16" MBP: i7 or i9?

[MrGunnyPT]

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Just-...6-with-Core-i9-Radeon-Pro-5500M.443889.0.html

reports that "After our first day of testing, we cannot notice any issues with macOS. Temperatures stay below 40 °C even under load and the fans are quiet as usual." (this is for an i9 2.3)

Very nice! I'm really about the i7 in this 16" more than enough for me who runs VMs on Parallels.

 

[INoctilux]

Hi,

I use my laptop for photo-editing (lot of Medium format files) on Lightroom, Capture One and Photoshop (not heavy use of Photoshop). I went for the 16 gb of RAM because on the Mac Pro 2013 (Hexa) we have 64 gb of RAM and in the studio we run on an IMAC 5K (32 go of Ram) and it seems to me that RAM is less important today than it used to be on the 90's. The Mac Pro 2013, which is a very relatable machine, begins to show some limits on Lightroom even if it's the one that is the most loaded of ram. So my idea is that when the 16gb will be the new 8 gb of ram; the other component will also be outdated; so buying 64 gb today will not really helps when 64 GB will be a requirement because the machine - essentially the processor - will be also outdated.

I am saying this but reading you make me doubt of my choice : have I done a silly move by buying 16 gb instead of 32 Gb ?

 

[gxxr]

Well, the thing with RAM is that having too little will slow you down, but having more than necessary will not speed anything up. The exact number that is right for you will vary based on your usage, but I guess the 64gb of RAM of your mac pro were simply more than was necessary for your type of work.
Considering I edit pictures now with only 8Gb, I'm sure one can work perfectly well with 16Gb, while 64Gb would probably be overkill for most photo editors. I went for the middle ground for the sake of future proofing (and because I'm a heavy multitasker who never closes any apps and switches between them frequently).

 

[-narcan-]

I am saying this but reading you make me doubt of my choice : have I done a silly move by buying 16 gb instead of 32 Gb ?

this forum has done that to me too. I’ve got a 32 on order and am keen to compare it to heavy photoshop & Figma work with the 16.

I can manage to get the 16 to start using swap space pretty quickly with a few heavy projects loaded up, but to be honest everything still feels very quick, so that’s why I’m interested to see if there’s much tangible difference.

My current assumption is though that the 2.3 i9/5500m 4gb/32gb/1tb is probably the sweet spot for this machine - balancing price, performance and head room , but of course all comes down to specific use cases

 

[am2am]

My i9 2.4, 5500M with 8GB, 32RAM, 2T arrived.
So far happy.

Running very cool idle (processor ~35st C, ~50st C if external 4k monitor connected) - I've posted details here: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/16-is-hot-noisy-with-an-external-monitor.2211747/post-28028111

Under load this is really powerful machine. I've posted Geekbench/Cinebench results here:
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ar-show-big-differences.2211524/post-28028196
Overall very stable, all 8 cores max are running ~3,1 - 3,2Ghz - no signs of throttling, very stable.
Cinebench multicore ~7200, Cinebench ~3300

Few observations:

My photos library (60k) RAWs is still syncing - istat is reporting constant 8GB of GPU memory used. It looks it's worth to get upgraded GPU memory - at least in my case.

Display color is on the warm side (comparing with iPad true-tone) - after 3 days I get used to it.
I do have speakers pops as reported by others (YouTube, Final Cut) - not really bothering me for now - I assume it will be corrected by software.

32BG memory was the right decision. Staying constantly on 16GB on average - going up to ~24GB when under load (raw editing, previews, final cut editing).

My first final cut export to H264 and hevc(8bits) - 4k footage - I could not max all 8 cores - they were running at approx 50-60% - relatively quiet fans. Movie was not complicated, no effects. GPU/T2 acceleration helped as well I assume. With hevc 10bits export CPU shows more load - I didn't finish the export - did not have time.

I cannot hear any coil whine!

Overall - very happy with new toy. Plan to use it many years.

 

[filmak]

My i9 2.4, 5500M with 8GB, 32RAM, 2T arrived.
So far happy.

Running very cool idle (processor ~35st C, ~50st C if external 4k monitor connected) - I've posted details here: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/16-is-hot-noisy-with-an-external-monitor.2211747/post-28028111

Under load this is really powerful machine. I've posted Geekbench/Cinebench results here:
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ar-show-big-differences.2211524/post-28028196
Overall very stable, all 8 cores max are running ~3,1 - 3,2Ghz - no signs of throttling, very stable.
Cinebench multicore ~7200, Cinebench ~3300

Few observations:

My photos library (60k) RAWs is still syncing - istat is reporting constant 8GB of GPU memory used. It looks it's worth to get upgraded GPU memory - at least in my case.

Display color is on the warm side (comparing with iPad true-tone) - after 3 days I get used to it.
I do have speakers pops as reported by others (YouTube, Final Cut) - not really bothering me for now - I assume it will be corrected by software.

