Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
13" no good?
- Thread starter RedJeans
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have 13inch 2010 MBP low end model with 128GB Stock SSD, I can confirm that this computer is pretty good for what you want to do.
You will only notice the i5 difference if you are using pro software like CAD, photoshop, final cut or high end gamer.
It is booting up in 13 secs, shutting down in a few seconds.
I am running at least 12 software at the sometime and it is still fast, no lag..
ms office
safari with 10 tabs open
finder
unison
mail
itunes
photoshop
aperture
google earth
limewire
a lot of sytem plugins like growl, glimmerblock, perian, weather, youcontrol and so on.
a lot of dashboard widgets running
With all these software running at the same time, it is still very very fast !
I am also using spaces and expose fully.
The only thing i do not like is, screen size is a bit small and so when you need to zoom in web browser or doing image process work, 13inch is pain.
Also, you cannot put lot of thing to your desktop because of its resolution and screen size.
You will only notice the i5 difference if you are using pro software like CAD, photoshop, final cut or high end gamer.
It is booting up in 13 secs, shutting down in a few seconds.
I am running at least 12 software at the sometime and it is still fast, no lag..
ms office
safari with 10 tabs open
finder
unison
itunes
photoshop
aperture
google earth
limewire
a lot of sytem plugins like growl, glimmerblock, perian, weather, youcontrol and so on.
a lot of dashboard widgets running
With all these software running at the same time, it is still very very fast !
I am also using spaces and expose fully.
The only thing i do not like is, screen size is a bit small and so when you need to zoom in web browser or doing image process work, 13inch is pain.
Also, you cannot put lot of thing to your desktop because of its resolution and screen size.
The Microcenter $799 deal on the White MB is pretty darn tempting in your circumstance. Grab the Intel 160GB SSD, and you're set.
http://www.microcenter.com/storefronts/apple/index.html
http://www.microcenter.com/storefronts/apple/index.html
I use a 2.53 13" from last year that I built up with 8GB of ram ( Photoshop CS5 addresses it by the way ). It has an Intel 160 GB SSD and a 320 GB 7200 RPM drive in the optical bay.
Aside from a slightly underpowered video card, it screams, I get lots of work done on it, enough work in fact that I simply spend less time on a computer, which is why I use Apple products, I have a life and don't need to chase the latest and greatest technology around when I would rather be out photographing, climbing, skiing, living.
Get the 13", it is a great laptop.
Aside from a slightly underpowered video card, it screams, I get lots of work done on it, enough work in fact that I simply spend less time on a computer, which is why I use Apple products, I have a life and don't need to chase the latest and greatest technology around when I would rather be out photographing, climbing, skiing, living.
Get the 13", it is a great laptop.
Your friend is giving you bad advice.
I've got a 6 core 3.33 i7 in my desktop and a C2D 2.53 in my MBP. As much as I appreciate the power in my desktop, I'm seriously considering selling my MBP so I can buy one of the current 13" models. I would much prefer the portability over the newer CPUs that are available in the 15" line.
Like many others have said, when buying computer hardware (like a laptop/notebook), the true task at hand is matching usage to hardware capabilities. What I recommend is buying something that at least slightly exceeds what you see to be your current needs (unless you plan on buying a new laptop every year).
That said, based upon the usage you've indicated, nearly any computer you buy this year would be up to the task. Buy the least expensive one that meets your needs.
That said, based upon the usage you've indicated, nearly any computer you buy this year would be up to the task. Buy the least expensive one that meets your needs.
So much hate for the C2D. Most of it is ignorance.
"I need 2010 architecture to surf the web!!!"
Most of these newbies don't even realize that the current C2Ds are equal to the Core i3s. The 2.66 actually outperforms any Core i3 in most cases.
Unless your doing CPU intensive tasks, the extra CPU power isn't going to do much except reduce your battery life.
"I need 2010 architecture to surf the web!!!"
Most of these newbies don't even realize that the current C2Ds are equal to the Core i3s. The 2.66 actually outperforms any Core i3 in most cases.
