Help me configure a new Macbook Pro
February 2, 2018 6:17 AM   Subscribe

Last summer I asked a question about whether it was worth fixing a broken trackpad on my 13" Macbook Pro 2012, and consensus was a yes, so I did and got a bit more life out of it, but it has more problems and I think it is time to buy a new laptop. I would love some help configuring it. I tend to do a little bit of light Photoshopping along with Word, Excel and PowerPoint and often have them running together. I really feel at sea with all the various options.
posted by nanook to Computers & Internet (12 answers total) 3 users marked this as a favorite
 
In rough order of importance, most-to-least:

Pay for extra RAM. You can't upgrade it later (it's soldered to the logic board) and if you multi-task, I suspect you'll notice the improvement.

I'd personally go for at least the 512gb SSD hard drive option, if you expect to need much in the way of high-res/raw photos stored locally. If money is tight, you could go with the 256gb option and then add USB-C drives later (I got a 512gb Samsung through work that is blazing fast) but then you're wrangling extra cables and adapters which may or may not be a dealbreaker. You could also use remote storage (either in iCloud/dropbox or some kind of NAS), but then you're at the mercy of bandwidth/time.

I'm not sure how much you'd notice the CPU upgrade, honestly. RAM will make things run a bit more snappily, and storage space will let you store more stuff locally, but faster CPU will just make things happen a bit faster? If you're aiming to have this computer for 5 years (possible, given how long you held onto your last one) I think there's a case to be made to splurge on CPU for future-proofing, but if money's at a premium, I think RAM and storage will get you more value.
posted by Alterscape at 6:33 AM on February 2, 2018


I would say the order of importance for upgrades would be:

1) SSD
2) Memory
3) Processor

Based upon your light usage, I would just upgrade the SSD. I'd probably go for the 512GB drive.

If you were doing heavy photoshopping I'd upgrade the memory to 16 GB, and if you were doing processor intensive rendering I'd upgrade the CPU, but neither seem to apply to you. Maybe the 16GB will give you future proofing, but I honestly think you'll be fine with 8GB for the life of the machine (others in the thread might disagree on this one.)
posted by bluecore at 6:33 AM on February 2, 2018


I absolutely wouldn't suggest ANYONE buy a laptop today with less than 16GB of RAM and less than 512GB SSD. You can't upgrade either later with Macs, so get more than you think you need at the getgo.

By contrast, most folks today aren't taxing the processor much. I'm not sure the $270 CPU bump is worth it for a Photoshop person; I'll defer to other people there. *I* got the upgraded CPU on my 13" rMBP in 2015 because I run VMs on it, but...

(Honestly, as a photographer/photoshop user, there's a case to be made to bump the SSD to 1TB.)
posted by uberchet at 7:01 AM on February 2, 2018


I am moving from a 2009 iMac to my brand new MacBook Pro. I am a serious amateur photographer with >70K photos in external storage. I will be using Lightroom heavily, Photoshop not as much, but often. Minor video work, but not enough to drive any decisions.

I got the 15" with 16GB Ram. I struggled with the SSD size, finally going with the 2TB option due to my existing data and iTunes library. Yup, ton of money but this thing screams (I've had it 2 days). I made the long term investment because I hope to get a solid 8 years out of it. Amortized, it comes to about $460/year.
posted by jeporter99 at 7:50 AM on February 2, 2018


I'm with the group here: get as much RAM and as much SSD as you feel you can afford (16GB RAM / 512GB SSD is a good place; the price jump to 1TB is steep for an extra 512GB).
posted by Making You Bored For Science at 8:17 AM on February 2, 2018


Seconding Alterscape and uberchet. Storage is getting cheaper, smaller, and faster all the time, and these days processor speeds are of little concern unless you're crunching through huge datasets or motion graphics.

Your use case is very much like mine: Office apps, some Photoshop, lots of time researching and writing on the web, recording screencasts for training. My 3+ year old MacBook Pro with 16GB RAM and 512GB SSD still works very very well.

Remember as well that memory isn't just for apps like Photoshop; recent versions of macOS are hungry hungry memory hawgs. And in a few years, 32GB of RAM may be the recommended minimum. And depending on how much you need or like Photoshop, planning what you'll need to work with Adobe and Creative Cloud, most if not all bets are off.

