C2D vs i5/i7 for music production.

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by thenitekat, Aug 16, 2010.

  1. thenitekat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    #1
    I hope this conversation hasnt come up, cos I did do a search for it.

    I mainly use my MBP for music production, running Logic 9 with one or 2 other soft synths. I was going thinking about getting a new 13" MBP but upgrading to the C2D 2.66 and the HD to 500G. I was wondering whether the 15" i5/i7 would provide any real benefits to me for what I mainly use it for, i.e. recording/producing music.

    Almost all of the apple docs and threads relating to the new to new processors seem to concentrate on graphics, and visual stuff...

    i appreciate that the 13" will be limiting my screen real estate...but ill be travelling extensively but when in the studio can always connect up to a monitor.

    thanks
     
  2. revelated macrumors 6502a

    revelated

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    #2
    What I found with my old 13" is that every now and then the songs with multiple threads or custom edits would frequently "stutter" which obviously was unacceptable, also the fan would come on quite handly. I have yet to experience that phenomenon on either the 15" that I recently sold (2010) or my 17", both of which of course are i5.

    I sincerely believe that the i5/i7 would be better equipped for music production. The 13" can do it, but in my opinion, music editing is right at the pinnacle of what it can deal with.
     
  3. CTrav86 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010
    Location:
    Kalamazoo, MI
    #3
    I'm also into music production, and personally when I upgrade very soon I'm going with the i7 (I'm just trying to decide between the 15" and 17"). Sure, the C2D will do what you need it to do, as there are many people recording with these machines right now. However, don't quote me on this, but I'm pretty sure Logic 9 can take advantage of the hyperthreading of the i5 and i7, which would mean that Logic would see 4 virtual cores as opposed to just the 2 physical cores of the C2D.

    The reason I'm going for the i7 is that it will most likely do what I need it to do for a longer period of time than an i5. I'm still running a PBG4 and, well, it's not really much good for recording anymore; the processor is too slow and the ram is insufficient. But, then again, it is 6 years old, and recording software has come a long way in those 6 years.

    As far as benefits you'd likely see from at least an i5 would be the ability to run more plug-ins, softsynths, effects, and tracks simultaneously, as well as having faster track bounce times.
    The 15 is still a very portable machine, and working with DAW's screen real estate is quite important. I'd suggest that if you went with the 15, upgrade the screen to the High-Res (or High-Res Anti-Glare, which is what I'd do since I hate glare/gloss/glass screens).

    Hope this helps a bit. Cheers.
     
  4. thenitekat thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    #4
    thanks guys for that info. Its definitely making me lean towards the 15" i5 ill go check them out tomorrow.

    cTrav86 - u mentioned you are deciding between a 15 vs 17", and i know theres alot of differring opinions on this site, but i had a 17" 2008 MCB, ran great but i must admit the size was a bit restrictive. carrying around was a tad heavy, i found a bit too big to try and make edits in transit (i.e. in a plane or train), and even sometimes in a studio there just seemed to be no room to put it down!...it started to become a bit restrictive. obviously no problems if your not carrying it around.
     
  5. revelated macrumors 6502a

    revelated

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    #5
    I am fairly certain the 2009 and 2010 MBP is thinner, but for plane/train, lean towards the 15.
     
  6. Gabriel GR macrumors 6502a

    Gabriel GR

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2009
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    #6
    I'd spend the price different on a quality firewire interface with powerful DSP's. IMO it matters more than the computer itself.
     

Share This Page