Core 2 Duo vs. i7

anti-win

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Feb 5, 2006
17
0
Now, let me start out by saying that I am not taking the side of HP, Microsoft or other companies for that matter. I am simply puzzled by the lack of improvements Apple has shown to this product line.

Example, Best Buy flying has a.....

HP 17.3" 16:9 Widescreen laptop with Intel Core i7-7200QM QW Quad Core Processor, Windows 7 Premium, 6GB DDR3 Ram, 500GB 7200rpm HDD, NVIDIA GT 230M with 1GB dedicated memory along with wireless N, webcam/mic...

Forrrrr only $1299!!

Best buy slaps that ad right next to Apples 17" MacBook Pro ad for $2499.

Now don't get me wrong, you do get a lot with Apple, their software is untouchable. The quality of the physical laptop is best in class. I'm not here to fight over that. But when you've got a laptop from HP that is decked out in the best of the best for 2009, how can Apple stand up to that?!

The MacBook Pro only has 256gb dedicated graphics... it simply does't stack up.

What do you guys think, is Apple really going to ride this out until 2010? I can't imagine them doing this with new quad core processors out.
 

chrisrottan

macrumors member
Oct 23, 2009
77
0
Now, let me start out by saying that I am not taking the side of HP, Microsoft or other companies for that matter. I am simply puzzled by the lack of improvements Apple has shown to this product line.

Example, Best Buy flying has a.....

HP 17.3" 16:9 Widescreen laptop with Intel Core i7-7200QM QW Quad Core Processor, Windows 7 Premium, 6GB DDR3 Ram, 500GB 7200rpm HDD, NVIDIA GT 230M with 1GB dedicated memory along with wireless N, webcam/mic...

Forrrrr only $1299!!

Best buy slaps that ad right next to Apples 17" MacBook Pro ad for $2499.

Now don't get me wrong, you do get a lot with Apple, their software is untouchable. The quality of the physical laptop is best in class. I'm not here to fight over that. But when you've got a laptop from HP that is decked out in the best of the best for 2009, how can Apple stand up to that?!

The MacBook Pro only has 256gb dedicated graphics... it simply does't stack up.

What do you guys think, is Apple really going to ride this out until 2010? I can't imagine them doing this with new quad core processors out.
They would keep it as it is as most apple computer boughts are loyal customers who will buy whatever apple throws at them. However, if sales decline steeply, then apple might have additional upgrades to their line-up. That's pure economics.
 

nOw2

macrumors regular
Sep 1, 2009
167
2
I took a closer look at the HP and a number of anti-features stood out, such as the battery life and physical size.
 

joina

macrumors member
Oct 24, 2009
56
0
Bath,uk
I think HP ENVY is the one which can compare with mbp. The 15" one is way better than the best mbp in anyway but i just dont like the "fake mbp" looking
 

barkomatic

macrumors 601
Aug 8, 2008
4,108
1,871
Manhattan
Sad but true. You'll see thread after thread speculating about when Core i5 or i7 will make it to the MBP--when its already been released everywhere else. To add insult to injury, many of those machines have blu-ray and are cheaper. Yet, Apple is having no problems selling tons of computers.

Why? Apple is great at taking existing or even outdated technology and re-imagining it in ways that make it so much more usable and then presenting it in an aesthetically pleasing form.

When Apple does finally incorporate these technologies, you can bet their version will be much better, but sadly the extra engineering takes more time than a plastic PC company that quickly churns out computers with advanced components with very poor engineering.
 

chrisrottan

macrumors member
Oct 23, 2009
77
0
Sad but true. You'll see thread after thread speculating about when Core i5 or i7 will make it to the MBP--when its already been released everywhere else. To add insult to injury, many of those machines have blu-ray and are cheaper. Yet, Apple is having no problems selling tons of computers.

Why? Apple is great at taking existing or even outdated technology and re-imagining it in ways that make it so much more usable and then presenting it in an aesthetically pleasing form.
Yet we keep buying them.

