance and the 13” rMBP appears to take the cake with the MBA in second place and the MBP a distant third. The MBP has the slowest graphics and slowest standard processor for a higher price than either the rMBP or the MBA. The MBP also weights more (4.5 lbs.) and has the worst battery life (7 hours). An option in the MBP’s favor is it can have a slower but larger disk while the MBA and rMBP must use the smaller SSDs.

All the processor configurations below are (±10%) in speed compared to the MBA so processor speed is not a major differentiator. However the graphics speeds differ significantly with the MBP at the bottom with an HD 4000, the MBA in the middle with an HD 5000, and the rMBP at the top with Intel Iris Graphics.

For lower price I would choose a 1.3 GHz i5 MBA with 8 GB of RAM and a 256 GB SSD for $1,400. For higher performance I would choose the 2.4 GHz i5 rMBP with 16 GB of RAM and 256 GB SSD for $1,700. If I needed more than 256 GB of storage then I might consider the MBP with a 500 GB or 1 TB disk, but that would sacrifice performance both in graphics and I/O speed. Instead of a larger system disk one could consider placing some of the storage on the 256 GB SSD and some on an external 1 TB hard disk.

Similar configurations:

MBA 1.7 GHz i7, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD: $1,550 <— 2nd place

Mactracker 7284 system benchmark plus HD 5000 graphics

3 lbs. 12 hours of battery life

MBP 2.5 GHz i5, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD: $1,700 <— 3rd place

Mactracker 6690 system benchmark plus HD 4000 graphics

4.5 lbs. 7 hours of battery life

8% slower CPU performance on Mactracker benchmarks

compared to the MBA

MBP 2.9 GHz i7, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD: $1,850 <— 3rd place

Mactracker 7841 system benchmark plus HD 4000 graphics

4.5 lbs. 7 hours of battery life

8% faster CPU performance on Mactracker benchmarks

compared to the MBA

rMBP 2.4 Ghz i5, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD: $1,500. <— 1st place

Mactracker 7136 system benchmark plus Intel Iris Graphics

3.5 lbs. 9 hours of battery life

2% slower CPU performance on Mactracker benchmarks

compared to the MBA

rMBP 2.4 Ghz i5, 16 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD: $1,700. <— 1st place

Mactracker 7136 system benchmark plus Intel Iris Graphics

3.5 lbs. 9 hours of battery life

2% slower CPU performance on Mactracker benchmarks

compared to the MBA