32BG memory was the right decision. Staying constantly on 16GB on average - going up to ~24GB when under load (raw editing, previews, final cut editing).

My first final cut export to H264 and hevc(8bits) - 4k footage - I could not max all 8 cores - they were running at approx 50-60% - relatively quiet fans. Movie was not complicated, no effects. GPU/T2 acceleration helped as well I assume. With hevc 10bits export CPU shows more load - I didn't finish the export - did not have time.

I cannot hear any coil whine!

Overall - very happy with new toy. Plan to use it many years.

Thank you very much for these useful details.
Glad for you, I wish to you to enjoy it for many years.

 

[impulse462]

Thank you very much for these useful details.
Glad for you, I wish to you to enjoy it for many years.

If you're interested in temps, i'd add that my temperatures are almost identical to the poster you quoted. i have the same computer as him (1TB though)

 

[gxxr]

If you're interested in temps, i'd add that my temperatures are almost identical to the poster you quoted. i have the same computer as him (1TB though)

I'm having strange results with the i7 concerning temperatures and battery life.

The past two days, whenever I was using it (which wasn't often, since I haven't made it my work machine yet, so I was actually still working on the 13"), it didn't show good battery life (far below 10h). Except one time a couple of days ago, where the calculated battery life suddenly was far above 10h.
Now I just switched it on, and I get 10h40 remaining with a battery that's 94% charged.
Usage hasn't changed, unless I'm testing something specifically, I just browse the web with this thing for now.
It's the same with the temperatures: Whenever battery life isn't good, the temps are around 42°C. On those occasions where the calculated battery life is good, the temperatures are about 10°C lower at 32°C.

Even while I'm typing this, battery life is climbing (now at 11:30 remaining). Just this morning I tried the same stuff, no difference in usage, and battery life was only around 7h remaining (and the battery was fully charged then).

These fluctuations make me think that maybe there's still some background stuff going on (even though I tried to shut it all down).

The i9 is arriving tomorrow. I hope it'll finally be "my new laptop". This one (the i7) is fine for the most part (even the coil whine seems to have disappeared), but I don't fully trust it due to the battery life thing.

 

[danwells]

Spotlight?

 

[matram]

To me this sounds perfectly normal. The current power draw can change quite a lot dependent on what you are doing. The "time remaining" is based on some kind of sliding average of the power drawn and can be slow in reacting to changes in the power draw.

I use iStat Menus, configured to show me the instantaneous power draw in the menu bar. That helps me identify which applications or usage pattern are causing an increase draw. Here you see 6,6 W drawn and 14 hours remaining.

 

[gxxr]

Spotlight?

That's what I assumed, but what would it be indexing, days after I got the machine? As I said, I'm not really using the machine yet (since I expect I'll be returning it), so there is no real quantity of new files, or anything like that. There is a spotlight process that is using a little bit of energy, but that must be the same for other people?

The current power draw can change quite a lot dependent on what you are doing. The "time remaining" is based on some kind of sliding average of the power drawn and can be slow in reacting to changes in the power draw.

I used to be a software engineer, I know all that. I waited a long time to see the prediction update. There definitely was no change in "what I was doing"/how I was using the computer (as explained), I took great care to do the exact same thing (even pulled up the same websites) and yet the predicted runtime was very different.

I use iStat Menus, configured to show me the instantaneous power draw in the menu bar. That helps me identify which applications or usage pattern are causing an increase draw. Here you see 6,6 W drawn and 14 hours remaining.

View attachment 880345

That's useful, thanks. Will try that out tonight.

 

[gxxr]

Aaaah! DHL decided to drive off with my MBP again instead of dropping it off at a service point. Another day of waiting... (and the poor i9 in the cold delivery truck for a day)

 

[AlienSexGod]

Aaaah! DHL decided to drive off with my MBP again instead of dropping it off at a service point. Another day of waiting... (and the poor i9 in the cold delivery truck for a day)

Ah so you upgraded to i9 wise move imo
I went i9 also. I went 8Tb SSD as I can't upgrade later so bit the bullet now. ( I already had 8Tb SSD inside a 2.7Ghz i7 mid 2012 matt screen with DVD drive removed for the extra SSD bay) At first I figured I could schlep it with 4GB and use externals but for full speed you can only really half fill these so I went the biggest I can get. 32Gb ram is a good move and a no braine as 16Gb is way limiting. I won't always need 64Gb ram but I figured I will use it and since I am already spending a fortune I went for that also. SO I am MAXXED! Just Wild!