Unless your doing CPU intensive tasks, the extra CPU power isn't going to do much except reduce your battery life.
Same here, LOVE my 13" MBP, very powerful, easy to grab and go, super screen ... my 15" MBP doesn't get as much attention just not as convenient and fun to use.
Forget get about future proofing and saving $100 3 or 4 years from now ... instead think of user experience what will you most enjoy using every day with regards to screen, keyboard, size, weight etc.
It's hard to beat the 13" MBP, I've owned a LOT of notebooks...
Perfectly adequate!
The 13" MBP is perfectly adequate for what you want to throw at it (and can do even more), it has a fantastic battery life and most of all it is very portable. My late 2009 model does not feel dated after almost one year and I can see it doing great service for the next two or more years - by which time there will be even newer, faster, less power hungry processors to buy.
The 13" MBP is perfectly adequate for what you want to throw at it (and can do even more), it has a fantastic battery life and most of all it is very portable. My late 2009 model does not feel dated after almost one year and I can see it doing great service for the next two or more years - by which time there will be even newer, faster, less power hungry processors to buy.
Yeah, most people don't even know what is different about the i5/i7 chips verses the core2duo lineup.
-The main difference is the 32nm process node.
-Second is the integreated mem controller, pcie bridge and slightly better internal bus latencies.
-Third is the integrated graphics on-package (not on-die)
-The architecture is very, very similar as this is just the "tick" or shrink&integrate part of intels "tick-tock" refresh cycle.
-The machinery is pretty much the same, and the only reason you see performance advantages is because of the hyperthreading and turboboost on the i5/i7 while running highly-threaded applications, hence the core i3 (lacking both turboboost and HT) is nearly on par with core2duo aside from the integrated mem controller and graphics.
Grab the 13" core2duo now and wait till mid 2011 for sandy bridge. Or, you coul wait until later this year and grab a possibly revised 13" with the updated arrendale.
-The main difference is the 32nm process node.
-Second is the integreated mem controller, pcie bridge and slightly better internal bus latencies.
-Third is the integrated graphics on-package (not on-die)
-The architecture is very, very similar as this is just the "tick" or shrink&integrate part of intels "tick-tock" refresh cycle.
-The machinery is pretty much the same, and the only reason you see performance advantages is because of the hyperthreading and turboboost on the i5/i7 while running highly-threaded applications, hence the core i3 (lacking both turboboost and HT) is nearly on par with core2duo aside from the integrated mem controller and graphics.
Grab the 13" core2duo now and wait till mid 2011 for sandy bridge. Or, you coul wait until later this year and grab a possibly revised 13" with the updated arrendale.
I am running bioshock, oblivion, fallout 3, borderlands (and starcraft 1
Next up: Crysis and Bioshock 2.
Exaggerate a bit? It took a Phenom II x4 3.0Ghz, 8GB of RAM, and a 9800GTX + 512mb card for me to run Fallout 3 max settings and get 60 fps...
Arrandale is a new microarchitecture based on Nehalem and is not a die shrink of Penryn, which is what the Core 2 Duos are based on.
I agree with this post. Getting an SSD will do you a lot better than getting the i5.
Arrandale is a new microarchitecture based on Nehalem and is not a die shrink of Penryn, which is what the Core 2 Duos are based on.
Arrandale is the die shrink of Nahalem. Its not a new microarchitecture.
I was assuming you were trying to say it was a new microarchitecture. No one said anything about Penryn until you brought it in.
hypermog said:
vant said:
Simple. 13" all the way. Core2Duo 2.66 is probably faster than the low i5 on the 15" and the 13" has like twice the battery (even if they say 8, I am hearing reports ranging from 4-6 hours) and the 13" is more portable.
well the 2.66 C2D even if not the latest gen either is only in the high-end model which is a whopping 300 more expensive and not a good price/quality therefor imho. which is not that much cheaper then the base 15". I would expect to OP was talking about the base model and not planning to waste that much on the 13" upgrade. besides comparing the 4-6 hours reported to the advertised 10 hour on the 13" might not be fair either.....