2010 Macbook Pro vs 2013 Macbook Pro

[thebmall]

I feel silly asking this question, but my old 2010 15 inch Macbook Pro had the following specs: 2.8 GHZ Intel Core i7 (dual), 8GB Ram, 256gb Solid State Hard Drive, and an NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M 512 MB.

I'd like to go to the new Retina 13 inch with the top of the line specs:
2.8GHz Dual-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.3GHz - 16GB Ram, etc.

I know these are different generations of processors, but both of these say 2.8hz Dual-Core...So would I essentially not see a difference? My apologies for my stupidity, but I'm having trouble with this!

 

[thundersteele]

I know these are different generations of processors, but both of these say 2.8hz Dual-Core...So would I essentially not see a difference? My apologies for my stupidity, but I'm having trouble with this!

The GHz numbers are completely meaningless. Within a generation usually a higher number is better, but across generations it doesn't say anything about which is faster.

You can check geekbench or look up some other benchmark scores to see how much faster the CPU is.

 

[Wuiffi]

Ghz is just not working to compare different generations.

IPC, turbo boost and a lot of other things matter too, and the late 2013 13" rMBP outperforms your 2010 one by about 40% in single and multi thread performance. Furthermore it can do Airplay mirroring and other stuff the 2010 one can't do.
And then Iris is more powerful than the nvidia 330m, the PCIe SSD is faster than anything you put into your SATA 2 drives, the display is higher resolution the I/O, network and everything has improved.

Just looking at performance, the 2013 13" runs circles around your mbp.

 

[Freyqq]

You have to use benchmarks to tell the difference. GHZ is not a value that says how fast it will be at a particular task...it is only a piece of the full equation.

Anyway, it will heavily outperform the 2010.

 

[thunng8]

I know these are different generations of processors, but both of these say 2.8hz Dual-Core...So would I essentially not see a difference? My apologies for my stupidity, but I'm having trouble with this!

One datapoint is geekbench. According to geekbench

Single core 64bit
2010 15" MBP 2.8Ghz: 2365
2013 13" MBP 2.8Ghz: 3293

Multicore 64 bit:
2010 15" MBP 2.8Ghz: 4830
2013 13" MBP 2.8Ghz: 6891

So for CPU, newer mac is around 40% faster despite similar clockspeeds.

Source: http://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks

 

[dusk007]

Biggest difference is how quite it stays when doing stuff that already heats the 2010 quite a bit like 1080p flash streaming video. Battery life is a lot different.
The 2010 were released with 8-9h of battery life according to marketing.
The 2013 say 7h but in reality my old 15" 2010 lasts only half as long as the the 2013 15". The 2013 13" should last even longer.

 

[dylin]

sorry to ask, but why are you wanting to change your current macbook? I'm assuming better portability?

But in all honesty, i think the rMBP 13" has better internal hardware. The CPU is more efficient as well as a tab bit more powerful due to the has well generation CPU its holding.

On top of that you get a really nice screen thats easy on the eyes.

But what ever you choose, i hope you enjoy it