# need help choosing the right macbook.



## RoaVision (Feb 27, 2014)

Hi im looking for advice on choosing a new MacBook. I am looking into the MacBook pro 13" with retina 
•2.4GHz Dual-core Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 2.9GHz
•8GB 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM
•256GB PCIe-based Flash Storage
but the apple worker is telling me if I want to run adobe lightroom and photoshop I will need to get the 16gb. 
so im stuck in deciding what to get I also have a budget. so I don't know if I should just stick to the one I was going to get or go with a MacBook pro that doesn't have retina and add more storage. if you have any advice id appreciate it thank you.


----------



## sjschall (Feb 27, 2014)

You don't "need" 16GB to run PS and LR. In fact, you only "need" 2GB of ram (4 recommended, straight from Adobe site). 

8GB would surely suffice, and with 16 it might open/run a little faster. I also depends on what you want to be running simultaneously. The 13" you have picked out seems great. I think you'll like the retina over not, especially with the relatively smaller screen size.


----------



## gshocked (Feb 27, 2014)

Hi,

If you are purchasing a recent MacBook Pro with the retina screens, I suggest you get one withe most RAM you can afford. Since the RAM is soldered on to the logic board, it's not user upgradeable.
Any laptop will benefit in more ram and in future you may find yourself in a situation where you will initially work in lightroom and may require to edit a photo in Photoshop at the same time. This situation will put a large demand on your system resources. Also I have found when creating a slideshows in lightroom, more RAM resulted in a smoother preview. Therefore I assumed it may work like Adobe After Effect, which use RAM Preview - meaning it will only preview so much based on your RAM.

Another thing worth purchasing is a USB 3.0 or Thunderbold hard drive.


----------



## canonvoir (Feb 27, 2014)

The most RAM you can afford. I find 16GB on my Mac Mini runs best due to having a lot of programs open. 4GB of RAM on it limited my Safari tabs while VMWare and Excel were open. I could not believe it. It has a SSD hard drive. 8GB would be my absolute minimum. Anything less than 8GB and you will experience slow downs and bottlenecks. 

My 11" MBA has 8GB and runs great but I am only in Photo Mechanic and Aperture at most on it.


----------



## slclick (Feb 27, 2014)

I went from a 2009 MBP 2.26 Mhz, dual core 8GB RAM, 1TB HDD and LR5 took 45 seconds to fully open. Exporting highest rez jpeg was about 10 sec. 
I now have a 2013 Retina 15" 16GB RAM,2.7 Mhz, 512 SSD, Quad Core i7. 4 Seconds to open LR5 2 seconds to export that same jpeg.


----------



## RoaVision (Feb 27, 2014)

Thank you everyone. I decided to go with the 16gb. I appreciate the advice. I didn't want to have any lag or issue if I have multiple software open. Thank you once again


----------



## Northstar (Feb 27, 2014)

RoaVision said:


> Thank you everyone. I decided to go with the 16gb. I appreciate the advice. I didn't want to have any lag or issue if I have multiple software open. Thank you once again



good choice....i went with the same 13" mbpro retina but with only 8gb ram....it runs great with only 8gb so I imagine 16gb will help future proof it a little more.


----------



## eml58 (Feb 27, 2014)

I'm using both the 13" Retina (2.8Ghz) with 8GB & the 15" Retina (2.6Ghz) with 16GB of RAM.

The difference between the RAM loads becomes noticable in particular when your running several programmes at once, i.e.. LR5 + PS CC + On One, you will start running into lag in this situation with 8GB, it's not a major, but on my 13" it is noticeable at times.

Also if your working with Video, in particular from an external drive, 8GB just isn't quite enough to work without some Lag.

The 13" Retina MacBook Pro is a great machine running either 8GB or 16GB, but if you can afford the extra $$$ always load to the Max, especially as RAM today is so cheap and you'll have a great machine for a couple years.

The 15" macBook Pro is just a better all round screen experience especially with the Retina Display & it comes standard now with 16GB RAM, I always upgrade to the fastest processor, mine is running the 2.6Ghz processor. Again, if you can afford it, this is the machine to go for, the display when working with video & images is just that much better than the 13", there's a slight size/weight trade off, in my situation I use the 15" and my son uses the 13".

