The Definitive 2017 Macbook Pro 13 inch or 15 inch Thread

[OSXCrusader]

Good luck! I have a feeling you are going to like the 15" model. Far better performance in still a relatively small footprint. I am absolutely loving my 2017 15"; I upgraded from a 2014 15" last month and it is much smaller/ easier to carry.

Either way, though, great machines! Let us know what you decide when you get the 15" in your hands.

Absolutely! I am thinking the same thing.

I will note one thing though: Yesterday, as I said earlier, I spent most of the evening on the 13" watching videos, editing some high res photos in the photos app, browsing websites - nytimes, financial websites, looking at some mail. I also scaled my display for more space which actually made the 13" seem significantly larger in terms of screen real estate (but of course text could get uncomfortable to read over long periods of time.)

Later towards the end of the night, I went back to my 2010 15" and WOW! This thing felt like a desktop! Even right now as I type this, I ca't get over how large the display feels and looks to me! I guess the 13" had successfully managed to immerse me into the smaller form factor and now coming back to 15" feels like a huge difference but its got me suspicious because I didn't "perceive" a serious lack of screen real estate except for moments where windows or the background is completely hidden by an app or browser.

I do find this asymmetric perception difference very interesting: So going from 15" to 13" (didn't perceive much difference staring and working in the smaller screen itself) but going from 13" to 15" felt like a huge difference! What's funny is I'm actually a little discomforted by it? Everything on the screen feels farther apart from everything else, not stretched but on this website/webapage (and using an adblocker), large voids of WHITE blank screen that were smaller in the 13". Wonder if that's an indicator

I still remain a little annoyed with decisions (or lack thereof) because on hand, I realize the 13" is REALLY the machine for me given my use and for portability. Seriously - a beautiful machine in terms of size but yeah, will report back in.

I feel like I'm doing the right thing - getting both machines into my home and testing.

 

[Adamantoise]

I still cannot decide what to get. Honestly, the base 13" TB is enough for my usage; only game I play is League of Legends (and Civilization but not as much).

However, I'm sure even the Iris 650 can stutter in large team fights when there's a lot going on. If I buy the 15" it will definitely be the base model.

How long is the promotion to get free Beats?

 

[benboy12]

Absolutely! I am thinking the same thing.

I will note one thing though: Yesterday, as I said earlier, I spent most of the evening on the 13" watching videos, editing some high res photos in the photos app, browsing websites - nytimes, financial websites, looking at some mail. I also scaled my display for more space which actually made the 13" seem significantly larger in terms of screen real estate (but of course text could get uncomfortable to read over long periods of time.)

Later towards the end of the night, I went back to my 2010 15" and WOW! This thing felt like a desktop! Even right now as I type this, I ca't get over how large the display feels and looks to me! I guess the 13" had successfully managed to immerse me into the smaller form factor and now coming back to 15" feels like a huge difference but its got me suspicious because I didn't "perceive" a serious lack of screen real estate except for moments where windows or the background is completely hidden by an app or browser.

I do find this asymmetric perception difference very interesting: So going from 15" to 13" (didn't perceive much difference staring and working in the smaller screen itself) but going from 13" to 15" felt like a huge difference! What's funny is I'm actually a little discomforted by it? Everything on the screen feels farther apart from everything else, not stretched but on this website/webapage (and using an adblocker), large voids of WHITE blank screen that were smaller in the 13". Wonder if that's an indicator

I still remain a little annoyed with decisions (or lack thereof) because on hand, I realize the 13" is REALLY the machine for me given my use and for portability. Seriously - a beautiful machine in terms of size but yeah, will report back in.

I feel like I'm doing the right thing - getting both machines into my home and testing.

Thanks for starting this thread. I currently own a 2013 13" MacBook Pro and felt it was time for an upgrade. I was torn between a new 13" with 16 GB of RAM or a base 15" Pro. I really thought I was going to go with a 15" this time around. However, I spent some time playing with both models at Best Buy. The 15" seemed huge in comparison to the 13". I just couldn't picture myself sitting on the couch with something that big in my lap or bringing it on an airplane. Tonight, I placed an order for the 13" model. I am interested in reading your thoughts about the 15" when it comes in.

