2010 13" MBP vs. 2009 15" MBP?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by RedRaven571, May 4, 2010.

  1. RedRaven571 macrumors 65816

    RedRaven571

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #1
    Would it be better to get a brand new 13" base MBP (2.4gHz C2D, 4GB RAM, 320M GPU) or a 1 year old (used) 15" MBP (2.4gHz C2D, 4G RAM, 256MB 9600 GPU; has 2 years Applecare remaining), assuming they would cost the same?

    My primary use would be video editing home movies/photos using iMovie, iPhoto, Aperture 3, and FCE4.

    A large part of me says to get the new 13" MBP because, well, it's new; however the 15" still has 2 years Applecare, so I'm covered that way.

    Opinions?
     
  2. WisdomWolf macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    #2
    I think it depends on how important mobility/portability and battery life is to you and whether or not you think you'll take advantage of either the better graphics in the 15" or the audio out over mDP -> HDMI on the 13".
     
  3. FnuGk macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    #3
    wasnt the 2.4 the low end 15"? that means it only has the 9400 so it have a much weaker gfx than the new 13"

    if thats so the 13" would be superior in every way
     
  4. js81 macrumors 65816

    js81

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2008
    Location:
    KY
    #4
    I think that the 9600M is a better GPU than the 320M; however, the 320M is no slouch. I run AOE3 and Bioshock (admittedly not the most demanding games) in Windows at native resolution and all options on and get very good FPS.

    Unless you really have to have the 15", I'd recommend new over used any day.

    EDIT: I believe FnuGk is right... sorta. The last 15" MBP right before the update had a 2.53GHz as a low end, with the 9400M graphics. I was really thinking about it until I saw that the overall Geekbench scores for the new 13" was better than the previous 15". The 320M blows the 9400M away, BTW.
     
  5. RedRaven571 thread starter macrumors 65816

    RedRaven571

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #5
    I tote my current beast (a 17" HP Pavilion 1440 x 900) with me everywhere, and a lighter computer would be a relief, but battery life isn't too important to me because I almost always plug it in.

    Sound out through HDMI is nice, cause I could hook up the 13" MBP to my Bravia with one connection.

    I have seen the 13 and 15 MBPs in the Apple store and it doesn't seem like a huge difference in screen size. The 13" looks perfectly acceptable to me; I use an HP Elitebook at work and it has a 14.1" screen (1280 x 800) which seems fine.

    I don't know if the lower resolution will make a difference in video editing (I'm strictly a hobbyist).
     
  6. WisdomWolf macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    #6
    I was going based on his post that shows 9600 in the specs for the 15".
    If the 15" has a 9400 then it's only benefit left is slightly larger screen size with a minor bump in resolution (1440x900), but imo that's not enough to justify the heavier computer.
     
  7. RedRaven571 thread starter macrumors 65816

    RedRaven571

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #7
    The one I'm watching on eBay states it has the 9600M GT 256MB VRAM.

    http://cgi.ebay.com/Apple-MacBook-Pro-15-4-Great-Condition-4GB-Ram-upgrade-/320522569261?cmd=ViewItem&pt=Apple_Laptops&hash=item4aa0a2462d

    And, JS81, that's also part of my dilemma, I've never bought a used notebook, the lure on this one is that there are 2 years Applecare remaining....

    OTOH, if I wait for the back to school promo, I might be able to get a new iPod, too
     
  8. FnuGk macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    #8
    uhm then i guess WisdomWolf's first post sums it up quite well.

    just to clear up the 13" does NOT have hdmi but it supports audio over the mini display port thus you can use an mDP -> hdmi adapter and have normal benefits of hdmi
     
  9. RedRaven571 thread starter macrumors 65816

    RedRaven571

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #9
    Understood, thanks!

    I guess the real nut of my question is: Is the 9600M GT 256MB GPU superior to the 320M (enough so that it would validate buying a 1 year old notebook to get it)?

    Thanks for all your help.
     
  10. vant macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    #10
    Yes it is superior.

    But, many people with the 320M are sufficiently happy editing videos with it.
     
  11. RedRaven571 thread starter macrumors 65816

    RedRaven571

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #11
    Well, I ended up getting a used 15" (not the one in the link, but the same specs), spent $1177 (including shipping) and the original warranty is effective until October 2010, and I am just waiting for it to show up on my doorstep.

    IF the seller doesn't include original proof of purchase, am I still able to get Applecare?
     
  12. cluthz macrumors 68040

    cluthz

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Location:
    Norway
    #12
    The Macbook Pro 2.4GHz with 9600M GT card is the one from Late 2008 with express card slot and replaceable battery.
    Those are limited to 4GB ram as far as i know and have vastly inferior battery life, 4-5 hrs.
     
  13. RedRaven571 thread starter macrumors 65816

    RedRaven571

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #13
    I wasn't planning on going past 4GB RAM (I don't think I've ever seen our iMac have less than 2GB [of the 4 installed] available at any time), and 4-5 hrs of battery life is twice what my current HP Pavilion gets (~ 2hrs).

    I was just trying to get a bigger piece of real estate and (maybe)a better GPU (256MB 9600 vs integrated 320m) for about the same $$.
     

Share This Page