In absolute terms, that’s not all that svelte, but for a device that gives you a spacious 15 inches of display real estate, which can manage a surprising 2880 x 1800 resolution if you use a third-party app to scale beyond the built-in supported max resolution, it’s very impressive. The MP is a deprecated machine, on its way out, and maybe you could get one cheap, although they seem to remain overpriced new.īut why a new Mac? why not use the MBP? or even trade up to a newer, faster MBP and just lose the old 21"? Yeah, a MP would be faster than your 21", but not a good value at all.This 2013 15-inch model retains the exact same physical dimensions as its predecessor, weighing in at just under three and a half pounds, and under three-quarters of an inch thick. I wouldn't ever wanna go back to a 2.5k monitor after using a modern iPhone, retina MBP, etc.
I dunno what monitor you have and what MBP, but using an old low resolution monitor, even if better with color, as the only monitor for a computer might be a less than pleasing experience. The Mac Pro is spec'd with 3.7 GHz Intel Xeon E5 Quad-Core and Dual AMD FirePro D300 GPUs (2 x 2GB) I'm not super spec tech knowledgeable but how would that compare to a 2017 iMac? (3.4GHz (3.8 Boost) quad-core 7th-generation Intel Core i5 processor and Radeon Pro 570 with 4GB video memory) They both go for roughly the same amount so thats not a major deciding factor to me. I don't really have the desk space for a 27 inch iMac + my current external monitor, but I didn't know if the 2017 would be a better performer than the 2013. I'm leaning toward a Mac Pro since it doesn't have a built in monitor and can use my 27 inch external monitor which will also be used by my MBP.
I'm looking to replace my current desktop computer (21in Mid-2010 iMac).
0 kommentar(er)