I understand your running to a budget, we all do, but again if you can afford it upgrade to the 1TB HD, it won't affect the running of the machine, only how long before you start having to run from an external HD. I generally only keep Images and video on the HD while I'm on a trip, as soon as I get Home it all comes off and goes onto a 32TB G Speed esPro External RAID system.

Whichever you go for, enjoy the experience, Apple + Canon, heaven .


----------



## weko (Feb 28, 2014)

The processor on the 15" is a quad-core, on the 13" is a dual-core. So if your budget allows it, the 15" is a better bet.


----------



## Omar H (Feb 28, 2014)

A friend of mine has one of the older macs with 4GB and she claims she has never had any issues running Lr and Ps at the same time. I recently got an 8GB MBP with the retina display and 15" screen and I like it a lot. I have not yet submitted it to a harsher test (as exporting 100+ files to JPEG) to really appreciate it, but surfing the web and overall it's nice. 

Like they have said before, if you can afford the best MBP, go for it. If not, then take a careful look at your options, the new retina MBP is not user-upgradable when it comes to RAM just as the MBA, however the previous generation of MBP I understand you could upgrade the RAM yourself, so that may be an advantage for you (if you can still find one).

If you're not making money out of it and budget is an issue, then don't stress yourself over it and get the MBP you just described, with 8GB you should have enough. Unless... you're making money out of it and lighting fast processing is a business need...

Good luck and enjoy!


----------



## sagittariansrock (Feb 28, 2014)

I noticed that all but the top MBP Retina only have onboard graphic chips (Iris/Iris Pro) now instead of discrete graphics. Are they as good for graphic editing as the previous version with nVidia cards? 
Don't know why Apple had to discontinue the non-retina MBP. Seems like a way to force newer technology even if people don't want it.


----------



## gshocked (Feb 28, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> I noticed that all but the top MBP Retina only have onboard graphic chips (Iris/Iris Pro) now instead of discrete graphics. Are they as good for graphic editing as the previous version with nVidia cards?
> Don't know why Apple had to discontinue the non-retina MBP. Seems like a way to force newer technology even if people don't want it.



Its all about money:

http://www.apple.com/mac/compare/notebooks.html


----------



## caruser (Feb 28, 2014)

gshocked said:


> sagittariansrock said:
> 
> 
> > I noticed that all but the top MBP Retina only have onboard graphic chips (Iris/Iris Pro) now instead of discrete graphics. Are they as good for graphic editing as the previous version with nVidia cards?
> ...



But here's the strange thing, if you take the smaller of the two standard 15" Retina MacBook Pro configurations and add the CPU and SSD and RAM to match that of the larger one, you have two identically priced machines where one has a discrete graphics chip and the other doesn't!


----------



## sagittariansrock (Feb 28, 2014)

caruser said:


> gshocked said:
> 
> 
> > sagittariansrock said:
> ...



That's because they want to discourage you from customizing.
I didn't get the bit about money and the link to compare, by the way.
I mean, of course, they are trying to force retina MacBooks which in the guise of new technology takes away flexibility to upgrade components. Greater payout for Apple, that what you mean?


----------



## slclick (Feb 28, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> I noticed that all but the top MBP Retina only have onboard graphic chips (Iris/Iris Pro) now instead of discrete graphics. Are they as good for graphic editing as the previous version with nVidia cards?
> Don't know why Apple had to discontinue the non-retina MBP. Seems like a way to force newer technology even if people don't want it.



Because of the discrete only issue I went with a card/onboard NVidia-Iris combo refurb. Huge cache and better buffer.


----------



## gshocked (Mar 1, 2014)

The reality is Apple laptops are over priced. Don't get me wrong they are fantastic machines and super reliable but at the end of the day consumers are paying for custom parts and design. Just think what if Apple sold their high end laptops for $500 less. They would most likely sell heaps but I'm not sure if people would still see them as a premium products. (End of rant)

If your looking for good value. The old gen MacBook Pro with the dedicated vid cards are now heavily reduced - if you can find one. They will work just as well and you'll have the bonus of a larger internal hard drive. I'm lookin get to get another MacBook laptop but I'll wait till the next ones get announced.