Just need a good dock or monitor that outputs a true 96w of power. For now I'll just still with the Apple PSU. Enjoy your. About time they made a a MacBook worthy of replace a 2012! The others just laughable... crap keyboard no escape key and not much faster! Really I want a 19" MBPr with TWO octo i9s I don't care if the battery only last only 2 hours I am mostly plug n play. Besides they could also program the OS to turn of the 2nd CPU on battery power as well as most of the cores on the first CPU to max battery. I need a portable workhorse and there is lots like me. Apple need to stop trying to think Steve Job knew it all. he was wrong about large screen phones not taking off. He is wrong about large screen laptop workstations....

 

[ScreenSavers]

I just ordered the i7 for myself. I see little benefit to the i9 for the editing I’ll be doing.

 

[JosepPont]

Hi, I order the i9 2,3, 32GB RAM and 5500 8GB. I think it is my sweet spot for manage lot of raw images (stacking and postproduction of astrophotos) with Pixinsight. I hope be right. The machine arrives in 2~3 weeks (Barcelona). If this thread is still alive I will post mi first impresions here. I also hope in that time you will clear your decission.

Good luck!

 

[tivoboy]

I haven’t really seen many direct compares of the processors or the GPU’s to know if any of these uncertain upgrades are going to add enough value.

So, I’m struggling with choices here. Upgrading from a 2012 and 2015 MBP both which had 16GB RAM, I’m inclined to move to 32GB to future proof the machine for at least 3-4 years. I do a LOT of web browsing and keep a lot of apps open at the same time, and do a mild amount of large image editing. Not TOO much but enough that I think 32GB would be a value add for the image editing and keeping applications running smoothly.

I want to go to 1TB storage, it seems pretty cheap and I’m used to using external 1TB Sandisk drives when I have to move a lot of images around. So, that should be enough.

What I’m struggling with is processor 2.6 i7 or base i9, base of either and also the GPU.

I’m inclined to upgrade the GPU to the next higher one, the 5500M but with 4GB RAM only. Is the 8GB going to give me much in performance here for my habits?

 

[MrGunnyPT]

I just ordered the i7 for myself. I see little benefit to the i9 for the editing I’ll be doing.

Yeah after thinking much I went with the base model. I'm perfectly happy with the current setup I have.. 5300M plays World of Warcraft just fine for casual normal raiding and Mythics+

In terms of work it's abysmally faster when compared to my 2017 13" TB. Hell, I can finally have 3-5 VMs running without an issue

 

[charliebarley]

This seems to suggest not much difference between base and maxed out specs for most tasks. Only real difference for people doing 3d rendering and things like that. And difference seems to be mainly down to the video memory (4GB vs 8GB), not the processors.

Still thinking about getting the base i9 version with 32GB and 1TB myself as seems better value than speccing up the i7 base. I mean they come out at roughly the same price so might as well get the i9.

 

[gxxr]

Ah so you upgraded to i9 wise move imo

90% sure. I still have the i7. Will be returning it this week, unless the i9 proves to be worse than the i7 at anything.

I did some tests importing RAW files and generating smart previews in Lightroom, which maxed out the i7 pretty well. I expect some improvements with the i9 - not sure how big they'll be though.

Mostly I'm hoping for better battery life since I'm not 100% happy with that.
[automerge]1575375488[/automerge]

Hi, I order the i9 2,3, 32GB RAM and 5500 8GB. I think it is my sweet spot for manage lot of raw images (stacking and postproduction of astrophotos) with Pixinsight.

That's the exact configuration I'll be receiving today (unless DHL messes up again).
BTW., is there a community of astrophotographers around Barcelona? If so, I probably know one of your colleagues.

I hope be right. The machine arrives in 2~3 weeks (Barcelona).

Unless the correos are on strike, I think it'll be faster. Apple undercut their delivery estimates to Austria both times by about 2 weeks.

Good luck with your i9!
[automerge]1575376120[/automerge]

(2) Sell the MBP13, I don’t personally see any point managing two laptops. I’m also upgrading to the MBP16 from a 13 and am handing my 13 down to my daughter.
(3) Buy a second hand or refurb iPad Pro with a keyboard as your mobile back up. iPads are good mobile companions for media consumption etc so a slightly different, and in my view practical use case than having a 2nd laptop.

As an update on the decision conerning the backup / ultra mobile solution: I ordered an iPad Pro 11 on Black Friday, and will be selling the 13" MBP. (I will get the 13" keyboard exchanged first though).
I decided in favor of the iPad pro after researching sidecar and trying out the iPad pro in store for photo retouching. That's pretty neat. And of course, it's fun to try new things. As has been pointed out, managing two Laptops, on the other hand, wouldn't be fun (or make much sense). I played around a lot with the new features of iPad OS on my Air 2 these past couple of days, and while I still think that some things are very cumbersome for laptop powerusers, it could work.

 

[badsimian]

Aaaah! DHL decided to drive off with my MBP again instead of dropping it off at a service point. Another day of waiting... (and the poor i9 in the cold delivery truck for a day)

Has it arrived yet then? I am about to press the button on an i9 2.4 and 5300 with 64GB/2TB I think...