When Apple does finally incorporate these technologies, you can bet their version will be much better, but sadly the extra engineering takes more time than a plastic PC company that quickly churns out computers with advanced components with very poor engineering.
Yeah but that's because molding of plastics comes at a cheaper price and a more pleasant look.
 

pacers721

macrumors member
Jul 30, 2008
61
0
a lot of people agree that apple is waiting for the new arrandale cpu which isn't going to be released until january. Considering apple only updates the mbps every 4-6 months, its better if they wait till january to update rather than update now w/o arrandale.
 

chrisrottan

macrumors member
Oct 23, 2009
77
0
a lot of people agree that apple is waiting for the new arrandale cpu which isn't going to be released until january. Considering apple only updates the mbps every 4-6 months, its better if they wait till january to update rather than update now w/o arrandale.
Alot of people like who? Your uncle, his friend's uncle and his friend's friend's gf's son who knows a guy who knows another guy who knows a girl who heard apple is waiting for the new arrandale cpu?

Truth of the matter is, that if you will see new technology, you will see them in the mac pro and the imac's.
Macbook pro's would probably get the i5's.
 

js81

macrumors 65816
Dec 31, 2008
1,199
16
KY
Twice as thick, a full pound heavier, plastic, Windows, no iLife, no multitouch, no bluetooth... but hey, its got a MODEM! :D Oh, and not to mention, that snazzy i7 processor runs at all of 1.6GHz! Wahoo! (The standard 17" MBP is 2.8 BTW) And some sneakin' suspicion of mine tells me no 8 hour battery life, either...

I don't really see the comparison here... save for the $$ vs. $$$$. (And all Mac-heads know you get what you pay for, right? :D)

EDIT: AHHHH! Missed one... 1600x900 screen... lol.
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,085
290
Indianapolis
Twice as thick, a full pound heavier, plastic, Windows, no iLife, no multitouch, no bluetooth... but hey, its got a MODEM! :D Oh, and not to mention, that snazzy i7 processor runs at all of 1.6GHz! Wahoo! (The standard 17" MBP is 2.8 BTW) And some sneakin' suspicion of mine tells me no 8 hour battery life, either...

I don't really see the comparison here... save for the $$ vs. $$$$. (And all Mac-heads know you get what you pay for, right? :D)

EDIT: AHHHH! Missed one... 1600x900 screen... lol.
Please go on about your clock speed comparison between Penryn and Clarksfield...
 

Kennedy

macrumors member
Feb 17, 2009
46
0
Twice as thick, a full pound heavier, plastic, Windows, no iLife, no multitouch, no bluetooth... but hey, its got a MODEM! :D Oh, and not to mention, that snazzy i7 processor runs at all of 1.6GHz! Wahoo! (The standard 17" MBP is 2.8 BTW) And some sneakin' suspicion of mine tells me no 8 hour battery life, either...

I don't really see the comparison here... save for the $$ vs. $$$$. (And all Mac-heads know you get what you pay for, right? :D)

EDIT: AHHHH! Missed one... 1600x900 screen... lol.
4 cores at 1.6GHz is more powerful than 2 cores at 2.8Ghz, and I'm pretty sure the i7 has hyperthreading, which makes it a virtual 8 core processor. Apple loses that one, except that the Core 2 Duo isn't as hot.

1600x900 screen is good for a laptop, too.
 

chrisrottan

macrumors member
Oct 23, 2009
77
0
4 cores at 1.6GHz is more powerful than 2 cores at 2.8Ghz, and I'm pretty sure the i7 has hyperthreading, which makes it a virtual 8 core processor. Apple loses that one, except that the Core 2 Duo isn't as hot.

1600x900 screen is good for a laptop, too.
And the fact that you don't need a front bus as a bridge to process memory but instead it goes directly.
That's why you dont need high speeds in processors.
 

iMacmatician

macrumors 601
Jul 20, 2008
4,249
55
4 cores at 1.6GHz is more powerful than 2 cores at 2.8Ghz, and I'm pretty sure the i7 has hyperthreading, which makes it a virtual 8 core processor. Apple loses that one, except that the Core 2 Duo isn't as hot.
Don't forget Turbo Boost (2.8 GHz for 1 core).
 

darkdream

macrumors member
Jun 25, 2009
66
0
1 GB for a videocard in a laptop kills the battery fast (my alienware m17x with 2 GB video ram is basically useless without and outlet) and the mainstream apple user isn't a gamer nor is there a need for all that clock speed really, but would be nice if it didn't come at a cost of higher energy consumption...
 

combine

macrumors newbie
Jul 22, 2009
24
0
those laptops produced by HP, Dell "alienware series" are mainly to be used as a desktop replacement. Whereas Apple's laptop are meant to be what they are used for.

