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

2010 MacBook Pro 13" or 2011 MacBook Pro 13"

Titanium81

Titanium81

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jun 23, 2011
510
0
Which one would be the best choice for photo / video work.

Please help me decided between these two:

MacBook Pro 2.66GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Originally released April 2010
13.3-inch LED-backlit glossy widescreen display
4GB (2 x 2GB) of 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM
320GB Serial ATA @ 5400 rpm
8x double-layer SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
NVIDIA GeForce 320M graphics processor with 256MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory

or

MacBook Pro 2.3GHz dual-core Intel i5
Originally released February 2011
13.3-inch (diagonal) LED-backlit glossy widescreen display, 1280-by-800 resolution
4GB (2 x 2GB) of 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM
320GB Serial ATA @ 5400 rpm
8x double-layer SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Intel HD Graphics 3000 with 384MB of DDR3 SDRAM
 
You don't have to tell us the specs, we're all well aware.

It's simple really: Graphic intensive purposes-2010 model. CPU intensive purposes-2011 model. Overall faster performance-2011 model.

The only time you'll see a benefit from the 2010 model is in GPU intensive applications like games.
 
The 2010 MBP's support OpenCL where the 2011 MBP's don't.

Is this going to make a big difference when using programs like Pixelmator that take advantage of the GPU for image processing?
 
Last edited:
If I added an SSD and 8 GB Ram to the 2010, would it scream past the 2011? (Even if the same was done to the 2011, since the 2010 has dedicated graphics that support OpenCL.)
 
Your question was already answered.....


For GPU applications get the 10 model, for cpu applications get the 2011..... Overall the 2011 is a better computer.


Furthermore photoshop, aperture, Final, etc. are all memory, cpu and disk based programs where graphics cards are minimally a concern.
 
So would the 2010 MBP 13" 2.66GHz with and SSD and 8GB Ram be pretty fast?

Comparable to the 2011 MBA 13" 1.7GHz?

Faster?
 
Get the 2010 model. I am regretting the 2011, i could have got a decent 2010 model for the price of this one and it would have had a better( a real ) graphics chip.
 
Joelb955 said:
Get the 2010 model. I am regretting the 2011, i could have got a decent 2010 model for the price of this one and it would have had a better( a real ) graphics chip.
Click to expand...

Would a 2010 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo with a SSD and 8GB Ram scream past a 2011 2.3GHz dual-core Intel i5 with HDD and 4 GB Ram?
 
If you're looking for photo and video capabilities, go for a refurb 15". The extra screen space and dedicated GPU makes a difference, plus the much better CPU.
 
Joelb955 said:
Get the 2010 model. I am regretting the 2011, i could have got a decent 2010 model for the price of this one and it would have had a better( a real ) graphics chip.
Click to expand...

Thank You!

The 2010 with the addition of an SSD and upgraded ram seems like the winner.

Cooler Running Processor and Dedicated Graphics and Cheaper Price Tag :)
 
...

the 2010 doesn't have dedicated graphics, just better integrated graphics than the 2011 has (slightly). the cpu in the 2011 will run circles around the 2010 but in most things you won't notice a difference. The 2011 air will be faster than the 2010 pro even if you add an SSD to the pro UNLESS you use more than 4gb of ram because you can't upgrade the air. Just having 8gb of ram doesn't make the computer any faster unless you use it. The air will be the fastest feeling computer of the three, the 2010 pro with an ssd will feel faster than a stock 2011
 
Titanium81 said:
So would the 2010 MBP 13" 2.66GHz with and SSD and 8GB Ram be pretty fast?

Comparable to the 2011 MBA 13" 1.7GHz?

Faster?
Click to expand...

It will be fast. I have the 2.4Ghz version with 8GB of ram and the stock 5400rpm hard drive. Even with the slow hard drive I find it nice and fast. A SSD would make it that much better. I would say if you can get a deal on a 2010 go for it since the 10s have a better graphics card.
 
The difference in graphics intensive performance is small (unless you need opencl support), the difference in CPU performance is huge.

The i5 / i7 are an order of magnitude better than a C2D in any CPU dependant application. I don't understand people clinging to the 2010 model on the basis they hate intel GPUs. It's not that bad, and the new CPU more than makes up for it.
 
Heavertron said:
The difference in graphics intensive performance is small (unless you need opencl support), the difference in CPU performance is huge.

The i5 / i7 are an order of magnitude better than a C2D in any CPU dependant application. I don't understand people clinging to the 2010 model on the basis they hate intel GPUs. It's not that bad, and the new CPU more than makes up for it.
Click to expand...

With an SSD in the 2010 2.4GHz wouldn't the speed of rendering video be comparable if not faster then a 2011 2.3GHz with a stock HDD?
 
Here is the BEST advice for you.

Go to www.microcenter.com (I hope you have one close by); print out their ad for 13" MBP for $999; go to Apple store and they will match it. That's what I did a few days ago ;)
 
If you plan to buy a MBP at local Apple store then you won't see 2010 MBP they only sell 2011 MBP. If you really want a 2010 MBP..try look at eBay or Craigslist.
 
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