 

[watchthesky]

i'm in the same boat debating between replacing my current mid-2012 15" retina for another 15" or give the 13" a go. the price and portability are the main interests for me going to a 13" this time. i'll be travelling a lot more with it as an international student rather than mostly using it at home and even though the 15" isn't objectively a monster to carry around by any means, i'm a very petite person and i've found doing proper travel (i.e. through an airport with layovers and such instead of driving across the city for a weekend) gets a bit heavy. most of my usage is pretty light and i'm not particularly worried about the difference between dual core or quad core CPU and i'm sure i have more than enough RAM, however i am a bit worried about only having integrated graphics. i'm not a heavy gamer and don't do a lot of creative work but i have noticed sometimes in photoshop and especially while playing the sims 4 in particular i've been getting a lot of lag and had to lower my display settings. how good have integrated graphics become? i've tried looking for spec comparisons between the intel 650 and the nvidia 650m in my current machine but honestly none of it makes much sense to me lol.

 

[Patcell]

i'm in the same boat debating between replacing my current mid-2012 15" retina for another 15" or give the 13" a go. the price and portability are the main interests for me going to a 13" this time. i'll be travelling a lot more with it as an international student rather than mostly using it at home and even though the 15" isn't objectively a monster to carry around by any means, i'm a very petite person and i've found doing proper travel (i.e. through an airport with layovers and such instead of driving across the city for a weekend) gets a bit heavy. most of my usage is pretty light and i'm not particularly worried about the difference between dual core or quad core CPU and i'm sure i have more than enough RAM, however i am a bit worried about only having integrated graphics. i'm not a heavy gamer and don't do a lot of creative work but i have noticed sometimes in photoshop and especially while playing the sims 4 in particular i've been getting a lot of lag and had to lower my display settings. how good have integrated graphics become? i've tried looking for spec comparisons between the intel 650 and the nvidia 650m in my current machine but honestly none of it makes much sense to me lol.

The portability of the 13 inch is very compelling. I played with it in the store and was struck by how tiny it seems now and retaining the same screen size at the previous generation.

You likely won't notice much of a difference between dual and quad core in day-to-day tasks. Even light photo editing should not be a huge difference - unless exporting large batches. The Iris Plus 650 is likely still a little bit behind the dedicated GT 650M in your current machine. The AMD GPU in the 15 inch model (even base model) will be leagues ahead of either of them. You have to decide if having the extra GPU horsepower is worth the (not insignificant) increase in size and weight over the 13". That being said, the current 13" should meet your needs pretty well (just don't expect to increase settings in Sims 4).

Personally, I went with the 2017 15" and I am more than happy with the decrease in size and weight from the previous generation.

If you are doing a lot of traveling, the 13" seems like a better choice though. Good luck as an international student! Sounds like a lot of fun!

 

[pallymore]

The portability of the 13 inch is very compelling. I played with it in the store and was struck by how tiny it seems now and retaining the same screen size at the previous generation.

You likely won't notice much of a difference between dual and quad core in day-to-day tasks. Even light photo editing should not be a huge difference - unless exporting large batches. The Iris Plus 650 is likely still a little bit behind the dedicated GT 650M in your current machine. The AMD GPU in the 15 inch model (even base model) will be leagues ahead of either of them. You have to decide if having the extra GPU horsepower is worth the (not insignificant) increase in size and weight over the 13". That being said, the current 13" should meet your needs pretty well (just don't expect to increase settings in Sims 4).

Personally, I went with the 2017 15" and I am more than happy with the decrease in size and weight from the previous generation.

If you are doing a lot of traveling, the 13" seems like a better choice though. Good luck as an international student! Sounds like a lot of fun!

Actually the Iris 650 is about 50% faster than the GT650M in passmark. The Iris 650 is comparable to GT 950M - but you may see throttled performance due to its cooling limitations during prolonged use.

Even the 15 can't play many recent titles in high settings (not even max graphic settings). Is it better than the Iris graphics? sure, it's about 100% faster - sounds impressive, but it's real performance is only similar to the Desktop GTX 660.

If you fly a lot, get the 13inch. the 15 is painful to use in the economy class :/ especially when the seat in front of you is reclined.

 

[Patcell]

Actually the Iris 650 is about 50% faster than the GT650M in passmark. The Iris 650 is comparable to GT 950M - but you may see throttled performance due to its cooling limitations during prolonged use.

Even the 15 can't play many recent titles in high settings (not even max graphic settings). Is it better than the Iris graphics? sure, it's about 100% faster - sounds impressive, but it's real performance is only similar to the Desktop GTX 660.

If you fly a lot, get the 13inch. the 15 is painful to use in the economy class :/ especially when the seat in front of you is reclined.

I'm sure the Iris 650 is competent, but it doesn't seem to be faster in gaming benchmarks compared to the GT 650M...

https://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-650M.71887.0.html

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Iris-Plus-Graphics-650.190370.0.html

I have been very impressed with the Radeon Pro 560 in my 15". I play GTA 5 regularly in Bootcamp; at 1080p and High settings I get about 70 fps. Battlefield 1, I get about 50-60 fps with a mix of medium and high settings at 1080p.

