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

Another Look at Apple's Core 2 Duo Choice for New 13-Inch MacBook Pro

tlinford said:
Why do people keep comparing the MBP 13 to the Vaio Z!? It's much more expensive (in the UK it is at anyrate).... The MBP provides the right cost/lightness/robustness and performance out there...!!! It does for mobile (pro, not playing games) pro work at any rate!

The Vaio ships with SSD, Apple have backed off pushing SSD because people think they cost too much... Did anyone else notice how the Original Hatched Battery Uni Body has a faster HD controller the next gen... this was because so few people wanted to pay the extra cash, so it wasn't worth putting in an over-specified disk controller chip!

I which people thought less with their dangly bits!
Click to expand...
The funny thing is, when confronted with the same argument, we Mac users are used to justify the higher priced Macs for having more features. Same thing applies here. When you start configuring the 13" MBP with SSD and the 13" Vaio Z, the Vaio Z is only a couple hundred dollars more expensive, considering it has Core i5 and much higher res screen (and a discrete GPU to boot). Looking at the specs, let's just admit that Sony did a good job with the Z. Give credit where it's due.
There there's a question about the Core 2 CPUs used on the 13" MBP. The ones that are used are the same CPUs used for the 2008 15" MBP. I mean there are better and faster Core 2 CPUs today (eg. the ones with 6MB L2 cache and same TDP) but Apple opted for the older ones with only 3MB L2. :confused:
 
scotteh said:
The only thing I am worried about is the lack of a discrete GPU. I am going to be a graphic design major, and I enjoy a few games from time to time (Crysis, Americas Army) and I just dont know if it's even possible to make happen. It's really the only macbook pro in our budget. Or maybe I need to do some serious begging.
Click to expand...

My major is Graphic Arts and I got to tell you.. the absolute best expendeture is more ram and an ssd. It is truly amazing how responsive Adobe is, even on my 2ghz c2d. I upgraded to 4gb of crucial ram and threw in an intel x25. Photoshop is now _fun_ to work with. I usually work with 10 megapixel+ photos as well as digital art with 50+ layers. I love it now. Illustrator and indesign are great too. The SSD totally rocks these programs.

I would like to add that a 23" 1080p monitor is also useful.. : )
 
pika2000 said:
The funny thing is, when confronted with the same argument, we Mac users are used to justify the higher priced Macs for having more features. Same thing applies here. When you start configuring the 13" MBP with SSD and the 13" Vaio Z, the Vaio Z is only a couple hundred dollars more expensive, considering it has Core i5 and much higher res screen (and a discrete GPU to boot). Looking at the specs, let's just admit that Sony did a good job with the Z. Give credit where it's due.
There there's a question about the Core 2 CPUs used on the 13" MBP. The ones that are used are the same CPUs used for the 2008 15" MBP. I mean there are better and faster Core 2 CPUs today (eg. the ones with 6MB L2 cache and same TDP) but Apple opted for the older ones with only 3MB L2. :confused:
Click to expand...

In the UK the price difference is higher than £200, more like $450, once you apply the Apple education discount, even more $600-$650..

The i5/i7, probably need to settle down a bit before Apple jump in fully...?

Sometimes, a wee while needs to go by before we realise we've got a classic in our hands and I wonder with intel licensing issues, if this 2 Core Duo will be thought of as a classic.... sometimes less is more! :rolleyes:

The faster i5/i7 processors are still going to be held back by HD access speeds. frontside Bus.. bah blah ... I am really struggling to see what the i5/i7 processor is going to give me more than I've got ( I don't get a thrill from just running Geek Bench).... I love the sound of a 10 hour battery. could work all day and into the the evening... must be the Scottish Work-Ethic in me! ;)

One of the reasons I opted for Mac over PC, after working in IT support, where colleagues, would remortgage their houses every 6 months to build a new Gaming tower because their tech wasn't the latest... I thought the Apple community was about what you did with your tech, not how big it was? :cool: how many lights are on it? I would get a HotRod is that''s what I was after!
 
I'm using a Pentium Centrino 1.8GHZ HP laptop right now with Windows 7.

It works very well for Surfing, Browsing, Emailing, Photoviewings, Pictures, Blogging, and videos.

I'm replacing it because of some other issues.
--I've dropped it a few times and now if I move it awkwardly the entire system just crashes.
--Originally battery use to last 7 hours, now it's close to 3 hours.

It has lasted me 4 years without any problems which weren't my own doing.

Now I'm sure the 13" MBP with it's C2D will be just fine.
The only thing my HP can't do right now is play 1080p files smoothly for a full 2 hours.

So for most users who want a portable computer, I think this one will be just fine. Don't worry about the C2D vs iCore. Get this one before Apple is forced by Intel to change to the i3 or something with less battery, lesser graphics card and lower battery life.
Engadget already has an article up which talks about i7s hitting 100degrees celius.
Idea of a portable computer is to have great battery life which this does!


This would easily last me for the full East to West flight! Toronto to LA!
 
pika2000 said:
Err, yes, that's what I said, that you need 64bit apps for the apps (them) to utilize the extra RAM.
Click to expand...

That's not what you said. MacBook 1 has 4 GB, MacBook 2 has 8 GB. You have four 32-bit apps that each need 2 GB. On MacBook 1, two apps run easily, with the third and fourth app your Mac uses virtual memory like crazy because it doesn't have enough RAM and everything slows down. On MacBook 2, all four apps can run simultaneously, each using 2 GB of RAM, using all 8 GB that you have. So you are actually using 8 GB of RAM with not one 64 bit app in sight.
 
gnasher729 said:
That's not what you said. MacBook 1 has 4 GB, MacBook 2 has 8 GB. You have four 32-bit apps that each need 2 GB. On MacBook 1, two apps run easily, with the third and fourth app your Mac uses virtual memory like crazy because it doesn't have enough RAM and everything slows down. On MacBook 2, all four apps can run simultaneously, each using 2 GB of RAM, using all 8 GB that you have. So you are actually using 8 GB of RAM with not one 64 bit app in sight.
Click to expand...

Now i'm not computer genius, but I was under the impression that you need to run a 64-bit OS in order for your computer to recognize anything more than 4GB of RAM...

Not sure about Apps themselves...
 
Another reason for the use of C2D's was the watt usage. The 13" MBP has always used 25 watt processors, the only of which that are available are Penryn. The highest clocked 25 watt processor is the 2.66 Penryn chip. The i3 currently uses 35 watts so until Sandy Bridge comes out next year you won't be seeing any i processors in the 13" MBP, MacBook or Mac Mini. Not like it matters because the lower clocked 2.13 GHz i3 is equivalent to the 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo and the higher clocked 2.26 i3 is equivalent to the 2.66 GHz Core 2 Duo. But people will just complain to complain just because there is no i in their About This Mac.

Also for these people complaining did you know that Intel plans on rebranding some Core 2 Duo's as i3?
 
Eric S. said:
I'm not sure I believe anything that says. For one thing it's from last June. And it claims that Arrandale will be branded i3 (it's i3/i5/i7), Clarkdale will be i7 (it's i3/i5), and Gulftown will be i9 (it's i7 Extreme, and there is no i9). So I'd be surprised if everything else was right.
Click to expand...

Well, you can either ignore the entire thing simply because they got a couple of non-disclosed names incorrect or you can actually see past the fact that a couple of names are wrong and see that every technical aspect in the report was true.
 
aiqw9182 said:
Well, you can either ignore the entire thing simply because they got a couple of non-disclosed names incorrect or you can actually see past the fact that a couple of names are wrong and that every technical aspect in the report was true.
Click to expand...

Well it says that some C2D processors "may" be rebranded i3. Is there anything more recent than 10 months old with more definite information? Otherwise I do ignore the entire thing. It got more than a couple names wrong. It got almost all of the names wrong that hadn't already been released.
 
Eric S. said:
Well it says that some C2D processors "may" be rebranded i3. Is there anything more recent than 8 months old with more definite information? Otherwise I do ignore the entire thing.
Click to expand...

Considering the fact that every other piece of technical information has been correct in that article I don't see why you would need any other source of information to believe this. I found the article on Wikipedia so if you want to do some more digging around then be my guest.

Also here's the chart straight from Intel if you still don't want to believe this:
http://img.inpai.com.cn/article/2009/6/19/641ad8ab-8dad-4c1f-944d-a26a9d1323ae.jpg

Eric S. said:
It got more than a couple names wrong. It got almost all of the names wrong that hadn't already been released.
Click to expand...
And again, none of those names were disclosed at the time so I fail to see how this counteracts any of the technical info that was correct.
 
aiqw9182 said:
Considering the fact that every other piece of technical information has been correct in that article I don't see why you would need any other source of information to believe this. I found the article on Wikipedia so if you want to do some more digging around then be my guest.

Also here's a chart straight from Intel if you don't want to believe this:
http://www.inpai.com.cn/doc/pic.asp...d8ab-8dad-4c1f-944d-a26a9d1323ae.jpg&id=99368
Click to expand...
Your Wikipedia article leads us in a circle.

I had heard rumors last year that Core 2 would be rebranded but nothing has come of it to this date and I don't expect it to do so.
 
Eidorian said:
Your Wikipedia article leads us in a circle.

I had heard rumors last year that Core 2 would be rebranded but nothing has come of it to this date and I don't expect it to do so.
Click to expand...

I know it leads back to the same article. I was simply stating that's where I found it. Also Core 2 still hasn't been discontinued yet, so we won't see anything until 2011 when it IS discontinued and likely rebranded.
 
aiqw9182 said:
Considering the fact that every other piece of technical information has been correct in that article I don't see why you would need any other source of information to believe this.
Click to expand...

But what we're talking about is brand names, not technical specs. If this article gets wrong most of the information on branding that we can check, why should we believe something that even it isn't certain about, since it uses the word "may."

Your original post said "Intel plans on rebranding some Core 2 Duo's as i3" as if it were definite. Even in this article it seems just speculation, which is why a more definite (and recent) account would be required.
 
Eric S. said:
But what we're talking about is brand names, not technical specs. If this article gets wrong most of the information on branding that we can check, why should we believe something that even it isn't certain about, since it uses the word "may."

Your original post said "Intel plans on rebranding some Core 2 Duo's as i3" as if it were definite. Even in this article it seems just speculation, which is why a more definite (and recent) account would be required.
Click to expand...
Did you check the source from the article I linked you to? The word "may" was simply added by the journalist. The entire article was just commenting on a chart from Intel. In that article it may seem like speculation but the fact that the entire article was written based on a chart throws all of that out of the window.
 
I think the 13-inch with a 10-hour battery and a 2.66 C2D is a damn nice machine. The graphics are pretty good and for people that travel a lot, this machine is ideal.
 
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