Core 2 Duo vs Core I5 vs Core I7 ?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by GuillaumeB, Nov 1, 2011.

  1. GuillaumeB macrumors 6502


    Jul 4, 2007
    Just behind you
    As I intend to get a new Macbook Pro or MacBook Air, I was wondering if anyone can tell how my current 2,53 GHz Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro compares in terms of CPU performances. What would be the equivalent Intel Core I5 or Core I7 processor speed ?
  2. Hellhammer Moderator


    Staff Member

    Dec 10, 2008
    It's complicated because i5 and i7s have Turbo Boost and Hyper-Threading. I would say even the slowest MBA should be on-par or faster than your C2D.
  3. dusk007 macrumors 68040


    Dec 5, 2009
  4. GuillaumeB thread starter macrumors 6502


    Jul 4, 2007
    Just behind you
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

    Thanks for tour answers I do appreciate
  5. GuitarG20, Nov 1, 2011
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2011

    GuitarG20 macrumors 65816


    Jun 3, 2011
    Just about anything from the Corei(5,7) series can outgun a Core2 series CPU.

    Some of them are ridiculously more powerful. If you want numbers to look at, you can compare the Geekbench results and look at the CPU listed for each computer. IIRC, geekbench mostly looks at CPU power.
  6. DoctorOwl macrumors newbie

    Oct 10, 2009
    I was researching my mid-2009 MBP with C2D 2.26 lately vs current models. The current lowest 13" MBP is faster by a factor of ~1.3, and the lowest 15" is faster by a factor of 3 (i.e. due to quad core).
  7. Fredvs79 macrumors newbie

    Feb 24, 2012
    Wow, that is pretty impressive. Thanks for those links. I also have a late '09 2.53Ghz macbook pro 15". Just about everything (except an iPad) leaves it in the dust these days. I'm not sure how a MacBook Air will stand up with an Apple A6 chip in it though (if Apple does go that route in the future), but I have one thing to mention...

    As a research student, I do heavy simulations with matlab, and that uses the CPU. I also do some video conversions (one format to another) with handbrake so that things I find online play nice with my AppleTV/iPhone/etc, and that takes up CPU power.... But other than those two times, which account for maybe 2% of my total usage time, the 2.53 dual core is plenty capable.

    Personally, since my hardware made the cut for mountain lion, I'll be sticking with it. Until it fails to make the supported upgrade cut, short of Apple supporting USB 3.0 ports (unlikely since they're pushing Thunderbolt), higher def screens, or better battery life I'm not enticed to buy a new laptop.

    Also, I'm curious, does software have to be specifically written to take advantage of Turbo boost and multithreading, or does the OS take care of that? What sort of tasks do you find your increased CPU power benefits you?
  8. throAU macrumors 603


    Feb 13, 2012
    Perth, Western Australia
    The core I series are a massive jump from the Core 2. Even a dual-core i3 is as fast as a middle range core 2 quad at a lot of things.

    Turbo boost is an automatic thing - if the CPU temp is below a certain threshold, the machine will up-clock if it is busy (to try and get the work done faster if it is a temporary spike in load) until the temp gets hot and then automatically clock back down to normal.

    An ARM cpu in an MBA would be plenty for what a lot of people use their computers for (just web, email - content consumption). But if you are creating content, you'll need more power than that - at least until ARM goes 64 bit, and a lot more cores.
  9. jekyoo macrumors 6502

    Sep 11, 2007

    This is pretty old and compared the early 2011 models but this will give you an idea of the performance of the sandy bridge processors. The performance difference from the c2d is significant.

Share This Page