core 2 duos obsolete?

[kaydot]

Hi there,

I see a lot of posts in this thread in favor of Core2Duos, which to me, is surprising. However I am approaching this from the perspective of a 2007 Macbook, which has a C2D in it. The Macbooks of this age do not have discrete graphics.

That being the case, I would not encourage the OP to look at a C2D Macbook with Intel integrated graphics (2008 or older), since those machines I consider to be obsolete. They will have difficulty driving external displays, and mine in particular (a 2007 model with 4gigs of RAM) cannot stream HD without dropping frames. That said, it does surf the web fine and most "regular computing" tasks. However tasks, such as photoshop, do take longer and anything requiring CPU (games, HD encoding, HD Streaming) may be limited.

I believe the OP is considering Macbook Pros, but I wanted to bring some additional color to those posts recommending vanilla Macbooks.

 

[azentropy]

You could just use google's services which can do all the syncing for free as opposed to the quite expensive service from Apple. Porting is bit of a hassle but iCal/Contacts all support google's sync.

iCloud is free.
Google's service does not work with my iPad/iphone etc. native apps.

 

[bill-p]

I don't see the UI as lacking at all and nor have I seen issues on any of the other C2D machines I've looked at. Swiping between desktops, scrolling, using the launchpad and any of the other gestures display no lag. Animations are smooth, etc.

I consistently run about 4-8 tabs open in Google Chrome, Mail, iTunes, Photoshop Elements, bridge CS3 and sometimes Call of Duty 4 (I'll close PS for this).

There must be something wrong with your installs or something. Are you using a common time machine back up that could have corrupted files?

Either way, if you're speaking to your experiences, then perhaps you should mention that rather than speaking in broad sweeping statements that are not true. The fact is Lion can and should run quite well on a C2D.

And I never said that Lion doesn't run on a C2D. I'm merely saying that it runs better on a quad i7 and that it runs about the same as C2D on a dual-core i7. Perhaps I should have put it that way instead.

On a side note, all Lion installs were done cleanly from a full format. I did it once to all of the mentioned computers when 10.7 came out, and again when 10.7.1 came out, and at 10.7.2, I finally gave up.

Launchpad is especially noticeable when it's lagging, at least to me. If you think it's smooth on C2D, I suspect you'll find it even smoother on a quad i7. It has to be seen. Prior to getting a MBP with the quad i7, I wouldn't even know it was lagging and stuttering on the other machines. Honestly.

I'm with him, there is something wrong with your installs..OS's simply don't use that much CPU, programs on your computer do but the OS naaa..

If you would consider it, Lion uses a lot of fullscreen animations. Switching between apps is a fullscreen animation. Mission Control is also a fullscreen animation, and Launchpad is a fullscreen animation.

Those don't come free, and except for games, not a lot of apps use fullscreen animations.

 

[kevink2]

It is sad that at work, my computer was only recently upgraded to a Core 2 Duo Non Mac.

To me, more important than pure CPU speed, unless it is important for your usage, is maximum RAM capability. It was only the last few years that the MBPs could support more than 4GB of RAM.

 

[george-brooks]

Recently sold my Core 2 Duo Macbook Pro (mid 2009) to upgrade to a late 2011 i7 model. Sure glad I did because Final Cut, Adobe, etc. are all running faster on it even than on my 8 Core Xeon mac pro. Geekbench agrees. However, even though I needed the extra speed and appreciate it, my old macbook was perfectly good and still much faster than most of my friends' computers. When Apple ended support for Core Duo in Lion I was scared that core 2 duo would be next, but I have a feeling that if you buy a Core 2 Duo machine now it will give you great performance for the price and last you for at least a few years.

 

[GermanyChris]

And I never said that Lion doesn't run on a C2D. I'm merely saying that it runs better on a quad i7 and that it runs about the same as C2D on a dual-core i7. Perhaps I should have put it that way instead.

On a side note, all Lion installs were done cleanly from a full format. I did it once to all of the mentioned computers when 10.7 came out, and again when 10.7.1 came out, and at 10.7.2, I finally gave up.

Launchpad is especially noticeable when it's lagging, at least to me. If you think it's smooth on C2D, I suspect you'll find it even smoother on a quad i7. It has to be seen. Prior to getting a MBP with the quad i7, I wouldn't even know it was lagging and stuttering on the other machines. Honestly.



