The latest isn't always the greatest. I'm sure most of you know that already.
When I say that, I really mean that the latest isn't always ideal. A little deceptive, I know. I couldn't think of anything else interesting to say for the heading, so let me explain what I mean.
Since Apple released the new thinner and lighter 2016 MacBook Pros with Touch Bars and only USB-C ports, there may have been some confusion regarding whether or not these MacBook Pros are actually proper upgrades to the previous 2015 models.
If you've already got a 2015 model, upgrading to a new 2016 MacBook Pro isn't worth the price premium, especially if you stick to the base models, which is what I'll be focusing on here.
In September of 2016, I got my first new Mac - a 2015 13" MacBook Pro with Retina Display. As it was a huge investment for us, I had to settle for the base model which has a 2.7GHz dual core Intel Core i5 CPU, 8GB of 1866MHz DDR3 RAM, Intel Iris 6100 graphics and a measly 128GB of PCI-e storage.
128GB is barely enough for many people. It would almost be worthwhile to upgrade to the base model 2016 MacBook Pro for this reason alone as not only does it come standard with 256GB of PCI-e storage, but its SSD is also way faster - up to a blistering 3.1GB/s for read speeds and 2.1GB/s for write speeds, as opposed to the base model 2015's still-fast 1.5GB/s read speeds and 661MB/s write speeds.
Not only this but the Intel Iris 540 graphics of the base model 2016 MacBook Pro are said to be twice as fast as the Iris 6100 graphics the 2015 base model features. PassMark G3D gives the Iris 6100 graphics an average mark of 963 with 315 samples and the Iris 540 graphics an average mark of 1,362 with 625 samples, so even with the base model you'll be getting significantly improved graphics performance - despite this, neither machine is designed with gaming in mind and shouldn't be considered for such even though it's possible to play some light games on both.
The difference in CPU performance between the 2015 13" MacBook Pro and the 2016 13" MacBook Pro is less exciting. The 2.7GHz Core i5 in the 2015 MacBook Pro scores 6938 in GeekBench 3's 64-bit tests while the 2.0GHz Core i5 of the 2016 MacBook Pro barely outperforms with a score of 7060 - a difference of 122 points. This difference is so little that in real world tests you wouldn't notice the difference, unless you're rendering a video in something like Adobe Premiere, where the 2016 MacBook Pro would probably only trim a few seconds off the rendering time.
To contrast, the benchmark difference between the 2015 base model 13" MacBook Pro and the top-end 13" MacBook Pro is more significant. The 2015 13" MacBook Pro could be configured with a 3.1GHz Core i7 CPU that scores 7470 in GeekBench 3's 64-bit tests, a difference of 532 from the base model's 2.7GHz Core i5, and the difference between those two might not be too noticeable in real world usage.
Regardless, the 2016 MacBook Pro's 2.0GHz Core i5 might be a better choice because it uses less power and generates less heat than the 2015's CPU, while maintaining the same level of performance, which I should mention is still quite competent today.
And of course, with the 2016 model you still get the Force Touch trackpad that was introduced with the MacBook and the MacBook Pro. It's much larger and whether it's better than the previous model or not boils down to personal preference. On one hand, touchpad gestures are easier because there's more room on the touchpad but on the other your palms may rest on the touchpad while you're typing, and this might gum up your work.
Another point is the keyboard, which is the same style used on the MacBook. There's almost no key travel at all and it takes some time getting used to. In my own personal opinion, it's an awful design and even with the 2016 MacBook's slimmer design I think they could have still put more travel into the keys. It looks much nicer with the backlight, but to me it's not very practical and not pleasant to use. The previous model has an excellent keyboard, with good travel and a good feel. Of course, this boils down to personal preference but it seems that many people really dislike the new keyboards.
And none of this is to mention the brighter screen with improved colours on the 2016 model.
So, what do you have to pay in order to get faster graphics, a faster SSD, a CPU that's barely faster, a keyboard that's easy to dislike and all in all, a laptop that's a marginal upgrade to the previous model? Try a starting price $1,900CAD, up from the previous model's starting price $1,550CAD. What constitutes this price increase? I honestly have no idea, especially since you're losing ports and (at the time this article was written) require adapters for everything like regular USB devices and SD cards, unless you're ready to go USB-C only already.
And this model doesn't even include the (in my opinion) gimmicky Touch Bar. If you want the Touch Bar, be prepared to spend an additional $400. Given, the next model up does bring a faster CPU and faster graphics, but to me it seems that these price increases are rather arbitrary and unnecessary. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Are you new to the MacBook Pro, or are you just thinking about an upgrade?
If you're coming from a 2015 MacBook Pro (or even a 2014 MacBook Pro) it's probably better to wait and see what the 2017 models have to offer because at the price point the 2016 MacBook Pros are being offered at it's hard to justify an upgrade. If you don't already have a MacBook Pro and are looking to get one and have the money to spend, it might be better to look to the 2016 models than at the previous model, but if you don't have the budget for one or don't have to have the very latest, the 2015 MacBook Pro will do just fine - it's still a well-equipped machine that performs well for most tasks.
All listed prices are in Canadian Dollars (CAD).
Sources
New 2015 13-inch Retina MacBook Pro Review (Base model) - MacWorld.co.uk
2.7 13" Early 2015 Specs - EveryMac.com
2.0 13" Late 2016 Specs - EveryMac.com
Image credits
Old or New: Created by me, font is Avenir Next Ultra Light
Comments
Post a Comment