1.) If you used the 15-inch MBP (2.4 GHz i5) mostly for web surfing and basic productivity stuff you would be using the Intel integrated graphics instead of the discreet graphics. If you did the same thing with the 13-inch MBP (2.4 GHz C2D) you would be using the NVIDIA integrated graphics. Would the 15's slower graphics negate its faster processor? i.e. Is i5 + Intel graphics faster than C2D + NVIDIA graphics for basic stuff?
2.) According to http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/why-the-13-macbook-pro-didnt-get-a-core-i5-upgrade.ars the Intel graphics are the reason Apple didn't want to include the i3 in the 13 inch. Any benchmarks on i3 (2.26 GHz) Intel graphics vs. C2D (2.4 GHz) NVIDIA GeForce 320M? Is Apple's "concern" legit?
2.) According to http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/why-the-13-macbook-pro-didnt-get-a-core-i5-upgrade.ars the Intel graphics are the reason Apple didn't want to include the i3 in the 13 inch. Any benchmarks on i3 (2.26 GHz) Intel graphics vs. C2D (2.4 GHz) NVIDIA GeForce 320M? Is Apple's "concern" legit?