----------



## slclick (Mar 1, 2014)

gshocked said:


> The reality is Apple laptops are over priced. Don't get me wrong they are fantastic machines and super reliable but at the end of the day consumers are paying for custom parts and design. Just think what if Apple sold their high end laptops for $500 less. They would most likely sell heaps but I'm not sure if people would still see them as a premium products. (End of rant)
> 
> If your looking for good value. The old gen MacBook Pro with the dedicated vid cards are now heavily reduced - if you can find one. They will work just as well and you'll have the bonus of a larger internal hard drive. I'm lookin get to get another MacBook laptop but I'll wait till the next ones get announced.





I understand your argument but you contradicted yourself with this : I'm lookin get to get another MacBook laptop but I'll wait till the next ones get announced. I'm sure you'll have a great response but that's how I read it. One thing I hate more than Nikon vs Canon is the Windows /Mac debate. I love what I love, you love what you love, it's your life, your money.


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 1, 2014)

slclick said:


> gshocked said:
> 
> 
> > The reality is Apple laptops are over priced. Don't get me wrong they are fantastic machines and super reliable but at the end of the day consumers are paying for custom parts and design. Just think what if Apple sold their high end laptops for $500 less. They would most likely sell heaps but I'm not sure if people would still see them as a premium products. (End of rant)
> ...



I actually agree with gshocked and maybe you will if you look at it objectively.
I use Apple products pretty extensively. I have an MBP, my wife an MBA, we both have iPhones and I also have an iPad and iPod.
They are very well made, but most importantly, reliable. All true.
However, it is also true that _some_ MBPs are overpriced. The 15" ones, a case in point. You cannot get any 15" MBP (new, that is) at less than $ 2000, and actually $ 2500 considering less than 16GB memory and 500GB storage in a non-configurable system lacks foresight.
Do you think everyone can afford $ 2500 even if they love the reliability of Apple? It is easy to suggest going for a lesser model, but then you settle for a smaller screen and handicapped graphics (even though you might be paying as much as $ 1800).

I love Macs- I will never go back to Windows if I can because Macs suit me far better. And that is an objective statement. I am not going to say Macs are better in general because that is always relative.

However, that does not mean I have to agree with Apple's decisions, some of which are asinine. Look at creation of a new proprietary jack instead of using micro-USB. Look at using minidisplayport and then Thunderbolt ports, but never selling mDP-DP cables. Look at installing sensors under the MBP keyboard that will detect water damage and void our warranty, where IBM installs holes that will drain the water and save your computer. These are definitely not in the interest of the consumer, but of the stockholders.

gshocked- I am also looking to upgrade my early-2011 MBP but waiting for the next generation. Worry is, the refurbs with discrete cards will get all sold out. Hope is, they will introduce it back in the next gen. Let's see, it is worth a gamble.

Getting back to the OT- I have a 2GHz quad-core i7 with 8GB RAM, and it is perfectly sufficient for running LR/PS simultaneously (I am running PS 5.5/LR5). Now you are looking at a dual-i5 but it is the next generation, and the PCIe SSD channels much faster. I reckon you will be fine if you just assign more virtual memory to the HDD (SSD). Having said that, it is always a good idea to buy the best system you can afford. What will be enough today might be woefully limiting in a few months.


----------



## slclick (Mar 1, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > gshocked said:
> ...



I didn't disagree on the poster having an opinion about win vs mac it was with the advice to buy an older model with the dual video setup (which I have) as opposed to the only onboard graphics, IrisPro. Then the poster goes to say they will wait for the next gen model, well that will have onboard graphics!


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 1, 2014)

slclick said:


> sagittariansrock said:
> 
> 
> > slclick said:
> ...



Ah, of course! I see it now. 
But I also feel they might put in dedicated cards in the next gen. Who knows?
In any case, only one non-retina MBS is left in the refurb store, and all the retina ones are inboard graphics ones, so I guess the point moot


----------



## slclick (Mar 1, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > sagittariansrock said:
> ...



Yep, I saw them dwindling as I was shopping last month so thats why I acted quickly!