I certainly did not purchase as a gaming machine (nor should anyone), but I have been pleasantly surprised by the results.

I wholeheartedly agree that if you are traveling and flying a lot, the 13" makes much better sense. Unless the performance of the 15" is absolutely essential.

 

[pallymore]

I'm sure the Iris 650 is competent, but it doesn't seem to be faster in gaming benchmarks compared to the GT 650M...

https://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-650M.71887.0.html

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Iris-Plus-Graphics-650.190370.0.html

I have been very impressed with the Radeon Pro 560 in my 15". I play GTA 5 regularly in Bootcamp; at 1080p and High settings I get about 70 fps. Battlefield 1, I get about 50-60 fps with a mix of medium and high settings at 1080p.

I certainly did not purchase as a gaming machine (nor should anyone), but I have been pleasantly surprised by the results.

I wholeheartedly agree that if you are traveling and flying a lot, the 13" makes much better sense. Unless the performance of the 15" is absolutely essential.

Yea, I said "50% faster in passmark"

Their 3DMark scores are closer, -with Iris 650 being slightly faster than the GT650M there.
Gaming performance depends on many factors - I'm certain many games and/or engines will be optimized for dGPUs instead of iGPUs. Another one is cooling, in general iGPU might be throttled much earlier than dGPUs due to its cooling limitations. Also, drivers, nV constantly publishes new drivers (at least for newer cards) to improve GPU performance in games, while intel - don't focus on gaming performance because it's pointless to game with iGPU.

Also it depends on what "gaming" means to you - Angry Birds can be "gaming" for many people, while to some anything below 1440p or 144hz is garbage.
To me, in 2017, I will not tolerate a 4-5 year old game only getting ~70frames in 1080p without max settings.

 

[Patcell]

Yea, I said "50% faster in passmark"

Their 3DMark scores are closer, -with Iris 650 being slightly faster than the GT650M there.
Gaming performance depends on many factors - I'm certain many games and/or engines will be optimized for dGPUs instead of iGPUs. Another one is cooling, in general iGPU might be throttled much earlier than dGPUs due to its cooling limitations. Also, drivers, nV constantly publishes new drivers (at least for newer cards) to improve GPU performance in games, while intel - don't focus on gaming performance because it's pointless to game with iGPU.

Also it depends on what "gaming" means to you - Angry Birds can be "gaming" for many people, while to some anything below 1440p or 144hz is garbage.
To me, in 2017, I will not tolerate a 4-5 year old game only getting ~70frames in 1080p without max settings.

I certainly didn't mean to start and argument. I sincerely apologize if I ruffled feathers at all.

I was originally writing in response to the person posting bout playing Sims 4 on the 650M. Perhaps Iris 650 will beat it; I am not qualified to answer.

I too have a dedicated gaming rig with a GTX 1080ti... I did not mean to imply that the Mac could or should try to compete with a gaming system.

That being said, I don't think there is any comparison between the Radeon GPUs in the 15" models an the integrated Iris chips in the 13".

 

[soaddk]

15" for sure !!! Loving mine!

 

[OSXCrusader]

For people on the fence that are severely torn about this decision, I highly recommend just buying both machines and taking them home and alternating between them over the 14 day return period, or stagger your purchases such that you get an entire week on the 13" and then move over to the 15" when it arrives and spend a week. At the end of 2 weeks, make a decision and return one of the machines.

All in all, I'm pretty excited about the 15" coming for some reason. As this thread indicates, I have been on the fence since the new MBPs have arrived, did a lot of research and reading, went into apple stores several times to play with both, talked to a lot of people (where the consensus was to go with the 13").

I feel very happy that I'm really pushing and dragging my feet on this purchase to make the best decision for myself. After all, I am an Apple fanboy and a macrumors reader, and I'm happy that I'm making this decision in consultation with all of you.

As some people have pointed out, the 15" has gotten light enough and small enough in this new gen that it shouldn't matter. I was glossing over the

13" vs 15"

So only a pound heavier (and yes I know, that can feel like a lot more over long periods of time). I don't anticipate carrying the laptop around all day on my back though. I will need to when I fly, walk/drive to a cafe etc or when I lug it around to business school.

The 15" is 1.78 inches WIDER compared to the 13"

The 15" is 1.12 inches DEEPER (side length) compared to the 13"

The 15" is 0.02 inches THICKER than the 13"

Doesn't really seem like a lot. We will see how it feels when it gets here. Haha, I am trying SO hard to discredit/diminish the portability of the 13" but it really is so portable and feels amazing in a single hand, and to pick up. I anticipate that it won't be too much trouble to carry around or even work at cafes but in certain cases such as using on a flight in economy class or literally on your lap or the bed, I can see how the 15" will feel more BULKY.
[doublepost=1501197982][/doublepost]On a side note, this thread seems to have picked up quite a bit of momentum! Also, the poll results have changed and are skewing towards the 15" more so now than ever.

