C2D outdated ?

Not outdated at all. I'm still running my almost 3-year old MBP with a C2D. It does everything I need and is just as fast as it was day one. I can't think of anything you can't do with a C2D that you could do with a newer model.

 

Realistically speaking the C2D is a fine processor. The i3 has very little, if any improvement over C2D, and even the current dual core i5's and i7's only have something like a 20% increase in performance. Unless you're doing video encodes, you'll probably be fine for a C2D for quite a while. Plus, with the C2D, you get to use decent integrated Nvidia 320m graphics, vs Arrandale's POS Intel HD graphics.

 

My late 2009 iMac has an Intel C2D at 3.06ghz and it feels FAST AS HELL.

Even when compared to my friends hex-core AMD gpu gaming computer.

Two fast clocked cores can't do too badly at most day to day things.

 

The 2.4ghz core 2 duo has a benchmark of 1378. The similarly clocked i3 has a benchmark of 2227.

That isn't insignificant. It's ranked nearly twice as better in PassMark's database.

That being said, it all depends on what you will be using it for. For what you stated, you will most likely see little difference.

However a lot can change in that time. If you see yourself somewhere down the line doing something more CPU intensive, then wait. If not, go for it and enjoy your MBP!

 

My 3.5 y/o Dell has a 2.2ghz C2D.... I'd say C2D is fairly outdated.

 

It's fine.

Really, It's fine. I was going through the same issue, and called Apple a lot about it. People that are on Forums all day long, and have no life are going to tell you that it is outdated. Yes, it's an old chip, but is being put in many computers still. The reason people are saying that, is because it's kind of weird for Apple to sell an older chip.

If you look at PC's that are being sold, they still have 8 year old chips, like the pentium 1.. just a little bit upgraded. Well, the C2D is an old chip, but Apple is selling the top of the line C2D's. It's really the GHz speed that matters when you think about the requirements for programs.

The i3 chip, that's the SAME thing as the Intel Core 2 Duo, it's just a little better, but not for the actual power of the machine. All the i3 chips really do is save battery, and manage the heat better.

Also, don't get a Macbook Pro just yet, they are getting replaced by the new ones in like... a couple months or weeks, and they will likely have the i3 chips or higher, even in the 13 inch model.

 

I understand what you're saying. Let me explain a bit more. In the past, I would buy a new notebook about every 12-18 months, since newer models represented significant performance boosts over earlier models. In recent years, and especially since moving to Macs, the performance differences from one model to the next have been much smaller. While a brand new MBP might seem a bit faster, it would only be a bit. Besides, for most users, the processor has less of an impact on performance than RAM and SSD would.

My 3 year old C2D with 4GB of RAM and an SSD would run circles around a new i7 with 2GB RAM and a hard drive, in most cases.

 

Yeah,

Yeah, dude these people are telling the truth. The Core 2 Duo isn't the only thing that depends on the computers speed. It also GREATLY depends on the amount of RAM, and it's speed. As well as the GHz speed.

 

That is extremely misleading. Maybe that was true seven or ten years ago but it's hardly the case now. I'm running a single core celeron clocked at 2.2ghz in my current laptop. Compare it to any similarly clocked Duo or i3 and it would be blown out of the water.

Even between two core CPU's there is going to be a significant difference, when fully utilized, between different types / iterations of CPUs.

This is where my earlier comment, and what I think a majority of you mean, kicks in however. In that most people aren't going to commonly fully tax their CPU and thus won't entirely (if at all) see that difference.

I'm by no means an expert in this area, but something tells me if the iPhone itself can handle basic editing of it's HD video then it wouldn't be comparable to, for instance, editing professional grade HD Video. Not to mention that Video/Photo editing is often times GPU/RAM/HDD (or SSD) taxing rather than CPU.

 

not many

 

I would say that the Core 2 Duo is not terribly out of date though it is on its way out as far as I see it. I see no problem keeping it in refurbished models though it's time to send it packing in the new ones.

 

I would love for you to show me an in-market computer sporting a Pentium I chip. I'll give the benefit of the doubt that you misunderstood what the Pentium I was, but still, the oldest "Pentium" processor that is in current notebooks would likely be the Wolfdale based ones, which were released in 2008.

Someone already called you on the GHZ thing so I won't touch that.

In general, the C2D is 'fine' right now. 3 years from now it should still be 'ok', but it will show its age as we get newer web rendering engines and applications. The one good thing is, games show processor age, and any C2D equipped macbook isn't really a formidable gaming rig, so most non-gaming programs for the foreseeable future should run fine.

The C2D is still appearing in many entry-level notebooks, but I think the reason people have such a problem with it in the MBP is due to the fact that it is NOT an entry level notebook (at least not when it comes to price-point.)

 

Unless you're rendering or encoding, I doubt you'd see a difference in anything nowadays. Well, it might affect boot times and application launch times JUST a little bit, but drive speed affects that a lot more.

 

This better illustrates what I'm trying to explain.

 

It's fine for all of my use except audio production. I can mix sessions with little trouble at a 1024 buffer size, but forget recording tracks when my session starts to get to a moderate size while still keeping the buffer low. I get CPU buffer errors like crazy. Drives me mad.

That's why the 2.4GHz C2D is going and the i7 2.93GHz Quad iMac is on it's way to my house.

 

Maybe a minute difference here or there with HandBrake or a similar program. Nothing major. Also, the C2D that is in the current models is a generation newer than the 06 models. While some stuff can be pretty taxing on the CPU, it seems like the updates are getting less significant, unless you are changing the amount of cores. I don't see C2D being obsolete any time soon, even though they are a few years old.

 

There is an appreciable speed difference between my brother's i5 MBP and my older C2D one running at the same 2.4ghz. Just because it works fine doesn't mean we have to put up with it while the rest of the industry moves ahead. If it works for you right now that's great but why resist a change that only makes things better for you? When I rip and encode DVDs for archiving, my C2D runs at 100% for 10-14h. Being able to knock a few hours off with a better processor would be huge and this is an advantage that will be present in all aspects of computing, just to varying extrents.

The "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" attitude would have left us stuck with PowerPC G4s.

 

Sure, C2D isn't outdated
But you'll shoot yourself in the foot if Apple included a larger battery, standard flash storage, and newer faster ram in this upcoming refresh

 

Thank goodness someone said it. Why in the world would I buy a brand new computer for over $1000 with a processor that is comparable to the 2.0 GHz Core 2 Duo in my current Dell Latitude D830? Are you kidding me? Just because a processor will "get me by" doesn't mean that I shouldn't have the choice to buy the latest and greatest in a 13" laptop. Come on now.

 

I seriously doubt they will include standard flash in upcoming MBP. Will MBP users be okay with 64GB or 128GB storage?

Even base MBP start off with 250GB HDD and people scream for more storage on MBP. SSD will be most likely be an option.

I do see screen resolution going up.
I do see HDD and optical drive will go away, eventually.
I am just not sure all of these features will happen with next MBP.