Looks like no one’s replied in a while. To start the conversation again, simply ask a new question.

User profile for user: goose233
goose233 Author
User level: Level 1
8 points

Which MacBook Pro is better for my situation?

Hello, guys.

Could you please help me to decide which MacBook Pro is better for my situation?


Currently I am choosing between these models:

  • MacBook Pro 15" 2.2GHz / 16 RAM / 256 GB Storage / Iris Pro
  • MacBook Pro 15" 2.5 (2.8) GHz / 16 RAM / 256 GB Storage / Iris Pro
  • MacBook Pro 15" 2.5 GHz / 16 RAM / 512 GB Storage / AMD Radeon R9 M370X (2 GB)


What I will be using the laptop for:

  • Web design. I work in Photoshop every day and sometimes it gets messy (big projects, a lot of simultaneously opened ones, etc.). Theoretically, I would like for my laptop to be able to seamlessly handle Photoshop, Illustrator and inDesign workflow, quite possibly even at the same time. Of course, not all of them will be loaded up to the most, but it should be unnoticeable to work on big-sized projects in Photoshop if it's running alone.
  • Audio engineering. I do audio recording/mixing/mastering as a hobby, which may require some intence CPU usage. My current laptop (2.3GHz Intel Dual Core i5-2410M) cannot handle even the basics of what I need for comfort work with the audio. Usually it is around 10-15 tracks, stock and sometimes third-party plugins. I omit the part that the new laptop should have completely no issues with recording the audio through the audio interface (no cracks, bumps, noises, and other things caused by the lack of CPU and RAM). I assume each of these three Macs is capable of a fluent audio recording, the question arises about the comfortable audio processing in the future.
  • Browsing. I know that it sounds ridiculous, yet it comes sometimes that my current laptop cannot live through an intense browsing session. Around 20-25 tabs with mixed content (text for the most, a couple of video opened online). I use Google Chrome, which is quite noticeable on the CPU, but it's my personal preference in terms of browser.
  • Web development. I would like to be able to perform everything regarding web development easily and fast. That shouldn't be the problem, since even my current laptop satisfies my needs in development. Just though it's worth mentioning.

Considering aforementioned information, I can make a conclusion that I need:

  • Retina display, to squeeze every tiny pixel out of the monitor for graphics-related work
  • Reasonably fast CPU and RAM


At first, the most powerful MacBook Pro (with default 2.5GHz and AMD video card) seemed as a logical option. However, having read about the AMD video card I have noticed that it's even lower than the medium ones on the market (judging on its benchmark). Hence, it seems there is no reason to pay more for just a video card, comparing to the default stack of a cheaper model (the 15" MacBook Pro 2.2GHz / 256 GB Storage). 0.3GHz of CPU is unnoticeable, and the lack of the hard drive space can be justified by external USB storage or configuring the cheaper model for more storage by itself. So the main difference is the video card. Please, correct me if I am wrong about this conclusions.


Therefore, I have come to decide which configuration is better regarding the cheaper version of MacBook Pro 15", the 2.2GHz (default one) or 2.5/2.8 GHz (configured). Consider the following:

  • I am strongly dependent on a budget; each $100, actually, matter
  • My priority is a seamless workflow without everything freezing for 5 minutes and loading/shutting down time taking up to 10 minutes, like it does now
  • It is not important if a graphic/audio project takes some more time to render, but it is important to work freely during the production
  • I don't mind having an external USB storage, as long as it has a decent writing/reading speed (external flash USB are available for Macs, right?)
  • Neither design nor audio aren't my initial income, rather a freelance opportunities or hobbies


I would be really thankful if you could answer some of these questions and help me to decide:

  • If I had to choose between 2.2GHz to 2.8GHz boost or 256GB Storage to 512GB Storage boost, which one is more reasonable?
  • Is there a really significant difference in performance of the tasks that were mentioned between 2.2GHz and 2.5GHz / 2.8 GHz?
  • Does AMD video card makes a huge difference in terms of working with graphics? (Of course, it does, but that would be great to take a look at the difference in the form of some chart or a benchmark; if it's not dramatic, then paying more for video card makes no sense to me)
  • Can Iris Pro (which comes with 2.2GHz cheaper option) handle some minor gaming like World of Warcraft or even Diablo 3? Not necessary on the ultra or high settings, but on the ones which make the game playable and enjoyable. (That is not necessary, but it would have been a considerable benefit, because although I am not a hardcore gamer, it is nice to play some old favorite games once in a while)


Thank you for your opinions and suggestions!

Posted on May 6, 2016 8:29 AM

Reply
9 replies
User profile for user: dwb
dwb
User level: Level 7
32,920 points

May 6, 2016 9:54 AM in response to goose233

Whichever you select I’d recommend the 512GB drive. Media projects can get quite large and I suspect you also like to have stock photos, textures, etc available all the time. I’m not a professional graphic artist but I do create pamphlets and documents as well as 15-20 minute videos and on a 256GB drive I’d finish a project, move everything off, and start a new project. Sometimes when I had several projects going at once I had to decide which inconvenient solution was best.