----------



## RGF (Mar 1, 2014)

RoaVision said:


> Hi im looking for advice on choosing a new MacBook. I am looking into the MacBook pro 13" with retina
> •2.4GHz Dual-core Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 2.9GHz
> •8GB 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM
> •256GB PCIe-based Flash Storage
> ...



I have a similar configuration, though 512 SSD. I run PS and LR without a problem - though my PS images are not enlarged (work at original pixel size of 1Dx and 5DM3).

I debated about adding faster processor, more RAM and larger SSD but in the end decided that they were not worth the extra cost.

Hope this helps.


----------



## RVB (Mar 2, 2014)

RoaVision said:


> Hi im looking for advice on choosing a new MacBook. I am looking into the MacBook pro 13" with retina
> •2.4GHz Dual-core Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 2.9GHz
> •8GB 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM
> •256GB PCIe-based Flash Storage
> ...



Lightroom typically uses 3GB of ram at the minimum,performing raw conversions and other tasks raises this considerably ,kernel task and basic apps will use easily another 3Gb of ram,I think that 16GB of ram is a good idea for your next Macbook...


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Mar 2, 2014)

The one your looking at is fine. I would say maybe consider the 15" base if you can afford it so you have some extra screen real estate for lr.


----------



## birdman (Mar 2, 2014)

Mac adopter all of 2.5 months here. Oh, I still have my beast-mode core i7 custom gaming desktop with SSD and 3.5TBs of storage. My older HP laptop needed moboard so gave me good excuse to finally get MacBook. I lucked out and found open box mid-2012 stock 15" model for $1, 375. It's glossy, not matte screen with 1/2 gig Nvid 650 gpu and 2.3Ghz CP. II threw in 16GB ram and Samsung 840 Evo SSD w/750 gigs. Used OWC data doubler for SSD. 

I spent much $$$ upgrading but it's sexy as hell. The change over to all Retina leaves bad taste w/me. 15" is plenty...13.3" would've been fine too I guess. After taking apart bottom and making upgrades I will admit the mystique became less and less. I say we pay for proven design, effectively simplistic OS-x and above average materials. If u don't want Apple to give you the options they provide, Find one like mine. Usb 3.0 and SATA III in main bay and optical bay. Retina displays are beautiful. But why not just buy a 27" display (external) and speed up work flow? Plus, the ram won't be soldered and you'll have all inputs needed including Superdrive if needed. Good luck; great products but certainly never respected S. JOBS (but may his soul rest in peace)


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 2, 2014)

birdman said:


> Mac adopter all of 2.5 months here. Oh, I still have my beast-mode core i7 custom gaming desktop with SSD and 3.5TBs of storage. My older HP laptop needed moboard so gave me good excuse to finally get MacBook. I lucked out and found open box mid-2012 stock 15" model for $1, 375. It's glossy, not matte screen with 1/2 gig Nvid 650 gpu and 2.3Ghz CP. II threw in 16GB ram and Samsung 840 Evo SSD w/750 gigs. Used OWC data doubler for SSD.
> 
> I spent much $$$ upgrading but it's sexy as hell. The change over to all Retina leaves bad taste w/me. 15" is plenty...13.3" would've been fine too I guess. After taking apart bottom and making upgrades I will admit the mystique became less and less. I say we pay for proven design, effectively simplistic OS-x and above average materials. If u don't want Apple to give you the options they provide, Find one like mine. Usb 3.0 and SATA III in main bay and optical bay. Retina displays are beautiful. But why not just buy a 27" display (external) and speed up work flow? Plus, the ram won't be soldered and you'll have all inputs needed including Superdrive if needed. Good luck; great products but certainly never respected S. JOBS (but may his soul rest in peace)



You'd have to look really hard at two screens side by side to appreciate the benefit of retina (it's visible, but not appreciable IMO).
I agree, kudos to Apple engineers and boos to their marketing department. 
It seems they have actually taken pains to make the 21.5" difficult for user-upgrade.


----------