Number of votes cast so far: 111 (does anyone know if you need to be signed in to caste a vote?)

[doublepost=1501198784][/doublepost]

15" for sure !!! Loving mine!

I love how some for some people, this is SO easy and straight forward! I'm very envious!

In 2010, it was extremely straight forward to me too. I remember looking throughout the year at the apple website and customizing/pricing my machine but I knew the models would be updated in summer. I think that's when I discovered macrumors too. When they became available, went to straight to thee website, maxxed everything out that I could (I think 512 GB hard drive was the max you could do then), ordered, unboxed and never looked back.

I'm not sure the power really helped/was needed but in engineering, the 15" sure came in handy for MATLAB, driving SAMSUNG display, writing lab reports and Excel where I spent a lot of time (and could see lot more columns/rows). I will be doing a lot more of that with this machine.

It's not that I'm back to square one. At the beginning of this thread, I said that whatever machine I chose, I would maxx out the specs on it. I have not done that here.

The 15" I ordered is the base model (only dGPU upgraded because its just $90?) and I'm sure that decision was heavily influenced by peoples' comments on here.

 

[watchthesky]

would programs like MATLAB run alright on a 13" or are they resource heavy? because i'll be an STEM student studying a fair bit of calculus and statistics in first year and chemistry/biochemistry throughout my degree. not sure if i'll actually need a program for my work but just in case i'd like to know my computer is capable if need be/i don't want to use school computers.

also does anyone have a size/weight comparison for the previous gen and current gen 15" pros? not just spec numbers but photos/personal experience using and carrying them.

power would definitely be nice but if i can get by the portability is a biiiig selling point for the 13" for me atm.

 

[OSXCrusader]

would programs like MATLAB run alright on a 13" or are they resource heavy? because i'll be an STEM student studying a fair bit of calculus and statistics in first year and chemistry/biochemistry throughout my degree. not sure if i'll actually need a program for my work but just in case i'd like to know my computer is capable if need be/i don't want to use school computers.

also does anyone have a size/weight comparison for the previous gen and current gen 15" pros? not just spec numbers but photos/personal experience using and carrying them.

power would definitely be nice but if i can get by the portability is a biiiig selling point for the 13" for me atm.

Just got back from meeting my PHD friend (the one with the 2017 15", same one that was telling me to go the 13" route before he bought his.) He has since told me that he finds the latest 15" much easier to carry than his 13" from 2 years ago so that's one data point. Have you gone into the store and played around with the 15"? You don't have to just type on it, you can pick it up, shake it around gently, close it etc...

So I have a better idea of what to expect when I do get my 15". For now, all I can is -

>Wow, that 15" screen is gorgeous! We watched a couple of 4k videos from youtube on the GoPro channel and wow, as some people on this thread have recommended, if it was my only computer and its screen was my primary and only monitor, then 15" is amazing.

>There is no doubt about it though: the 15" is a big beast. Even though specs and dimensions wise on paper, the 15" does feel much bigger, there is a very large difference now that I've come home and am using my 13" on my couch.
[doublepost=1501218750][/doublepost]

mid 2017 13" MBP sitting on mid 2010 15" MBP, Haha. I just took these pictures. MATLAB should run just fine on the 13" for most college "programming/simulations". MATLAB is incredibly powerful and I'm not sure if there are heavier usage scenarios that are applicable that can take advantage on the quad core and GPU.
[doublepost=1501218876][/doublepost]Here are 2 more videos that might be helpful:

[doublepost=1501219132][/doublepost]Also, I'm very curious about what people think about this article?

https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/dont-buy-a-15-inch-laptop

 

[Patcell]

Also, I'm very curious about what people think about this article?

https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/dont-buy-a-15-inch-laptop

I don't think that article is applicable to people in the market for a MacBook Pro per say... it's not really fair to compare the 13" or 15" pro to a budget machine (i.e. sub-$600 category). The author bemoans lack of portability and battery life in budget 15" machines - I think the 15" pro is much more portable than the type of machine being referenced. Granted I can only speak from my personal preference, but I have no problem carrying my 15" pro around my house, to coffee shops, the library, etc... also, battery life on the 15" pro is vastly superior to the sub-four hour numbers cited. My 15" machine fits nicely on my lap every so often also.