If you would consider it, Lion uses a lot of fullscreen animations. Switching between apps is a fullscreen animation. Mission Control is also a fullscreen animation, and Launchpad is a fullscreen animation.

Those don't come free, and except for games, not a lot of apps use fullscreen animations.

Goes to 18% for Launch pad..I have 2 externals and my integrated display so I don't use full screen ever. the i7 seems so much faster to you because it's yours and expensive..

to the others as far as RAM usage goes I personally don't have an increase form snow leopard..I did until .2 came out though.. Chrome (3 tabs), Safari (4 tabs), itunes, and mail 3.5GB used

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

The Macbooks of this age do not have discrete graphics.

FWIW, MacBooks of ANY age don't have discrete graphics. Actually, no Intel laptop that Apple makes with a screen size under 15" has ever had (or currently has) discrete graphics.

 

[VMMan]

the i7 seems so much faster to you because it's yours and expensive..

Seriously?

 

[GermanyChris]

Seriously?

in the context we were talking yes..overall no it's the fastest think in the notebook line..

 

[bill-p]

the i7 seems so much faster to you because it's yours and expensive..

I'm not sure if I should take this seriously or not. Please clarify.

 

[GermanyChris]

I'm not sure if I should take this seriously or not. Please clarify.

you quad i7 does not make the animations etc. faster. the OS is not using enough cpu for it to make any difference..

 

[bill-p]

you quad i7 does not make the animations etc. faster. the OS is not using enough cpu for it to make any difference..

I think you'll have to see it for yourself. I didn't think of it that way either until I got the i7 quad-core.

And it's not even because it's an i7. I suspect it's because it's a quad-core chip.

Whether you believe me or not is really up to you, but I have no reason to make the i7 look better because it was an expensive purchase. Not to mention I did say at the beginning of the thread that I specifically did not think there was enough of a difference between the C2D and Core i CPUs to warrant the C2D being obsolete in any foreseeable future. The quad-core running Lion smoother and faster is just a perk that I noticed, that's all.

 

[VMMan]

in the context we were talking yes..overall no it's the fastest think in the notebook line..

Why is it so difficult for you to believe that Lion runs faster on a Core i5/7 than a C2D?

Bill-p wrote in the beginning of this thread and throughout that a C2D is fine for running Lion. His opinion that Lion runs faster on the Core i5/7 isn't controversial in the slightest.

You then respond that his opinion is based on a psychological effect of owning an expensive Mac?

 

[GermanyChris]

I think you'll have to see it for yourself. I didn't think of it that way either until I got the i7 quad-core.

And it's not even because it's an i7. I suspect it's because it's a quad-core chip.

Whether you believe me or not is really up to you, but I have no reason to make the i7 look better because it was an expensive purchase. Not to mention I did say at the beginning of the thread that I specifically did not think there was enough of a difference between the C2D and Core i CPUs to warrant the C2D being obsolete in any foreseeable future. The quad-core running Lion smoother and faster is just a perk that I noticed, that's all.

I have played with all of them over and over...MBA through 17"..

The os uses an insignificant amount of processor cycles while it's a smaller percentage on 4 than 2 neither is noticeable..

----------

Why is it so difficult for you to believe that Lion runs faster on a Core i5/7 than a C2D?

Bill-p wrote in the beginning of this thread and throughout that a C2D is fine for running Lion. His opinion that Lion runs faster on the Core i5/7 isn't controversial in the slightest.

You then respond that his opinion is based on a psychological effect of owning an expensive Mac?[/QUOTE

Really we're talking animation and stuff..

the computer is faster, doing daily tasks like the OP is going to do he will simply not not be faster..

no the launch pad does not animate faster on an i7 than a C2D..there is where the expensive computer thing comes in..

 

[bill-p]

I have played with all of them over and over...MBA through 17"..

The os uses an insignificant amount of processor cycles while it's a smaller percentage on 4 than 2 neither is noticeable..

Well, if you don't notice it, that's fine and good for you.

But I do notice it, and on specific computers, not on "all of them".

no the launch pad does not animate faster on an i7 than a C2D..there is where the expensive computer thing comes in..

Again, quad-core i7 compared to C2D, and also compared to dual-core i5. It's not just "i7" because there are dual-core i7 as well in case you haven't noticed.

And I'm not sure how expensive computer comes in there. What does money have to do with the performance of a computer?

 

[GermanyChris]

Well, if you don't notice it, that's fine and good for you.

But I do notice it, and on specific computers, not on "all of them".



