Should the 2015 MacBook Pro 13" be my first Mac?
April 29, 2015 11:03 AM   Subscribe

Will this be good for XCode development, and can it drive two WQXGA (2560x1600) monitors reasonably well (no gaming)?

As a long time Windows, Linux, and iDevice user, I've finally decided to take the plunge and get a Mac. Professionally, I am an embedded systems engineer / architect with a huge amount of experience in Linux, but would like to start exploring iOS & Watch app development on my own time. I don't see my day job shifting that direction for the foreseeable future, but you never know. My wife will probably use whatever we get the most, primarily to surf with some light photo editing. She will primarily use it on the couch or in bed and wants something fairly small, while I would want to use it connected to the dual WQXGA monitors currently attached to my desktop PC.

Since nothing is upgradable, I'm leaning toward a pretty loaded model - Core i17, 16GB RAM, and 512GB SSD. The hope would be to have a strong machine good for several years to come.

Is this a good choice or will I regret not going with something like a Mac Pro desktop for XCode development?

If the answer is yes, I have a bonus question: One of my monitors is Dual-link DVI only and the reviews on the Apple site for the displayport to DL DVI ratings are really bad. Should I be concerned?
posted by SpookyFish to Computers & Internet (16 answers total)
 
Well, the existing screen on the MBP is WQXGA, and I have it driving a 1440p monitor on top of that no problem, but if you want it to drive three screens, you've got me.

That being said, it's the best laptop I've every used, full stop. Incredibly fast, superbly well-built.
posted by Oktober at 11:17 AM on April 29, 2015 [4 favorites]


I have a the 2012 MBP (bought in 2013), the last non-Retina model (and also the last user upgradable model). i7 CPU, upgraded by me to 16GB of RAM and an SSD. It has an nVidia GPU in it. I think Apple still sells it, or did last I checked. Even if not still sold new, I'd think there should be refurbs available.

You may find the connectivity more challenging than mustering the horsepower. I drive three external screens with it, through a Thunderbolt hub for the center 1920x1200 display (landscape orientation), and DisplayLink-to-HDMI adapters for the side displays at 1080 (portrait orientation). That's in addition to the laptop's screen. It gets pretty hot, and the fans sometimes go nuts, but it all works. The big caveat with this setup is that I'm stuck on 10.8.5 because Apple won't do anything to help the DisplayLink group make their drivers work properly on newer versions of OS X. (That's DisplayLINK [video over USB], not DisplayPORT. Different things.)

I'd figure out exactly how you're going to connect these monitors first and from there figure out how much CPU, GPU and etc you need (as well as how new a version of the OS you can do it with, as newer models may not downgrade to a version that predates their hardware very well.)

Or, yeah, buy a Mac Pro and throw another GPU, or a bigger GPU in it. Doesn't need to be the newest Pro for these purposes. Or, OSx86. Which isn't really something discussed on MeFi.
posted by snuffleupagus at 11:34 AM on April 29, 2015


I've used both extensively : my personal Mac is the 15 inch model and my work Mac at my last job was the 13.

The 13 inch maxes out at a dual-core i7. The 15 inch has quad-core i7.
This is a noticeable difference when programming as it's the difference between XCode compiling 4 files at once versus 8. Not a big deal when writing small apps, but it gets to be a pain with commercial sized apps like the one I was working on.

I also like the additional screen space when working at random places.

When working at my home desk I use mine on a little stand to raise the screen up, and use Apple's wireless keyboard and magic trackpad. It's a nice setup.
posted by w0mbat at 11:36 AM on April 29, 2015


They're very solid machines for any kind of programming. The only reason I'd really want a hyper-powered desktop these days is for some kind of really intense graphics or video rendering work.

I recently went with the 15" MBP, even though I don't really care for the size, for the better processor mentioned above, as well as the fact that 16GB RAM is default and I don't have to pay for an upgrade and wait for them to custom-build it.
posted by drjimmy11 at 11:41 AM on April 29, 2015


I should maybe add that the i7 in my "15-inch, Mid 2012" MBP is the 2.6 gHz quad-core and I went for the 1GB of VRAM on the nv650M GPU. When using DisplayPort and DisplayLink, the GPU drives the DisplayPort monitor, and the CPU drives the DisplayLink monitors.
posted by snuffleupagus at 11:44 AM on April 29, 2015


I have a the exact model you're talking about except with 1TB SSD (because I was constantly having to prune to stay within 500GB on my last machine). It works fine for XCode, Photoshop, Final Cut Pro, and everything else I do. Even my old machine, a ca. 2011 model was fine for most of that stuff. Yes, big projects take a little longer to build than they would on a quad core, but I don't find it to be a major problem. CPU is very rarely the bottleneck in anything I find myself doing.

