Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

2009 13" 2.26 v 2015 13" 3.1 performance

S

stevearm

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Nov 15, 2007
992
91
Hi all,

I'm currently still using a 2009 MBP on Snow Leopard, it's running more or less fine but I'm thinking it's about time I upgrade.

Looking to get a 13" rMBP 3.1, 16GB. I was wondering how much of a boost it would be performance wise. Obviously it's 6 years newer but from what I hear Yosemite is a bit of a power-hog and the 4x retina graphics might eat up a lot of juice too.

Will I see a noticeable difference from my Snow Leopard machine or should I think about maybe waiting till the next MBPs are out?
 
The performance difference is night-and-day. A Core 2 Duo, HDD-based machine with maybe 5 hours battery tops vs a Core i5/i7 with SSD and 10 hours battery?

It's so much better.
 
Thanks, I've actually got a 1TB SSD in the 2009 MBP now, but I think the PCI-E ones are faster anyway? I was just concerned Yosemite + retina graphics would dial back up the performance upgrade.
 
It doesn't. Yosemite is better than Snow Leopard and the retina screen is better than anything else.
 
stevearm said:
Will I see a noticeable difference from my Snow Leopard machine or should I think about maybe waiting till the next MBPs are out?
Click to expand...

The 2015 models are faster, and not just by a little bit. Geekbench scores are more than doubled.

The 3.1GHz CPU isn't worth the extra $200 it costs though. I'd stick with the 2.9GHz i5.
 
T5BRICK said:
The 2015 models are faster, and not just by a little bit. Geekbench scores are more than doubled.

The 3.1GHz CPU isn't worth the extra $200 it costs though. I'd stick with the 2.9GHz i5.
Click to expand...

Thanks very much, just seemed like I noticed a bit of lag trying out the in-store model.

I'm not too clued up on CPUs, what would the extra .2GHz realistically impact? Speed of using the OS? Apps opening faster etc?
 
stevearm said:
Thanks very much, just seemed like I noticed a bit of lag trying out the in-store model.

I'm not too clued up on CPUs, what would the extra .2GHz realistically impact? Speed of using the OS? Apps opening faster etc?
Click to expand...

Not at all.
 
While the CPU is much faster and everything involving heavy calculations will be much quicker, the OP is right in that some graphically-intense UI operations like Mission Control or switching spaces might not necessarily be as smooth on the newest model as Exposé is on his present Snow Leopard machine.
 
Woch said:
While the CPU is much faster and everything involving heavy calculations will be much quicker, the OP is right in that some graphically-intense UI operations like Mission Control or switching spaces might not necessarily be as smooth on the newest model as Exposé is on his present Snow Leopard machine.
Click to expand...

That's what I was asking about really, UI operations. I do get the feeling things will be quite choppy. Shame because I love how stable and smooth Snow Leopard and Expose is :)

I guess getting the 3.1GHz version will help a little? Or would more RAM be better?
 
True, I still miss the days of Snow Leopard and its silky-smooth UI operations :)

The problem lies in the graphics performance and drivers of Yosemite being poorly optimized, so neither the 3.1GHz option nor additional RAM will be of any help. You just need more graphical processing power (or a hopefully better optimized version of OS X). If you are fine with your current machine, I would suggest to wait for the next generation Skylake processors since these should bring considerable performance improvements to their integrated GPU.
 
Woch said:
True, I still miss the days of Snow Leopard and its silky-smooth UI operations :)

The problem lies in the graphics performance and drivers of Yosemite being poorly optimized, so neither the 3.1GHz option nor additional RAM will be of any help. You just need more graphical processing power (or a hopefully better optimized version of OS X). If you are fine with your current machine, I would suggest to wait for the next generation Skylake processors since these should bring considerable performance improvements to their integrated GPU.
Click to expand...

Argh, just when I'd settled on finally jumping out of comfy Snow Leopard and into modern OS X you're making me wonder if I should put up with my falling apart 2009 MBP :) Is the UI really that choppy on Yosemite? I don't use Spaces and I'll be turning translucency off.
 
Haha well it really depends on whether you can wait for one more year or not. If yes I would really suggest waiting, since the next generation CPUs will bring big graphical improvements (improving the choppiness issues of the 13" rMBP), the machines themselves might be redesigned and OS X 10.11 will hopefully be more optimized and more stable than Yosemite.