All of that being said, however, I think it would not be a great choice to pick the 15" Pro over the 13" only for the sake of the two additional inches of screen size. That's like taking NyQuil for the sniffles or something. If you by the 15" for the screen alone and never take advantage of the significantly faster internals, then I think you have wasted money and are sacrificing superior portability for a slightly bigger monitor.

Even so, buying a computer is a personal decision and if someone is willing to upgrade to the 15" pro for the display size alone, who am I to say they are wrong? No judgment here at all!

 

[PBG4 Dude]

would programs like MATLAB run alright on a 13" or are they resource heavy? because i'll be an STEM student studying a fair bit of calculus and statistics in first year and chemistry/biochemistry throughout my degree. not sure if i'll actually need a program for my work but just in case i'd like to know my computer is capable if need be/i don't want to use school computers.

also does anyone have a size/weight comparison for the previous gen and current gen 15" pros? not just spec numbers but photos/personal experience using and carrying them.

power would definitely be nice but if i can get by the portability is a biiiig selling point for the 13" for me atm.

My 2017 15" MBP is 4 pounds. My late 2008 MBP is 5.5 pounds, so for me, it was a drop in weight and size.

I play 8-10 pound basses for hours at a time while moving around on stage so any laptop is small and light to me though, LOL.

I don't know what school is like now, but 17 years ago, I didn't need a computer for my calculus classes. I don't see how it would be any more efficient to the learning process, at least for calc. Way easier to factor formulas / integrate / derive using paper and pencil, IMHO.

 

[whg]

would programs like MATLAB run alright on a 13" or are they resource heavy? because i'll be an STEM student studying a fair bit of calculus and statistics in first year and chemistry/biochemistry throughout my degree. not sure if i'll actually need a program for my work but just in case i'd like to know my computer is capable if need be/i don't want to use school computers.

also does anyone have a size/weight comparison for the previous gen and current gen 15" pros? not just spec numbers but photos/personal experience using and carrying them.

power would definitely be nice but if i can get by the portability is a biiiig selling point for the 13" for me atm.

I run MATLAB, RStudio, Visual Studio (similar to XCode) on my Surface Pro 4 with i7 CPU. There are absolutely no issues with performance. The 13" Macbook has the same or better CPU and there will be no issues with your use case. At home I connect to a 4k external monitor through the Microsoft dock. With Thunderbolt 3 a similar option should be available.

 

[PBG4 Dude]

I was looking at the 2017 15" tech specs on Apple's website last night. These things can drive 2 5K displays or 4 4K displays. Just thought that was neat, not that I'll be using this feature to its fullest anytime soon.

 

[lobo1978]

I have a comfort of owning both MacBook Pro 13" 2016 (i5, 16 GB, 512 GB SSD) and MacBook Pro 15" 2017.
I have moved from 13" to 15" because of a new job. I was comfortable working with iMac 27 (maxed out) and 13" laptop. Now I am going abroad and will work only with one computer so I purchased 15" laptop.

I have to confess that for last 3 years or so I was flirting with an idea of getting 15" but with iMac 27" on my desk it was just not reasonable. I think the best ever computer for work is actually iMac 5k period. I know that your work is not stationary but just to let you know my preferences.


I really love this 15" but it is heavier/bigger and therefore more cumbersome to handle in confined spaces than 13". You have to really look out on a train - forget about working on a plane... 13" is just ok in economy class. On the other hand I don't feel that my bag is much heavier with 15" in it. In a backpack I could not even tell a difference between 13" and 15". Only when handling in one hand you can discern those two versions but it is a very short time and not really matters much in overall workflow.

I do heavy computational stuff with my computer and need power during presentations with a client. 13" was not cutting it well. I have to sacrifice/sweat a lot to deliver. Now with 15" everything is super smooth, I have big real estate to work on a go - love it.

+ I am wearing glasses and my eyesight is not as good as it used to be. 15" is bless for me. I was using a very low 1280x resolution on 13", just to get rid of a eye strain and not squint all the time.

My profile:
- Travel a lot (short/commute, day trips to client, work week sessions in the field)
- Not a gamer
- iPad 12" for YouTube and internet browsing

To sum up: I am not regretting getting 15" but I think 14" could be a best trade off for my workflow.

I still have Lenovo t410s and I value both design and form factor of it. With IBM pedigree it is a really workhorse. Apart from a fact it is super slow (even with clean W7, SSD and 16 GB)... Windows is a crap and really killing PC.

I just hope Apple will eventually start making their own CPU/GPU and get out of Intel-BS-cycle with these ridiculous controlled-incremental updates and sales-driven planned delays.