The Intel Iris Pro video is better than I expected and I can play Diablo 3 on my 2015 MBP on higher than the lowest settings. I’m still using CS 5.5 because I refuse to rent my graphics software so I don’t know the state of current Adobe software but I do know that some users are grousing about 3D graphics and lower end GPU processors. I suggest you check out the Adobe forums.

Reply
User profile for user: goose233
goose233 Author
User level: Level 1
8 points

May 6, 2016 10:05 AM in response to dwb

I actually have a whole external drive for the source materials. For sure, some of them are better to have near all the time, but the vast majority is kept on a USB storage. I assume, if I use some textures from an external disk then system should remember the path and all I need to do is just plug in the disk when working with the project for it to use the materials correctly, right? The only drawback of this is whether there are equally fast external USB storage to provide the same speed as offered by native flash hard drive on Macs.


I am super excited to hear that Iris Pro can handle some Diablo 3 action! About the 3D graphics I don't think that's my case, I don't use that functionality at all. However, I am going to look that question on Adobe forums to make sure.


So, you would suggest MacBook Pro 2.2GHz / 512 GB Storage / Iris Pro suits my requirements just fine? There is no need to invest more in 2.5 GHz or 2.8 GHz, and it's better to stick with more storage instead?

Reply
User profile for user: dwb
dwb
User level: Level 7
32,920 points

May 6, 2016 10:38 AM in response to goose233

When I purchased my 2015 MBP I bought a new USB 3 enclosures from OWC to put a 7800 RPM rotational drive in. That was a big improvement over the USB 2 speeds. Even better is the SSD I have in another USB 3 enclosure. My experience has been that placed objects of InDesign and Photoshop remember their source location - when the drive is plugged in. Forget to have the drive plugged in though and you’ll have to place the objects again. That’s why I eventually stopped relying on placing things and either imported them or put them into the folder with the project. I’m very happy my new computer has a 512GB drive 😁


Do check out what other professionals are saying on the Adobe site. As I said, I’m neither a professional nor using the newest Adobe software. That puts me two years behind the Adobe curve and I won’t be going back. As a professional I understand you don’t have that option - at least for now. But that’s the computer I’d choose for myself…or actually did although I chose the 13” version along with an external display.

Reply
User profile for user: goose233
goose233 Author
User level: Level 1
8 points

May 6, 2016 2:56 PM in response to dwb

Well, considering Sketch as a less CPU consuming alternative, it leaves out only audio engineering.

Video card has no influence on the latter, and since Iris Pro can handle some gaming, it shouldn't be an issue for it to handle Sketch. Therefore, I don't see a reason to spend additional money on the integrated video card.


The question remains: can MacBook Pro 15" 2.2 GHz / 16 RAM / 512 GB Storage / Iris Pro be a solid working machine for those activities I've described in the post (except graphic design using Sketch, which, I hope, is less CPU intense).

Reply
User profile for user: Rawkk
Rawkk
User level: Level 1
9 points

May 6, 2016 4:38 PM in response to goose233

Hi there I am a college student and I do some video editing in Final Cut, I also use Photoshop as well as other intensive apps on the Macbook Pro. I could only recommend for your situation the

MacBook Pro 15" 2.5 GHz / 16 RAM / 512 GB Storage / AMD Radeon R9 M370X (2 GB)

Mainly because you are going to need the power and the larger fast access storage. My new MBP just came in 2 days ago and it is this model. I am so very happy with it. Honestly this Macbook Pro is best in class by a mile.

Reply
User profile for user: goose233
goose233 Author
User level: Level 1
8 points

May 7, 2016 1:56 AM in response to Rawkk

Thanks for the suggestion. I know it's definitely better, but as I said, I am dependent on a budget, so if a cheaper model is just slightly lower, than I don't see a reason to buy the most expensive one. Of course, for video editing you require much stronger video card, yet is it really the case when using something like Photoshop or Sketch? Otherwise:

  • 0,3 GHz CPU don't seem to make a dramatic difference (comparing 2,2 and 2,5)
  • AMD Radeon R9 M370X video card is, honestly, bad for the money it costs. I judge on the benchmark, i.e. this one.


Upgrading from 256 to 512 GB of Storage is still much cheaper than buying the top model.

It would be great to hear a response from someone who has used both 2.2GHz Iris Pro and 2.5GHz Radeon Macs for the tasks similar to mine. My ultimate goal is to find out whether I will be satisfied with the cheaper version.

Reply

Which MacBook Pro is better for my situation?

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple ID.
Learn more Sign up