As for the smoothness of the UI it really depends on the usage and sensitivity of each person. Some will say it's perfectly smooth and others will say it's laggy. The best you can do is trying for yourself, which you already did :) Also, contrary to Snow Leopard, Yosemite's UI choppiness increases over time when you don't restart the computer.
 
I'm not sure I can wait to be honest, especially since it could be longer than a year if there is to be a redesign, the screen on my 2009 Mac is cracked etc. Trust me I'd love to hold out as much as possible as I think Snow Leopard is a far superior OS, but apps are starting to not support it anymore and some of the newer features are nice.

I also don't like the way Apple is going with it's new thinner keyboard and UBC-C so maybe now is the time to get a rMBP which hardware design wise should be pretty polished now.

UI snappiness is really important to me though so that's why your warnings make me very wary. I might search similar threads and try it out some more in the shop. More bad news that the choppiness gets worse the longer you don't restart :(
 
stevearm said:
I'm not too clued up on CPUs, what would the extra .2GHz realistically impact? Speed of using the OS? Apps opening faster etc?
Click to expand...

The faster CPU would be useful in situations where you're doing very complex tasks and utilizing 100% of the CPU. If you need the absolute fastest computer, your best option is to look at the 15" rMBP, it has a quad core i7.

stevearm said:
Is the UI really that choppy on Yosemite? I don't use Spaces and I'll be turning translucency off.
Click to expand...

My 2015 13" rMBP has some lag when I do certain things. It doesn't bother me. I laugh when people complain about lag when resizing their windows. Is that really what you use your computer for all day? Resizing windows?

Turning transparency off helps according to some folks. It's worth a try.

stevearm said:
I might search similar threads and try it out some more in the shop. More bad news that the choppiness gets worse the longer you don't restart :(
Click to expand...

Searching the forums and reading up on it is only going to find people complaining about the issue and people saying that they don't have the issue. If suggest spending sometime using one. Apple has a 14 day return policy.
 
T5BRICK said:
The faster CPU would be useful in situations where you're doing very complex tasks and utilizing 100% of the CPU. If you need the absolute fastest computer, your best option is to look at the 15" rMBP, it has a quad core i7.
Click to expand...

I'm a photographer so Lightroom and Photoshop is the limit of complex tasks really. Maybe a bit of video editing.


My 2015 13" rMBP has some lag when I do certain things. It doesn't bother me. I laugh when people complain about lag when resizing their windows. Is that really what you use your computer for all day? Resizing windows
Click to expand...

Can I ask what kind of things cause lag? Was it less of a problem on Mavericks?
 
Do people think the next version of OS X, given the rumoured focus on under the hood improvements, improve the UI lag ?
 
stevearm said:
Can I ask what kind of things cause lag? Was it less of a problem on Mavericks?
Click to expand...

Resizing windows is one example that gets brought up. It really depends on the content of the window, though. Mission control will drop frames sometimes(I don't use Mission control).

People report that it wasn't a problem in Mavericks, but I never used Mavericks, so I wouldn't be able to compare.
 
stevearm said:
Hi all,

I'm currently still using a 2009 MBP on Snow Leopard, it's running more or less fine but I'm thinking it's about time I upgrade.

Looking to get a 13" rMBP 3.1, 16GB. I was wondering how much of a boost it would be performance wise. Obviously it's 6 years newer but from what I hear Yosemite is a bit of a power-hog and the 4x retina graphics might eat up a lot of juice too.

Will I see a noticeable difference from my Snow Leopard machine or should I think about maybe waiting till the next MBPs are out?
Click to expand...
Don't bother with the i7, it's the biggest ripoff in history when it's barely 5% better than the 2.7GHz i5 at best.

You'll be fine with the 2.7/8/256 variant of the 13" rMBP.
 
I'd say get the fastest i7 you can afford. That way you'll have the fastest model you can buy and won't be left wondering whether your machine could be a little bit faster.
 
ZBoater said:
I'd say get the fastest i7 you can afford. That way you'll have the fastest model you can buy and won't be left wondering whether your machine could be a little bit faster.
Click to expand...

That is awful advice. Of course the i7 is the fastest, it just isn't worth anything near what Apple is charging for it.
 
Last edited:
T5BRICK said:
That is awful advice. Of course the i7 is the fastest, it just isn't worth the anything near what Apple is charging for it.
Click to expand...
Seconded. It's not worth paying an extra $200 to bump it from 2.7GHz to 3.1GHz just for an extra 5% increase in performance. Spending that $200 only shows that the lad who did that has got more money than sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back