My road with Mac was: MacBook Air 11 -> MacBook Air 13" x2 -> MacBook Pro 13" x3 -> MacBook Pro 15"
I do own iMac 24" (work), iMac 27 (work) and iMac 5k 27" (private).

 

[lobo1978]

[doublepost=1501219132][/doublepost]Also, I'm very curious about what people think about this article?

https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/dont-buy-a-15-inch-laptop

Apple offer is very narrow and high-end. It does not fit into this article hypothesis. They assume 15" is a 5 pounds monster with a battery life of max 6 hrs... To prove their hypothesis Laptopmag editors need to contrast boring generic plastic PC laptop-boxes (13" vs 15"). With that assumption I am more than convinced that consumers might be much better off with 13" or even smaller for their actual needs.

Please notice that in <1000 USD domain of PC laptops design is stagnant for years. Each year they just update internals of boxes (mass produced in "one" factory somewhere in China - on Monday Dell, on Thursday Acer etc.) to allow next version (even more f..up) Windows to run decently after two months. There is no room for innovation or bold moves.
Apple has a comfort to shape the future in pursuit of the perfect design: non-removable internals, super-fast SSD, getting rid of legacy ports and media (CD/DVD), low-power/fanless design, retina displays etc. Other bigger PC players just blindly copy/follow it (Dell, Lenovo, HP) with +1000 USD offers.

 

[OSXCrusader]

I have a comfort of owning both MacBook Pro 13" 2016 (i5, 16 GB, 512 GB SSD) and MacBook Pro 15" 2017.
I have moved from 13" to 15" because of a new job. I was comfortable working with iMac 27 (maxed out) and 13" laptop. Now I am going abroad and will work only with one computer so I purchased 15" laptop.

I have to confess that for last 3 years or so I was flirting with an idea of getting 15" but with iMac 27" on my desk it was just not reasonable. I think the best ever computer for work is actually iMac 5k period. I know that your work is not stationary but just to let you know my preferences.


I really love this 15" but it is heavier/bigger and therefore more cumbersome to handle in confined spaces than 13". You have to really look out on a train - forget about working on a plane... 13" is just ok in economy class. On the other hand I don't feel that my bag is much heavier with 15" in it. In a backpack I could not even tell a difference between 13" and 15". Only when handling in one hand you can discern those two versions but it is a very short time and not really matters much in overall workflow.

I do heavy computational stuff with my computer and need power during presentations with a client. 13" was not cutting it well. I have to sacrifice/sweat a lot to deliver. Now with 15" everything is super smooth, I have big real estate to work on a go - love it.

+ I am wearing glasses and my eyesight is not as good as it used to be. 15" is bless for me. I was using a very low 1280x resolution on 13", just to get rid of a eye strain and not squint all the time.

My profile:
- Travel a lot (short/commute, day trips to client, work week sessions in the field)
- Not a gamer
- iPad 12" for YouTube and internet browsing

To sum up: I am not regretting getting 15" but I think 14" could be a best trade off for my workflow.

I still have Lenovo t410s and I value both design and form factor of it. With IBM pedigree it is a really workhorse. Apart from a fact it is super slow (even with clean W7, SSD and 16 GB)... Windows is a crap and really killing PC.

I just hope Apple will eventually start making their own CPU/GPU and get out of Intel-BS-cycle with these ridiculous controlled-incremental updates and sales-driven planned delays.


My road with Mac was: MacBook Air 11 -> MacBook Air 13" x2 -> MacBook Pro 13" x3 -> MacBook Pro 15"
I do own iMac 24" (work), iMac 27 (work) and iMac 5k 27" (private).

Thanks so much for your input. Yes, I feel the same way. I have thought about starting a separate thread (I think this has been discussed extensively in the past) about a 4" MBP.

I really think by going with countered batteries, shrinking the bezels etc, apple should go ahead and simplify its entire product line up:

12" Macbook for most users: ultra portable, long battery life, minimal ports (everything happens wirelessly, maybe even charging), amazing display.

14" Macbook Pro: quad core, dGPU, touch bar

Both base models should be 16GB and processors, RAM and Storage upgradable depending on needs
[doublepost=1501365730][/doublepost]

Apple offer is very narrow and high-end. It does not fit into this article hypothesis. They assume 15" is a 5 pounds monster with a battery life of max 6 hrs... To prove their hypothesis Laptopmag editors need to contrast boring generic plastic PC laptop-boxes (13" vs 15"). With that assumption I am more than convinced that consumers might be much better off with 13" or even smaller for their actual needs.

