Macbook pro 13 or 15?

[Kjung7]

I agree on Parallels i5 can run hot on a 2015 so as @ihatetoregister post recomends
"
13 " i5 2.9 : 3773
13 " i5 3.1 : 3879
13 " i7 3.3 : 4005

I'd say it's not worth going for the in-between upgrade (3.1) as it's only 2,7% difference, and kinda worth going for the i7."

So for 13" 3.3 i7 best.

With the education discount the jump from 2.9 to 3.1 was only $90. Last minute decision lol

 

[ihatetoregister]

Its interesting you think the CPU would be hotter on a i7 during heavy use I thought the opposite would occur.

(I know it was not addressed to me but I'll reply )
They both have the same TDP so there shouldn't be a difference.

 

[deany]

(I know it was not addressed to me but I'll reply )
They both have the same TDP so there shouldn't be a difference.

I think I'll be asking your advice when I'm looking at my next MBP!
Cheers

 

[pshifrin]

I've been very impressed with the performance of my 13 3.3/16/512. Single core Geekbench equal to the 15 inch and multi core equal to my home iMac quad core 2011. Real world, it handles everything I've thrown at it.

I'm happy to have the smallest / most powerful ultra book available.

 

[halfbad]

OP said he uses FCPX, keep in mind your render times will be longer, probably double as you are losing 2 cores with the 13, but if it's not serious work you'll probably adjust.

 

[ihatetoregister]

OP said he uses FCPX, keep in mind your render times will be longer, probably double as you are losing 2 cores with the 13, but if it's not serious work you'll probably adjust.

This is an excellent point made by halfbad here (although 13" won't be twice as slow) : FCPX is one of the rare software which actually take full advantage of multi-core.
Which means for this particular software the perf difference will be huge - actually not double, but about 50/60% more if I remember correctly -.