All of my previous MacBook Pros have been 15" models. All else being equal, I'd probably buy the 15" again. The larger screen is nice, and if you can have 4 cores, you might as well. The reason I went with the 13" was mostly that it was most recently updated (I needed a new computer immediately, no time to wait for the next 15" rev), and it was a bit cheaper for the same amount of RAM and SSD. While the 15" is a little nicer, it was hard for me to justify the extra cost, especially since I have it hooked up to a monitor most of the time anyway. I don't regret getting the 13" at all, but if I could have waited for the next 15" revision, I probably would have.

I can't speak to the specifics of your monitor setup, but I will say that I have endured much pain with multi-monitor configurations on Mac laptops in the past. It can definitely be done, but I've seen it be painful more often than I've seen it work well. YMMV.
posted by primethyme at 11:56 AM on April 29, 2015


I haven't used any macbook with more than one external monitor. Apple does claim it "simultaneously supports full native resolution on the built-in display and up to 3840 by 2160 pixels on up to two external displays"

If the answer is yes, I have a bonus question: One of my monitors is Dual-link DVI only and the reviews on the Apple site for the displayport to DL DVI ratings are really bad. Should I be concerned?

Yeah, AFAICT there are no DP -> DL DVI adapters that don't have issues. I've been using this StarTech one for a couple years with my 2012 rMBP; sometimes when coming out of sleep I have to disconnect & reconnect it before the monitor displays correctly. Other than that it's quite reliable, but that's kind of annoying. My mac does have a different video card than the one you're considering, but my advice is to be prepared for a usable but imperfect experience using your Mac with a DL DVI display. I wouldn't necessarily expect the Mac Pro to do any better; it'd still need the same adapter.

(Tip: The DP -> DLDVI adapter gets its power over USB. If you have an extra phone charger lying around, it'll work with that, without using up a port)
posted by aubilenon at 12:12 PM on April 29, 2015


I wouldn't necessarily expect the Mac Pro to do any better; it'd still need the same adapter.

You can put an aftermarket GPU with DVI-D ports in a Mac Pro (sometimes requires fiddling depending on whether its one of the officially supported cards). That's of course depending on budget, and I suppose availability of older hardware as I'm too lazy to check if anything currently in production and OS X friendly would have two DVI-D ports. A Radeon 5870 ought to work, although it is not current and not all versions had two DVI-D ports and the VRAM differs (I believe the one officially marketed for use in Macs had one DVI-D port and 1GB VRAM), so shop carefully.

It's also possible to run two cards, even two dissimilar cards, but it's a real PITA.
posted by snuffleupagus at 12:18 PM on April 29, 2015


FYI, the new Mac Pros (the cylinders) don't have upgradeable GPUs.

The old towers do.
posted by Oktober at 12:25 PM on April 29, 2015


Oh, I missed the dual-link DVI part of the question. I used to support an office full of people who had monitors that required dual-link DVI, and it was a bag of hurt. On the monitors that had DisplayPort connectors, a mini-displayport to displayport cable worked flawlessly. But for those that only had DVI, I tried a few different dual-link adapters, and I never found one that didn't cause problems. The worst thing is it seems really inconsistent. I had people who had no problems whatsoever, and other people with literally identical hardware setups and constant problems (like multiple times per day the monitor would stop working). I don't want to discourage you, and maybe it's gotten better in the last year or two, but that was a huge headache for me, and I put significant time into trying to find a solution unsuccessfully. Maybe you'll be lucky and be one of the people for whom it Just Works...
posted by primethyme at 12:50 PM on April 29, 2015


FYI, the new Mac Pros (the cylinders) don't have upgradeable GPUs.

The old towers do.


