About to purchase MBP, advice plz

[jimtron]

This refurb looks good at Apple online store: 2018, 2.9GHz, 15", 32gb, 4TB, Vega 20: $4379.

Or new, at B&H: 2019, 2.4GHz, 15", 32gb, 2TB, Vega 20: $4149.

I'll be doing video editing, Photoshop/Lightroom, and 360°/VR stuff. Seems like 4TB would be really nice. Otherwise a bit of a tossup; second one is a newer model, brand new, and cheaper; first one has faster clock, bigger hard drive.

I realize no one can make this decision for me, but curious if anyone has any thoughts, or other places to buy that might have a better deal. Definitely leaning toward the refurb at the moment.



Links:


https://www.apple.com/shop/product/...15f6243c0a1d04da732da15df2a6954ad09600c3744a6


https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1481337-REG/apple_z0ww_mv91_30_bh_15_4_macbook_pro_with.html

 

[Jac Robinson]

Well, one is an 8 core and the other is a 6 core processor. So, keep that in mind. More storage sounds preferable to me. But like you said, its your call.

 

[jimtron]

"Well, one is an 8 core and the other is a 6 core processor. So, keep that in mind. More storage sounds preferable to me. But like you said, its your call."

Ah, good point, missed that. So the '19 is 8-core, but slower processor. Yeah, still leaning toward the '18, unless anyone thinks the '19 is clearly a much better deal...

 

[bcaslis]

19 is faster despite the slower clock, has better cooling, and has the revised keyboard. Unless you really need 4TB SSD, it would be no contest for me. I would go with the 19 (which I did).

 

[Lunder89]

I would also go the 2019 version. The base clock might be lower, but when you have two cores to pick up the slack, it will make a difference.
Think of this way: 2.9 GHz x 6 cores = 17.4 GHz - 2.4 GHz x 8 cores = 19.2 GHz

 

[leman]

Is there a reason why you need such a large SSD? For your kind of work, it might be a better idea to have an external thunderbolt SSD for your projects. Also, hand down the 2019 i9, they are better in every regard. You don't need the 2.4Ghz CPU, the 2.3Ghz one is basically just as good. Also, clocks are misleading, the 2.3Ghz CPU is actually 4.8Ghz, so don't worry too much about it.

 

[Lunder89]

[QUOTE="leman, post: 27570116, member: 237161"...Also, clocks are misleading, the 2.3Ghz CPU is actually 4.8Ghz, so don't worry too much about it.[/QUOTE]

Okay, let me just correct you there. The 2.3 (or 2.4) clock is the BASE clock. That is the actual clock of the processor. IF the is a need for it, and the thermals can handle it, there is a turbo clock, which can then reach 4.8 or 5.0 GHz.
BUT the thermals on the MacBook Pro, will not allow the CPU to get there very often or very long. So that is NOT the speed to expect.

Also when the system is put under load, not all cores will reach that speed. Thermals aside, all cores could likely reach 4. 5 or 6, and ONE core would reach the 4.8 GHz.
But since we can't put thermals aside, under longer loads it won't get much faster than its BASE clock. I haven't seen the latest reviews of the 15" yet. But the first i9 MacBook Pros did not fare well, if you remember, they couldn't even stay at their base clock.

 

[leman]

Okay, let me just correct you there.

The real story unfortunately is much more complex. I was trying to give a simplified account and point out that the base clock is not the definitive measure of expected performance.

At any rate, the simpel fact is that the current-gen 2.3Ghz i9 will significantly outperform any last-year Mac in virtually every scenario.

The 2.3 (or 2.4) clock is the BASE clock.
That is the actual clock of the processor.

Not really. The way Intel defines the base clock is the minimal/guaranteed clock the CPU is expected to run at when running "a complex" (whatever that means) workload that utilises all the CPU cores, while drawing its TDP of power, in a system that is designed to accommodate the CPU's thermals.

What this all means that there will be very few real-life situations when you will see the CPU actually running at its base clock. As you correctly point out, it will depend on workload, the thermal environment, and other factors.

So that is NOT the speed to expect.

It is very much the speed to expect for short-term burst workload that do not involve massively parallel work. Which is the reason why new 15W CPUs outperform older 45W or even 90W CPUs in most general computing tasks.

But since we can't put thermals aside, under longer loads it won't get much faster than its BASE clock.

Depends on the workload. If your work is heavily multithreaded and your thermal environment is good, than you are right, the performance will probably stabilise around 20-30% over the base clock at some point. If your work is not heavily multithreaded, the clocks will be higher.

But the first i9 MacBook Pros did not fare well, if you remember, they couldn't even stay at their base clock.

All independent tests I've seen (including the tests I've done myself) show that the 2018 i9 is more than able to sustain its base clock. You are probably referring again to the bug present in the power management firmware of the MBP when it was first launched. This bug would result in machine erratically throttling under high load. Apple released a patch that has fully fixed this behaviour two weeks after it was released.

 

[xb2003]

Yeah, go with the 2019. Everything I've seen points towards improved thermals (which was a major issue for the 2018) and it has that newer keyboard, which may or may not fix the problem but probably won't hurt it.

The only other thing I'd be asking myself is if I really needed that internal storage. I mean, sure it's nice to not carry an external hard drive, but Apple charges a pretty penny for that privilege. And on top of that, it's way more convenient to store projects on an external drive if you switch between a desktop and a laptop a lot.