Please notice that in <1000 USD domain of PC laptops design is stagnant for years. Each year they just update internals of boxes (mass produced in "one" factory somewhere in China - on Monday Dell, on Thursday Acer etc.) to allow next version (even more f..up) Windows to run decently after two months. There is no room for innovation or bold moves.
Apple has a comfort to shape the future in pursuit of the perfect design: non-removable internals, super-fast SSD, getting rid of legacy ports and media (CD/DVD), low-power/fanless design, retina displays etc. Other bigger PC players just blindly copy/follow it (Dell, Lenovo, HP) with +1000 USD offers.

Thanks for your feedback. I agree, Apple's offering doesn't quite fit the mold. Do you remember the 17" offering though? I know we have quite a few fans here. I'm sure there will be buyers if apple did it again (maybe a gaming oriented versions with 2 dGPUs, server grade processor, 32 GB of RAM).
[doublepost=1501366122][/doublepost]Quick Update: 15" will arrive day after. After all this crazy going back and forth and struggling to make a decision, I am excited to have both machines (13" and 15" latest versions) in front of me, on my two $10 IKEA tables as I sit on my couch in my underwear and test both side by side and see which one I like.

I am trying to keep an open mind. However, my predictions are this -

>The 13" will still look very attractive and portable to me.

>The 15" will be big but knowing what's inside it (quad core, dGPU, same speed USB C ports), and of of course the 2 extra inches, I don't know.

I have said this throughout the thread but price difference in education pricing between a completely maxxed out 13" (except storage) and base 15" is only 200 or so dollars.

For those who have read this thread in its entirety and considered all inputs, what do you guys recommend now? Do people who recommended 13" for my use case still recommend 13"?

The polling shows 60% + still think I should get the 15"

 

[Patcell]

Thanks so much for your input. Yes, I feel the same way. I have thought about starting a separate thread (I think this has been discussed extensively in the past) about a 4" MBP.

I really think by going with countered batteries, shrinking the bezels etc, apple should go ahead and simplify its entire product line up:

12" Macbook for most users: ultra portable, long battery life, minimal ports (everything happens wirelessly, maybe even charging), amazing display.

14" Macbook Pro: quad core, dGPU, touch bar

Both base models should be 16GB and processors, RAM and Storage upgradable depending on needs
[doublepost=1501365730][/doublepost]

Thanks for your feedback. I agree, Apple's offering doesn't quite fit the mold. Do you remember the 17" offering though? I know we have quite a few fans here. I'm sure there will be buyers if apple did it again (maybe a gaming oriented versions with 2 dGPUs, server grade processor, 32 GB of RAM).
[doublepost=1501366122][/doublepost]Quick Update: 15" will arrive day after. After all this crazy going back and forth and struggling to make a decision, I am excited to have both machines (13" and 15" latest versions) in front of me, on my two $10 IKEA tables as I sit on my couch in my underwear and test both side by side and see which one I like.

I am trying to keep an open mind. However, my predictions are this -

>The 13" will still look very attractive and portable to me.

>The 15" will be big but knowing what's inside it (quad core, dGPU, same speed USB C ports), and of of course the 2 extra inches, I don't know.

I have said this throughout the thread but price difference in education pricing between a completely maxxed out 13" (except storage) and base 15" is only 200 or so dollars.

For those who have read this thread in its entirety and considered all inputs, what do you guys recommend now? Do people who recommended 13" for my use case still recommend 13"?

The polling shows 60% + still think I should get the 15"

My vote still goes to the 15". For $200 you're getting a quad-core CPU and vastly superior graphics performance (if and when needed). The only trade-off is portability. I don't have any issues with portability with my 2017 15" Pro. Although, I have never had the 13", so I can't really comment on the portability of that machine.

 

[OSXCrusader]

Congrats on your purchase

Although i'd say the CPU upgrade is almost definitely not worth it.
There are no real differences between the i7 (7567U) and the i5(7267U) other than the 0.4 ~ 0.5G CPU and 0.1G iGPU speed bump. They have the exact same number of cores, same threads, same cache, same iGPU, and same everything else.
you are gaining about 10 - 12% performance (ONLY when CPU is running at 100%) for $300 ($230 in your case)
I'd use that money to get 512G SSD - even though you don't need that much space now, but it will definitely benefit you more than the CPU upgrade.

can you comment on this more?

My primary tasks on a machine:

-youtube
-netflix
-browser (chrome, firefox) with 20 - 50 tabs open, sometimes might need multiple video tabs open
-word for cranking out steallar resumes, high docs
-powerpoint
-excel (will be using this and the entire office suite heavily in business school)
-big file size download
-editing pictures in the Photos app, not Adobe etc

If there really isn't any "noticeable difference", I'd rather return my maxxed out 13", save the money and buy the base, assuming I end up staying in 13" and the 15" doesn't win me over.

