2011 MBP 17" vs. iMac ICD (Early 2006)

[5683565]

So I've noticed something with my Early 2011 MacBook Pro. It's the 17" model, and it's got 8GB RAM.

Well, my old iMac, the original intel core duo model, kicks my MBP's ass in booting in both Windows 7 Ultimate and Mac OS X.

Has anyone else noticed sub-par performance with their new MBPs?

 

[miles01110]

Wouldn't the performance be "over-par", since "sub-par" is technically better?

 

[5683565]

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/subpar

 

[yusukeaoki]

Intel Core Duo vs Intel Core i7 Quad mobile?
I dont think so

 

[johnnyturbouk]

Intel Core Duo vs Intel Core i7 Quad mobile?
I dont think so

lol agrees

Please tell me that you do not have an SSD in the imac, and a 5400 HDD in the MBP

 

[shardey]

So I've noticed something with my Early 2011 MacBook Pro. It's the 17" model, and it's got 8GB RAM.

Well, my old iMac, the original intel core duo model, kicks my MBP's ass in booting in both Windows 7 Ultimate and Mac OS X.

Has anyone else noticed sub-par performance with their new MBPs?

Unless you have a ssd in the macbook pro, the iMac will win since it has the 3.5 7200 vs the stock 750gb 5400 rpm in the mbp.

 

[Dwalls90]

This isn't surprising to me. I have a feeling your MBP has a 5400 RPM drive, where as the iMac has a 7200 RPM drive. Boot times are based on hard drives and that's more or less it (maybe RAM a bit too)

 

[5683565]

Ah ok fair enough! The MacBook Pro 17" has the standard 750GB drive, whereas the iMac has a 1TB 7200 rpm drive (swapped it out last year).

Still though, you'd think that all the other advantages in the MBP would help it out a little... sheesh.