Measuring 14.13 x 9.73 x 0.71 inches and weighing 4.49 pounds, the MacBook Pro is pleasingly skinny and fairly easy to carry. The MacBook's underside sports a set of barely noticeable vents on either side, with the iconic glowing Apple logo adorning the lid. But check your activity monitor accordingly with your existing rig to see where you bottleneck is.The MacBook Pro continues to be one of the most seamless-looking notebooks in its category, with two subtle stereo speakers flanking the laptop's signature black chiclet keyboard. Make sense? So to answer your question, sure, the extra GHz always helps. DPP4 does not tap dedicated graphics though, and it's disk requirements are met by my 1TB/sec read/write of my existing SSD in my 2014 15" MacBook Pro retina (I don't see reads or writes exceeding 200mb/sec usually during processing, or even viewing often) and I have plenty of free memory even with lots open so my 16GB is good. If I launch just one process, it averages 250% usage. I have 4 cores, and in DPP4 (my post processor of choice for Canon since I shoot Canon), due to how it's threading is wired, I have to launch two concurrent processes in parallel to hit 90% of my machine's CPU potential (350-390% IE almost all 4 cores used) due to threading limitations from the software's optimization. GPU is harder to see, but you can flip on the dedicated graphics to see if LR/Adobe is even tapping your dedicated graphics on your existing MacBook. The same applies, especially with digesting large MP files, CPU gets a workout.īest way to know what's up, watch your activity monitor during your workflow and particularly see if your existing regiment is working your memory, disk, CPU (any how many CPUs, IE if you see 100-200%, especially 100% a lot, you need more GHz, not more cores as you're dealing with single threaded tasks. I just got done answering some complaints regarding LR / Adobe CC products and the new Polaris not behaving to spec, same reason, software and probably more importantly, OS X graphics drivers, aren't optimized for it yet. Think non-adobe products, I know you're asking Adobe, but there's lots else you probably use your computer for, say chatting on DPR for example Okay, now that's out of the way, the difference in processor speeds can't be underestimated for menial tasks, as many processes still aren't optimized for multithreading, thus in many, many cases, GHz is still king. For me, I would put the $350 elsewhere such as towards replacing a HD with a super fast SSD this will have a more noticeable effect on your perceived processing speeds. Bottom line? Only you can determine the value. Additionally, both of these platforms are 4 core processors and since PS is optimized to multi-thread the i7, 4 core processor is more of an influence than the distinction between the cycle speeds. Having a non cpu video card will affect the results more than the difference between the processors. My assumption is that the memory and drives/ssd and presence/absence of an external video card are similar? That being said, you can always check benchmarks such as those at Geekbench ( ). Will I see a major difference between the two? I'm working on files from a Sony a7rii,42MP. I mainly use it for Lightroom(75%) and Photoshop (25%). I can buy either a used 15" MacBook Pro 2015 2.2Ghz or a 2.5GHz.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |