Apple store recommended i7 not i5 if adding Windows in parallels - any advice?

[ZBoater]

Finally, the correct answer.

Ummm, I don't think so.

If you are running Windows in a VM environment, get the fastest, most capable machine you can get. So sorry guys, i7 > i5. Period. There is a reason Intel makes two flavors, and it just isn't about heat and battery life for them - its about performance. The only reason to get an i5 is because you want to save some dollars. And only you know whether the $100 is worth it to YOU. For some people it may not be worth it. For others, we'd rather get the fastest machine possible so we are not left wondering what could have been but will never be...

 

[jdechko]

With the current VM-solutions on Mac OS X, you cannot use VT-d on Sandy Bridge CPUs, but you can use the EPTs (Extended Page Tables) on all Sandy Bridge CPUs, which makes the memory management within VMs much faster.

Well, I did say that neither Parallels nor Fusion had implemented support for those features (being VT-d). I was just too lazy to look up my references in the supporting thread.

 

[2IS]

Before the 2011 MBA was the 2010 MBA. People ran and still do run Windows in parallels on those just fine. And that's a Core 2 Duo. You certainly don't need an i7.

i7 is more powerful than i5, there is no question about that. Whether it's better or not is a completely different matter depending on the user. For my sake, the better battery life of the i5 is more important that the power of the i7

 

[bill-p]

Any particular reason why Win XP shouldn't be used instead?

From my experience, in a VM, Windows XP is considerably much faster and less resource-hungry than 7. I can run XP with only 128MB of allocated RAM and can still run most office applications, browsers, etc just fine.

Unless of course the application you are trying to run requires Windows 7...

 

[fa.ce]

Are we absolutely sure that battery life and heat fan are different in i7 and i5 and that i5 has better battery and minus fan operations?

 

[ZBoater]

For my sake, the better battery life of the i5 is more important that the power of the i7

And on what do you base the comment that the i5 provides better battery life? Am I misreading these results?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4554/apples-11inch-macbook-air-core-i7-18ghz-review-update/5

----------

Are we absolutely sure that battery life and heat fan are different in i7 and i5 and that i5 has better battery and minus fan operations?

No, we are not.

----------

Any particular reason why Win XP shouldn't be used instead?

From my experience, in a VM, Windows XP is considerably much faster and less resource-hungry than 7. I can run XP with only 128MB of allocated RAM and can still run most office applications, browsers, etc just fine.

Unless of course the application you are trying to run requires Windows 7...

No, no reason. I have both VMs, and Windows 7 runs very smoothly as just as fast as my XP VM. I do however have 1GB of RAM allocated.

 

[raftr]

When informed it's for web design and development, Apple staff always told me while I could do with the 15" Pro I actually needed the 17" Pro as it was "more powerful and better suited for graphic design". Anything less than a Pro was out of the question.

I was doing perfectly fine using a plastic MacBook plugged into a monitor at the time.

I was looking at the new Air at the store recently. When I said it was for graphic design, I was suggested "at least the 13" Pro".

One Apple salesman though, a few months ago, when I told him I was holding out for the new rumoured Sandy Bridge Airs, lowered his voice and said "me too!"