'09 vs '10 vs '11 MacBook Pro 13"

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by 1BadMac, Feb 24, 2011.

  1. 1BadMac, Feb 24, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2011

    1BadMac macrumors 6502

    1BadMac

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    #1
    I picked up the low end 2011 today for $1,099. This replaces the '10, which replaced the '09. I was digging around and found some of my old Xbench results, so I ran Xbench on the new MBP and threw the results into a spreadsheet to compare.

    Xbench is way outdated, so it's not scientific by any means. Shows some progression though as each model has gotten marginally better. Although I'm still somewhat disappointed in the overall spec bump (what gives having lower res than the Air??) - it is faster than the previous gen.

    The only game I play is Star Trek Online - which runs under Wine. FPS is unchanged, averaging just under 30 fps. So no bump, but no drop either.

    Thus far battery life seems on par with the '10 version. Coconut battery reports 5770 for both.

    [​IMG]
     
  2. FX4568 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2010
    #2
    Nice, only thing that stayed the same was the GPU :/.
     
  3. hazedragon45 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    #3
    this is great. I sold my 09 macbook, but am now considering 10' or 11'. 10' of course to save some money
     
  4. AAPLGeek macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
  5. wordoflife macrumors 604

    wordoflife

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    #5
    That's interesting. For the most part, I won't see those advantages checking FB, so I should be good for now.

    I'm surprised how much faster the new ones are.


    With a student discount, probably.
     
  6. Grouchy Bob macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2011
    Location:
    AssWipe, New Mexico
    #6
    Thanks for the tests (and your time).

    Educational discount? I thought the base model was $1199.
     
  7. 1BadMac thread starter macrumors 6502

    1BadMac

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    #7
    Yeah, I'm sure if I rerun the results, I could be lower or higher than the '10. I'm seeing other posts where more real world results are showing marginally less FPS for the Intel 3000. Doesn't surprise me.

    I was surprised to see that the '11 i5 2.3 was this much better than the 2.4 C2D. I guess the integrated memory controller really does help.
     
  8. 1BadMac thread starter macrumors 6502

    1BadMac

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    #8
    I actually was supposed to get a Corporate discount, but I had my ID card from my Masters program a few years ago (obviously expired) and the manager just went ahead and matched the educational discount instead. So $1099 vs $1124.

    :D
     
  9. 1BadMac thread starter macrumors 6502

    1BadMac

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    #9
    I ran Geekbench 32bit and added my results to the above chart for all three. I need to get 64 bit version of Geekbench, but this is at least the same 32bit that was run on all machines.
     
  10. AbyssImpact macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    #10
    I am a student and I will purchase this on Amazon instead with the 2 day shipping for free. I live in California in a city where the sales tax is 9.25% so if I purchase it through Apple, I would pay $1099.99 plus $101 in tax. That would equal to be $1201. Amazon has it in stock for $1094 which will not get taxed.

    Sorry for going off topic, I think I will purchase this once the first batches gets done and have no more early adoption problems so many hardwares seem to have these days.:D
     
  11. 1BadMac thread starter macrumors 6502

    1BadMac

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    #11
    Edited to include the Coconut Battery comparison between models.
     
  12. montecarloss919 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    #12
    um the 1099 one is last years model i believe
     

Share This Page