 

[lobo1978]

If there really isn't any "noticeable difference", I'd rather return my maxxed out 13", save the money and buy the base, assuming I end up staying in 13" and the 15" doesn't win me over.

Just to comment from real life usage - two core i5 or i7 is just BS. It is a Intel game with customers - artificial segmentation of market.

Differences are very minimal. Some applications favor higher clocks and will produce better result - so higher clocked i5 will beat lower clocked i7. In very most real life situation, you will definitely not feel difference.

macOS is much much better with using hardware resources (comparing to Windows) so unless Apple pronounce your MacBook obsolete (not supported), you will still run OS smoothly. Apple's decision to 'not support' is usually based on tests whether hardware can handle operating system and important safety features.

You will feel bigger leap of performance by going from two-core to quad-core. Again with your needs and usage Safari will be just "snappier". To see the difference you need to do computation-intensive tasks where a specific time is required to accomplish a job. Better CPU/GPU will shave minutes/seconds out of it.
For my workflow better CPU is saving me 1-2 hrs per day (!) because I don't have to wait for results longer.

For your tasks base i5 has a huge reserve of computing power. Honestly, iPad can handle it very well too. Base MacBook or MacBook are optimized by Apple to fly with such tasks.

You are on crossroads trying to rationalize your decision and best is to get both and then decide.

If I were you I would get 12" iPad+keyboard case and MacBook Pro 15" base CPU and 512 GB SSD (better resale value than smallish 256 GB). With iPad you can get by with 60-70% of your workflow, the rest will be very well served in comfort of gorgeous 15" retina screen.

 

[PBG4 Dude]

can you comment on this more?

My primary tasks on a machine:

-youtube
-netflix
-browser (chrome, firefox) with 20 - 50 tabs open, sometimes might need multiple video tabs open
-word for cranking out steallar resumes, high docs
-powerpoint
-excel (will be using this and the entire office suite heavily in business school)
-big file size download
-editing pictures in the Photos app, not Adobe etc

If there really isn't any "noticeable difference", I'd rather return my maxxed out 13", save the money and buy the base, assuming I end up staying in 13" and the 15" doesn't win me over.

Quite honestly, your use case is very light, speaking in terms of computational difficulty. You aren't running ANSYS, MATLAB, rendering 3D images/ animation, gene sequencing, 4K video editing, or anything that would see a noticeable performance delta between any Apple laptop released over the last 4 years and the latest model, IMHO. Reading large files would probably see the biggest boost, due to SSD improvements. Everything else wouldn't be noticeable. If you type 40 5-character words per minute on a 2.8GHz quad core CPU, that means the CPU runs through 46,666,666.67 (60 * 2.8G * 4 / 240) clock cycles for each keystroke.

Edit: forgot to take hyoerthreading into account, so you can double the above result due to the 4 extra virtual cores.

 

[pallymore]

can you comment on this more?

My primary tasks on a machine:

-youtube
-netflix
-browser (chrome, firefox) with 20 - 50 tabs open, sometimes might need multiple video tabs open
-word for cranking out steallar resumes, high docs
-powerpoint
-excel (will be using this and the entire office suite heavily in business school)
-big file size download
-editing pictures in the Photos app, not Adobe etc

If there really isn't any "noticeable difference", I'd rather return my maxxed out 13", save the money and buy the base, assuming I end up staying in 13" and the 15" doesn't win me over.

I don't think you will feel any differences between using an i5 vs i7, or, even, dual core vs quad core, in your use cases.
All those task are very light on the CPU, you might want 16G RAM though.

15 is "more computer" for the money - if you ever need the power, but if you also travel a lot, 13 is nicer.

I do a lot of CPU intensive stuff, building software and such. At home I have a desktop with quad core i7@4.0 to 4.4GHz, and when I'm on the move / at work, I have a fully spec-ed out 2017 13inch. The desktop is definitely faster but I'm not disappointed by the performance of the 13inch.

In my daily work, building my project from scratch takes ~20 seconds on the desktop, ~30 seconds on the 13inch. (in comparison, about 80 seconds on my old 2013 13inch). not too bad for a dual core with 25% lower frequency on each core. And I don't run this fresh build too often (1-2 times per day). once the build is active, each additional build takes about 4 seconds on the desktop, and 5 seconds on the 13inch. Hardly noticeable.

I do love having larger screen space though, but when I'm working I have two external monitors so the smaller screen is not a problem for me. And I travel by air & train a lot - almost on a daily basis. I can always use my laptop when flying in the economy class, or sitting on a train - easily.