They are built for mobility with longer battery life and smaller footprints. If they(dell,hp etc..) could come out with a laptop with better specs, same/longer battery life and the apple form factor. I'm sold. Although OS X is still a big win compared to Windows ;)
 

chrisrottan

macrumors member
Oct 23, 2009
77
0
those laptops produced by HP, Dell "alienware series" are mainly to be used as a desktop replacement. Whereas Apple's laptop are meant to be what they are used for.

They are built for mobility with longer battery life and smaller footprints. If they(dell,hp etc..) could come out with a laptop with better specs, same/longer battery life and the apple form factor. I'm sold. Although OS X is still a big win compared to Windows ;)
They already have. It's called the ENVY
Made out of magnesium
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiYz9ZpK4z0
 

kryptonianjorel

macrumors 6502
Jul 3, 2009
373
0
They already have. It's called the ENVY
Made out of magnesium
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiYz9ZpK4z0
The ENVY was a nice try, but a major fail.


Anyway, you guys do realize that arrandale hasn't been released yet, right? That the mobile version of the i7. Right now clarksfield is way too hot to throw into a MBP. The coolest one is 45W and thats before the chipset and graphics. Arrandale has graphics built in, and maxes out at 35W, and the ULV version tops out at an amazing 17W.

MBPs update in Feb. If arrandale is out by then, it'll be in the MBPs. If not, the MBPs will be announced but not released.
 

maflynn

Moderator
Staff member
May 3, 2009
66,400
33,052
Boston
Now, let me start out by saying that I am not taking the side of HP, Microsoft or other companies for that matter. I am simply puzzled by the lack of improvements Apple has shown to this product line.

Example, Best Buy flying has a.....

HP 17.3" 16:9 Widescreen laptop with Intel Core i7-7200QM QW Quad Core Processor, Windows 7 Premium, 6GB DDR3 Ram, 500GB 7200rpm HDD, NVIDIA GT 230M with 1GB dedicated memory along with wireless N, webcam/mic...

Forrrrr only $1299!!

Best buy slaps that ad right next to Apples 17" MacBook Pro ad for $2499.

Now don't get me wrong, you do get a lot with Apple, their software is untouchable. The quality of the physical laptop is best in class. I'm not here to fight over that. But when you've got a laptop from HP that is decked out in the best of the best for 2009, how can Apple stand up to that?!

The MacBook Pro only has 256gb dedicated graphics... it simply does't stack up.
Agreed and as bad as the issue with dealing with the apple premium has been, now you're paying more $$ for less computer.

Not much we can do about it, as consumers, we are at the mercy of a corporation. Its apple who loses out.
 

copykris

Suspended
Sep 25, 2009
615
157
home
here's something crazy: you are absolutely free to choose any brand you damn well please over apple if you don't like what they are offering

wrap your head around that concept
 

Davidkoh

macrumors 65816
Aug 2, 2008
1,059
18
They already have. It's called the ENVY
Made out of magnesium
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiYz9ZpK4z0
http://asia.cnet.com/reviews/notebooks/0,39050488,45073846p,00.htm

lol, Envy sucks. 179 minutes of video playback on battery, the 13" MBP gets 342 in the same test. I wonder what I would choose ;)

That's the problem with like all the PCs, they either got alot of power or bad battery life. I haven't yet seen a PC that matched the MBP 13" in size, weight, performance and battery life for a lower price. And then we are not counting in the aluminium feel, backlit keyboard and such. Just the normal hardware all computers uses.

Please show me 1 PC that can offer same performance (both CPU wise and battery wise) in the same weight and size category for a "much lower price". I've yet to see one ;)
 

maflynn

Moderator
Staff member
May 3, 2009
66,400
33,052
Boston
here's something crazy: you are absolutely free to choose any brand you damn well please over apple if you don't like what they are offering

wrap your head around that concept
Wow someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.