 

[Jac Robinson]

Consider what defines an upgrade for you. I would definitely get the one with extra storage as that would be more useful to me. The other replies in this thread have focused on speed mostly. If more storage is highly beneficial to what you do, it may be the faster/more comfortable option.

Yeah, go with the 2019. Everything I've seen points towards improved thermals (which was a major issue for the 2018) and it has that newer keyboard, which may or may not fix the problem but probably won't hurt it.

The only other thing I'd be asking myself is if I really needed that internal storage. I mean, sure it's nice to not carry an external hard drive, but Apple charges a pretty penny for that privilege. And on top of that, it's way more convenient to store projects on an external drive if you switch between a desktop and a laptop a lot.

The desktop argument is a good one. By way of comparison, I think the price for more storage in this context isn’t that bad.

 

[Fishrrman]

If you're going to spend that much money (I honestly can't understand why anyone would spend $4,000 on a LAPTOP), you'd do better to wait until this coming October, when the new 16" MacBook Pro models are introduced -- with the NEW keyboard that will hopefully be a big improvement over the existing one.

 

[Howard2k]

Yeah, go with the 2019. Everything I've seen points towards improved thermals (which was a major issue for the 2018) and it has that newer keyboard, which may or may not fix the problem but probably won't hurt it.

The only other thing I'd be asking myself is if I really needed that internal storage. I mean, sure it's nice to not carry an external hard drive, but Apple charges a pretty penny for that privilege. And on top of that, it's way more convenient to store projects on an external drive if you switch between a desktop and a laptop a lot.

Seconded.

I use 256GB of local storage and keep my files local while actively working on them, but then move them to NAS when ready so they're still always accessible, but just a bit slower. And for many file types, that doesn't really matter. I don't need to keep all my movies and songs locally, I just open them off the NAS and it works great. It's also far cheaper than Apple's absurd SSD pricing.

 

[jimtron]

Thanks for the responses folks! Regarding the storage, I do use external drives, but it seems like it's still easy to have internal drive accumulate stuff pretty fast, and I know it helps performance to have the hard drive not too full. I do a lot of photo and video work while traveling, and have small external drives, but capacious internal storage would be nice for me.

That said, I'm now leaning toward the 2019.

Any ideas for a better price than B&H?

 

[jimtron]

(I honestly can't understand why anyone would spend $4,000 on a LAPTOP)

I do video, photography, and VR work professionally. I need a portable computer, and would rather not own two computers. So I use a MBP, at the office with an external display.

 

[Kung gu]

wait till october?

 

[jimtron]

wait till october?

Any idea what prices will be like, for 15 or 16" MBP, 32gb ram, 2tb hard drive?

 

[Kung gu]

Any idea what prices will be like, for 15 or 16" MBP, 32gb ram, 2tb hard drive?

idk, but base 16" is likely to be $3000

 

[ghanwani]

Thanks for the responses folks! Regarding the storage, I do use external drives, but it seems like it's still easy to have internal drive accumulate stuff pretty fast, and I know it helps performance to have the hard drive not too full. I do a lot of photo and video work while traveling, and have small external drives, but capacious internal storage would be nice for me.

That said, I'm now leaning toward the 2019.

Any ideas for a better price than B&H?

Check Apple Insider's price guide. I think you can save $100.

 

[jimtron]

Check Apple Insider's price guide. I think you can save $100.

Thanks, didn't know about that. Actually I'm seeing the same best price at B&H ($4149), or $50 less at Adorama, which I'd prefer to avoid.

https://prices.appleinsider.com/apple-macbook-pro-15-inch-2019

 

[Trusteft]

For me there would be no contest. Go for the newer new laptop.

 

[ghanwani]

Thanks, didn't know about that. Actually I'm seeing the same best price at B&H ($4149), or $50 less at Adorama, which I'd prefer to avoid.

https://prices.appleinsider.com/apple-macbook-pro-15-inch-2019

You are right. I made a mistake.

 

[Neilfau]

Any idea what prices will be like, for 15 or 16" MBP, 32gb ram, 2tb hard drive?

I’m in the same boat as you & I was just about to buy a 2019 15” with 8 core, 32gb ram, 1TB hdd & Vega 20 but I’m now leaning on waiting 2 months for the new 16.4”. If I’m spending this kind of money on a laptop then I want the best possible resale value for when I sell in 4-5 years time and I believe with all the keyboard issues the 16.4” will much more desirable even though performance wise I don’t expect it to be much faster than the current 2019 15”.

As for price.... the higher end 15” starts at $2799, rumours are the 16.4” will start at around $3000, so expect the base 16.4” to be similar to the high end 15”. I would expect the base 16.4” therefore to have 8 cores i9 (possibly xeon), 16gb ram, 512gb hdd etc, so you’re looking at $200 premium for the screen size and the new keyboard. One thing to also take into consideration is that I think a few people have calculated that a 16.4” screen will not fit the current 15” chassis even if there are zero bezels, so expect it to be slightly bigger and probably slightly thicker to accommodate the new keyboard.

 

[BarredOwl]

If you're going to spend that much money (I honestly can't understand why anyone would spend $4,000 on a LAPTOP), you'd do better to wait until this coming October, when the new 16" MacBook Pro models are introduced -- with the NEW keyboard that will hopefully be a big improvement over the existing one.

nope. That’s just an opinion based on rumors and your own personal dislike and paranoia of a keyboard. The time for getting bang for your buck is now. And, if you can’t or won’t spend 4K on a laptop, then you are not going to be in the market for the new revision.