Again, quad-core i7 compared to C2D, and also compared to dual-core i5. It's not just "i7" because there are dual-core i7 as well in case you haven't noticed.And I'm not sure how expensive computer comes in there. What does money have to do with the performance of a computer?

we were talking about quad cores..specifically your i7

the problem with this argument is were getting no where..you can't prove that your i7 animates faster then any of the others. I can't prove that you're wrong so we're going to have to drop it entirely, especially since this thread has now been completely hijacked.

 

[M5RahuL]

OP, not sure what your budget is.. but check these out... and if it's within your price range, grab one of these before they're OOS!

1) Early 2011 Macbook Pro !

http://www.vanns.com/shop/servlet/item/accessories/561341176/apple-13-3-macbook-pro?SSAID=101512

2) 2010 Macbook Air !

http://www.vanns.com/shop/servlet/item/clearance/561629408/apple-macbook-air-mc505lla?SSAID=101512

Act Fast!! ... I'm not even sure if these will be in stock by the time you see this post.. Oh well.. I tried!!

 

[lionheart619]

I personally criticize Intel for upgrading cpu chips every 6 months and that's insane for consumer to keep up with any macs. I just bought mine 2 weeks ago, and few months from now my machine will be obsolete. If you want to have latest machines up to date just apply job at apple or be developer.

 

[theSeb]

I personally criticize Intel for upgrading cpu chips every 6 months and that's insane for consumer to keep up with any macs. I just bought mine 2 weeks ago, and few months from now my machine will be obsolete. If you want to have latest machines up to date just apply job at apple or be developer.

Yes!! Progress is bad!!!! They must stop upgrading with immediate effect because kids must have the latest and greatest and will be laughed at by their peers if they don't.

Your machine will not stop working or be obsolete when a new model is out. I actually lament when I read posts like this. What is up with you guys that makes you think like that?

 

[Siggen]

64bit is really the only thing that mattered.
There is no difference between a Core iX 2nd gen or 1st gen and a C2D that matters compatibility wise.
It is only additional features that help speedup some stuff.
There is nothing they can drop support for in an upcoming OS that would exclude Dore 2 Duo without excluding the Core iXs too.

You may only be concerned about speed. If Photoshop matters or similarly demanding stuff I think buying a used Mac is a stupid idea and a used Businnes class PC serves you much better.

Of course they can, they only need not to compile the kernel for C2D. If they do that, the kernel will simply be unnable to run on C2D, not because they programmed in that it would not work, but because the kernel wont work.

They did this for atom cpu's

EDIT:
They probably wont drop support, but sure they are able to. And even with out spesifically programming it in not to work, but simply not to include the support they have now.

 

[garybUK]

wait wait... there's nothing wrong with them, but yours failed? Something ain't right...

The replacement has been fine, most of these bad batched died way back when, i'd happily buy one with a 8600 GT.

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

I personally criticize Intel for upgrading cpu chips every 6 months and that's insane for consumer to keep up with any macs. I just bought mine 2 weeks ago, and few months from now my machine will be obsolete. If you want to have latest machines up to date just apply job at apple or be developer.

What makes you think that, just because it's not the latest and greatest, your machine is obsolete?

 

[ltjlily17]

Going back to the original question- and not some crazy debate about Lion- I have a 2008 MacBook Pro 2.5ghz C2D, 2gb RAM with the dreaded 8600gt. I am currently running Snow Leopard.

I have absolutely no issues running Adobe CS5, I mostly use Dreamweaver and Photoshop.

I also have relatively no issues running games. I've ran World of Warcraft, Minecraft and StarcraftII (I say relatively no issues due to the fact that even on a maxed out computer, certain situations in StarcraftII will lag no matter what).

I plan to continue using this MBP until it spontaneously combusts or someone wants to just give me a new one. Ha ha.

That being said, I have had my motherboard replaced twice. The 8600 cards are not reliable and even if you buy one with a replaced board, you might have another failure, as I did.

If you are not one of the 'need it now, need the best' kind of people, then I don't think a C2D would be that poor of a decision. We can all argue that the iCores are better, but if a C2D is what you can afford and it does what you need it to, then that's that.

 

[lionheart619]

What makes you think that, just because it's not the latest and greatest, your machine is obsolete?

I don't care it's latest and greatest but my concern is resell value thats what I care the most.

 

[Puevlo]

They're junk mate. Faster to compute by hand.