Do not get me started on Adobe.
posted by conscious matter at 8:22 AM on February 2, 2018


Processor upgrades are tempting because these machines have a pretty long lifetime, but the big advantage of an i7 over an i5 is something called hyperthreading, which allows the CPU to appear to the OS and capable applications as if it has twice as many cores as it really does. Most of what you're doing is in applications that don't take advantage of this capability (not even Photoshop, except for a few specific manipulations), so you wouldn't see the advantage of that. There's a little bit of a base clock upgrade, and a little bit of a "turbo boost" upgrade (the maximum speed the CPU can run one – and only one – process, for a limited amount of time before it throttles back because of heat) and I wouldn't expect either of those to be too noticeable with your workload.

Get the i5, get 16 GB of RAM, and get as much SSD as you can afford after that. 512 GB is pretty much the sweet spot, price-wise. 1 TB would be nice to have and would extend the useful life of the machine a bit, but that price jump is steep.
posted by fedward at 8:39 AM on February 2, 2018 [1 favorite]


Nth'ing the recommendations here.

You should bump up to 16 GB of RAM, then 512 GB of SSD - or more if you can fit it in your budget.

I would not recommend the processor upgrade - the i5 will be fine for you and will actually get you better battery life.
posted by RedOrGreen at 8:47 AM on February 2, 2018


  • The smallest storage option would be very constricting to me—I'm exceeded that. I've got 512 GB on mine, and even with that, I need to have a strategy for what is stored internally vs externally—I'd rather be able to keep it all in one place. It's slightly annoying but manageable.
  • Adequate memory will have a bigger impact on your day-to-day perception of speed than a faster processor. I'd bump that to 16 GB if I could afford it.

posted by adamrice at 10:08 AM on February 2, 2018


Agreed on RAM and SSD. I think the processor is fine, and agree with RedOrGreen above re: battery life. It's not a mega powerhouse, but you don't seem to particularly need one.

RAM is generally one of the best bang-per-buck upgrades you can do on a computer build. RAM's benefits are usually in the form of fewer frustrating moments with the machine. It feels faster when it has more memory; partly because it is faster to process a lot of things, and partly because the available resources mean you aren't stuck watching a progress bar on one application, but can switch over to another and read MeFi (the users of which can occasionally frustrate one, but RAM cannot resolve that).

SSD is going to give palpable differences in speed of loading applications and executing any other disk-related tasks, such as loading gigantic photoshop files. It will also likely extend the lifespan of the boot drive; no moving parts mean that SSD lifespan is generally related to the read/write cycle of individual memory cells in there; it will also do a better job surviving and sustaining your data should something physically destroy your Mac, like getting run over by a car, dropped off a building, etc.
posted by Sunburnt at 11:07 AM on February 2, 2018


SSD is going to give palpable differences in speed of loading applications and executing any other disk-related tasks, such as loading gigantic photoshop files. It will also likely extend the lifespan of the boot drive; no moving parts mean that SSD lifespan is generally related to the read/write cycle of individual memory cells in there; it will also do a better job surviving and sustaining your data should something physically destroy your Mac, like getting run over by a car, dropped off a building, etc.
That's all true, but also moot; the machine OP is interested in doesn't have a conventional hard drive as an option. It's all about the SIZE of the SSD, not whether or not to use SSD over a spinning drive.
posted by uberchet at 11:56 AM on February 2, 2018


Here’s a tip for if your SSD fails:

My 1TB SSD failed a few weeks ago and I searched online for a relatively cheap replacement. Unfortunately, because of the pin configuration you can only use the drives made specifically for Apple. The 1TB cost $1000.

I took it into the Apple store and they have a deal where they charge you a flat rate of $575 to replace the drive - this includes installing a new drive. They then give you a new warranty on the drive.

It’s still a lot of money but cheaper than $1000. Presumably the cost would be less for a smaller drive.

I’ve heard that SSD drives are more likely to fail than old school spinny ones so I recommend frequent backups.
posted by bendy at 1:12 PM on February 2, 2018


« Older How do I work with these veggie crumbles?   |   Can a Wemo outlet go 20 minutes on, 40 off, all... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.