That's crazy! Oh well. (Although a used or refurb tower could work if native ports for those monitors are important enough. They were fine machines if dated, large, and power hungry by comparison.)
posted by snuffleupagus at 12:59 PM on April 29, 2015


I love my brand new 2015 13" Retina MBP I have at work. Seriously, I think it's the best Mac product I've owned recently, and there's been a few. I'm a developer, but not with XCode; my usage however is several virtual machines and a different memory hog of an IDE. Get the highest spec you can, and have fun. If portability isn't a main concern though, do look at the 15" but keep it mind it has not been refreshed this year as the 13" was. I know the 15" will drive 3 external monitors (not all 1080p though I don't think); I think the 13" can only have 2 externals. But I'm not super strong on these details and GPUs and stuff, so don't quote me on anything. I do love this machine though, more so than I thought. I've used iMacs, Airs, minis, older non-retina 15" MBPs, and this one kicks all their butts even when in their prime.
posted by cgg at 4:01 PM on April 29, 2015 [1 favorite]


Best answer: I had to do some research on this, but apparently the new macbooks can drive freaking three external displays. Two over thunderbolt/mini DP, and one over HDMI. I think you might even be able to get 4 going if you count the internal one and the external displays are only 1080p.

I know my 2012 macbook pro(i have the same 1st gen retina model another poster mentioned owning above) will drive two external displays.

There is no way around mini dp>dual link dvi adapters sucking. They're all garbage. Buy the cheapest one you can find, the expensive ones aren't any better. I haven't seen a single one without complaints. Startech and monoprice sell good ones, apples is 100% not worth it because it's just as janky. Expect to have to plug and unplug it several times consistently.(to be fair, i've had similar stupid problems with my macbook and HDMI, but i could never isolate if it was my glitchy samsung "smart" tv, my receiver, or ???...)


This is not going to be a super smooth 60fps all the time experience. Scrolling will probably be a bit laggy, especially if the internal display on the macbook is still active. The GPU in those has essentially just caught up with the internal display, even if they technically support a bunch of screens. I believe it will do it, i just don't think it'll be a kick ass experience.

If i were you, i'd buy two machines here, especially if you're willing to lay out that much. The machine you described is at least $2200. For that much you could buy a refurbished 27in imac that includes a 1440p 27in display(and will drive another one without ever stuttering) AND a more basic 13in retina macbook pro. Seriously, go look at the refurbished page of the apple store. The MBP is like $900, and the imac is like $1400. It could get even cheaper if you sell your DVI-D monitor on craigslist, since the imac comes with one anyways. And then you can just use a super cheapo mini dp>dp cable for the other one. And if you wanted to, the big nvidia GPU in the imac would run its own display and those two displays super smoothly.

If you really want to drive two borderline HiDPI displays like that, you want a souped up 15in macbook pro with dedicated graphics. I feel like buying the 13in MBP for this is like buying a fancy small SUV, when what you really need is a small car and a full sized truck.

I oscillate between "ohh, get a SUPER BEEFY LAPTOP that can do EVERYTHING!!" and "no, you're a moron, get a basic laptop with a nice screen that's easy to carry around, and get a desktop that actually does what you want and need smoothly" every few years. And after several cycles of that, i think i was right with the two machines solution. Especially when your needs are "drive a bunch of big high res displays".

Another consideration here is that compiling code is one of those CPU melting 100% load tasks. Laptops suck at that, they throttle. An imac will do the same work in like half the time because it can just run flat out non stop without even getting loud. You also have two more cores to play with, and i haven't seen a compiler that wasn't multithreaded in years.
posted by emptythought at 4:33 PM on April 29, 2015


As a long time Windows, Linux, and iDevice user

it would pay you to sit down with a Mac and open up a code editor and find out whether the lack of Home and End keys on the Apple keyboards drives you as insane with rage as it drives me.
posted by flabdablet at 9:09 AM on April 30, 2015


Fn+Left=Home
Fn+Right=End
posted by snuffleupagus at 9:27 AM on April 30, 2015


Response by poster: I had somehow missed that they were dual-core only. For some reason I had it in my head that all Core i7s were quad core and I just glossed over it. Considering that my daily driver is a 32 core workstation, that seems like a pretty major drawback, but then again, I'm not going to be building huge mountains of code every day either.

I think I'm still going to go ahead and get the 13 as my first step into the Mac world, perhaps a more basic model. At the very least, I will be able to use the 30" with displayport plus the built-in screen which is still a lot of real estate. If I really get into doing XCode development I will get an MBP 15 or Pro desktop in the future and let my wife keep the 13 full-time. Considering the POS Windows laptop she uses now, I have a feeling she's going to get very attached to it anyway.
posted by SpookyFish at 10:14 AM on April 30, 2015 [1 favorite]


« Older Madeira and Corsica and Sardinia, oh my!   |   Tinder: "there was a problem getting your code" Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.