2009 MBP C2D 2.8GHz, 4GB, 500GB, 9600M GT vs 2010 MBP i5 2.4GHz, 4GB, 320GB, 330M GT

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by 20LEGEND, Apr 15, 2010.

  1. 20LEGEND macrumors member

    Feb 9, 2010
    So my university computer store is selling both these machines at the same price ($1700) and for the life of me, I can't decide which one to get.

    • 2010 MacBook Pro 15" - 2.4GHz Intel i5, 4GB DDR3, 320GB, nVidia 330M (256MB) GT, 8-9 hours of battery
    • 2009 MacBook Pro 15" - 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB DDR3, 500GB, nVidia 9600M GT (512MB)+9400M, 7 hours battery

    I don't really care about the hard drive size or the extra hour of battery life. I want to pick based on the CPU and GPU, but have no idea how to make the decision.

    I'm hoping to use the computer for the next 3 years. And will be using it for extreme multi-tasking, moderate gaming (should be able to run FIFA 2010, 2011, (and hopefuly even 2012) smoothly).

    Any/all advice would be greatly appreciated.
  2. troy14 macrumors 6502a

    Mar 25, 2008
    Las Vegas (Summerlin), NV
    I'd recommend getting the one with the i5 processor. You can always upgrade your HD later, and I believe the 330m is tons quicker then the 9600m anyways.
  3. zedsdead macrumors 68040

    Jun 20, 2007
    If you don't care about the hard drive space, get the i5.
  4. Hellhammer Moderator


    Staff Member

    Dec 10, 2008
  5. hellfire88 macrumors 6502

    Apr 28, 2008
    I'd get the new one with the i5, it can turbo up to 2.93GHz (and a Core 2 Duo 2.8GHz is about as fast as a 2.4GHz i5 if not a bit slower). Also 330m is superior by a decent amount.
  6. elpmas macrumors 68000


    Sep 9, 2009
    Where the fresh snow don't go.
    this would've been a no brainer for me :p
    the question is "would you like to settle with old gen technology or new gen technology?" :p
  7. Fry-man22 macrumors 6502


    Nov 25, 2007
    The new one with the i5 - no question. 9600m GT (and really the new 330) isn't fast enough to starve 256mb GDDR3 most of the time anyway so the 512MB (the bold part) does little to no good...
  8. PandaOnslaught macrumors regular


    Feb 22, 2010
    i5 hands down, i would only consider the C2D if it was $400 cheaper
  9. 20LEGEND thread starter macrumors member

    Feb 9, 2010
    So I still haven't ordered a machine yet because now I'm stuck trying to decide between:
    2010 15" i5 2.4GHz, 330M, 4GB, 320GB, 8-9hrs
    2010 13" C2D 2.4GHz, 320M, 4GB, 250GB, 10hrs

    Help please. :eek:

    Also, I'm fairly concerned about the battery life problems with the new MBPs because battery life is one of the reasons why I'm switching to a Mac.
  10. C64 macrumors 65816


    Sep 3, 2008
    Start post:
    You'll be using this for some time to come: go with the i5. If size and weight are a factor too though, than that's something only you can decide on.

    You'll only get those advertised hours when you're not doing much and after some calibration. That means low brightness, simple sites (no flash), nothing that activates the discrete graphics, etc. Mostly you'll be doing more, so shave off 2-3 hours and you'll have fairly accurate estimate. But 6-7-8 hours is still pretty good.
  11. 20LEGEND thread starter macrumors member

    Feb 9, 2010
    I should have probably been more clear about the last part.
    Basically, since the 15"ers are having battery life issues because of issues with the graphics switching, the battery life is a negative only on the 15"er. Which is why I'm now considering the 13"er, well that, and the 600 bucks i'll save.
  12. Raje macrumors member

    Mar 2, 2010
    If you want to game definitely get the 15". I imagine you won't be running many graphic intensive programs when on battery (gaming, photoshop, etc) so the graphics card won't be a problem and even if you did and had the 13" it would still drain the battery life more than other things. The 330GT smokes the 320m and is what you want for gaming the extra 2" screen real estate would help also.

Share This Page