 

[gxxr]

Has it arrived yet then? I am about to press the button on an i9 2.4 and 5300 with 64GB/2TB I think...

Yes it has, but I was running errands all evening. (Cat sabotaging me again with a trip to the vet when there's a new MBP in the house!).

I only went through the setup procedure, then let it work on the initial update and started installing Adobe stuff, so no real tests yet.
However, I'm pretty sure I'm keeping this the i9. Right out of the box, this one is showing a much better battery life, and it's running 5-10°C cooler than the i7 did in the beginning. So since I don't assume it'll be slower than the i7, the i7 doesn't have much going for it at the moment.
The SSD noise is the same as on the other machine. I didn't notice many differences concerning screen, keyboard or touchpad. Maybe the i7's touchpad sits a bit more flush with the body, but it's a tiny difference. Likewise, I think the i9's screen is slightly brighter, but also slightly yellower. In any case, the latter is a non issue. My (calibrated) 13" screen is even yellower and both are bright enough.

The i7 is running very cool as well today. Not sure what it was doing exactly a couple of days ago. Now it drops to 29°C when idle. There might not be much difference between these machines in the end.

 

[gxxr]

Results of the first, utterly unscientific test:
I copied 167 RAW files (4.8Gb or so) to the SSD of each machine (to eliminate the influence of possibly wonky card readers) before starting the test. Then, I imported the files into Lightroom (new, empty catalogs on each machine
) and built smart previews.

1. During the import of the files and the initial read-out of the built-in previews, the bare eye couldn't tell a difference in speed.
2. However, the i9 had a 16 second lead in the end once all the smart previews were built (total time 2 minutes 53 seconds)
3. The i9 was still installing Adobe stuff in the background, and maybe it's still running some other setup routines. It might even have been faster otherwise. Or not.
4. The i7 ran a higher clock speed, especially during the first minute or so. Maybe that would have some effect on some tasks.
5. Not that we needed it, but here's proof that clock speed means nothing these days. I ran the same test with the 13" i5 dual core (3,1 ghz). It managed to keep a pretty high clock speed (avg 3,5) according to intel power gadget, but the time for the entire test was atrocious. I can't tell exactly, because I got so bored that I accidentally stopped the video I was recording with my phone. But building the smart previews took about 12 minutes! I even want to run that test again after rebooting the 13" because it seemed to lousy after having just watched the two 16"ers.

I will probably run some more tests, but not too many - now I want to start using one of these devices.
Is the difference above worth the moderate price difference? To me, yes. I hate waiting.

Oh, and I noticed that the charger of the i9 doesn't make any noises. The one that came with the i7 does.

 

[Krevnik]

The i7 ran a higher clock speed, especially during the first minute or so. Maybe that would have some effect on some tasks.

That's probably why the results were as close as they were (~10% faster on the i9). And those results are pretty close to what I saw between the base i7 and the i9 for my tests as well.

 

[vebruce123]

Results of the first, utterly unscientific test:
I copied 167 RAW files (4.8Gb or so) to the SSD of each machine (to eliminate the influence of possibly wonky card readers) before starting the test. Then, I imported the files into Lightroom (new, empty catalogs on each machine
) and built smart previews.

1. During the import of the files and the initial read-out of the built-in previews, the bare eye couldn't tell a difference in speed.
2. However, the i9 had a 16 second lead in the end once all the smart previews were built (total time 2 minutes 53 seconds)
3. The i9 was still installing Adobe stuff in the background, and maybe it's still running some other setup routines. It might even have been faster otherwise. Or not.
4. The i7 ran a higher clock speed, especially during the first minute or so. Maybe that would have some effect on some tasks.
5. Not that we needed it, but here's proof that clock speed means nothing these days. I ran the same test with the 13" i5 dual core (3,1 ghz). It managed to keep a pretty high clock speed (avg 3,5) according to intel power gadget, but the time for the entire test was atrocious. I can't tell exactly, because I got so bored that I accidentally stopped the video I was recording with my phone. But building the smart previews took about 12 minutes! I even want to run that test again after rebooting the 13" because it seemed to lousy after having just watched the two 16"ers.

I will probably run some more tests, but not too many - now I want to start using one of these devices.
Is the difference above worth the moderate price difference? To me, yes. I hate waiting.

Oh, and I noticed that the charger of the i9 doesn't make any noises. The one that came with the i7 does.

maybe do some tests on performance of video editing, is it worth upgrading from i7 to i9

 

[gxxr]

maybe do some tests on performance of video editing, is it worth upgrading from i7 to i9

I don't know much about video editing. What would you want to see exactly? Exporting a 4k video? I tried that to compare the 13" to the i7 16", but it wasn't a great test because Adobe Premiere didn't really use the CPU much for that.