Current Macbook (Pro) vs late 2007 macbook?

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by tpg, Sep 14, 2010.

  1. tpg macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    #1
    Hi,

    I'm using a 2.2GHz Core 2 macbook at the moment, which I got about 3 years ago. I'm thinking about upgrading to a new system, either a macbook or macbook pro, but am wondering what speed increase I am likely to see?

    Any benchmarks/opinions are welcome, but some numbers would be great :)
     
  2. mr0c macrumors regular

    mr0c

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Location:
    Virginia, US
    #2
    according to geekbench the results are as follows:

    MacBook Pro (15-inch 2010) Intel Core i7 M 620 @ 2.67GHz = 5422

    MacBook Pro (Mid 2007) Intel Core 2 Duo T7500 2.2 GHz (2 cores) = 2874
    (http://www.primatelabs.ca/geekbench/mac-benchmarks/)

    Given that the processor, memory and components are all running at higher speeds, it's not surprising that it's almost 2 times faster ;-)

    BTW, i'm also running a mid 2007, 2.2 GHz and yes it does feel a little slow;)
    If you want to keep the current system, I'd recommend a SSD upgrade - it will make it seem like a new system, although if you need a large disk >120GB it can be very pricey.
     
  3. tpg thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    #3
    Thanks for the info! That page is just what I've been looking for :)

    Yeah, SSD would be nice, but I've almost filled up my 500GB drive as it is, and don't really fancy forking out those sums of money on an SSD :p Also maxed out the RAM when I bought it, so no room to upgrade...
     
  4. mr0c macrumors regular

    mr0c

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Location:
    Virginia, US
    #4
    I can understand that, I certainly notice my macbook pro slow down when using fusion vmware, definitely not enough memory or disk space.

    From what others have been saying about the latest macbook pro, the i5 is better as you can spend the extra saved (in not getting the i7) to upgrade the memory (it's about 15% slower but costs 25% less).

    MacBook Pro (15-inch 2010) Intel Core i5 M 540 @ 2.53GHz = 4994
    (http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2010/04/macbookpro-benchmarks/)
     
  5. juicedropsdeuce macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    #5
    If you do not need a new machine right away, it is tempting to wait till the beginning of next year for the Sandy Bridge processors to come out. The integrated graphics will be equal or better to current discrete notebook cards. Better battery life. 30% faster. Maybe quad core (if apple allows).
     
  6. tpg thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    #6
    True, there's always something better around the corner! Regarding the other poster's comment about VMWare, I've had similar problems. Basically rendered my machine useless when I was trying to run two virtualbox VMs simultaneously - had to force a shutdown in the end! 4GB RAM evidently isn't enough. It's a shame that I'm limited to 4 in my macbook, otherwise I upgrade to 8 and that'd probably keep me going for another year or so.
     
  7. wordoflife macrumors 604

    wordoflife

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    #7
    The 2007 Macbooks are great machines. If you were planning on upgrading to a Macbook or 13" Macbook Pro, I honestly couldn't recommend to do so. The speeds will be faster, but its not worth it considering how well the old Macbooks stand up against current standards, and for the fact that you would essentially be upgrading to a processor that is still in the same product series of Core 2 Duo. Not to mention, the 2.4Ghz processor has been available since 2008.

    If you want a serious upgrade, a 2010 upgrade, then go with any of the higher end Macbook Pros (15" and 17")

    If I were you, and unless I needed more speed (which again, isn't worth it on the current 13" portables IMO), I would stick with what I have.
     
  8. juicedropsdeuce macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    #8
    It's much more than a clock speed increase. We know when and we know exactly what. So there is enough information to make a real decision, it's not some hypothetical.
     
  9. tpg thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    #9
    Oh yes - but I was more making the point that once that is out, then intel will of course be prepping their next chipset, which will be even faster.

    EDIT: And also, we don't know exactly what, since Apple decide which processors they want to offer.
     
  10. sprtnbsblplya macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    Arlington, VA
    #10
    I just geekbench'ed my early 2008 MBP after reading this thread.
    My 2.4ghz T8300 w/ 4gb RAM (667mhz) got 3274.

    The new Core i7 MBP got 5260. Tempting.

    Since my MBP is running strong, CS5 works fine on it, as does LR3 (those are for my hobbies), and MS Office 08 runs just fine for my school work.

    I think I'll probably purchase the next version of the MBP, whatever it is that they stick in it. Most just for the graphics card, I want to play the new Fallout coming out later this year with some more eye candy. And this MBP struggles with SC2.
     
  11. SlamJam12 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    #11
    I agree with this statement. The intel core (i5 and i7) processors are very attractive performers on the new Macbook Pro.
     
  12. tpg thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    #12
    Well, I've just run Geekbench on my late 2007 macbook. It got 3097 in the 32 bit mode. I notice there's a 64 bit mode as well - for those of you who've posted scores up, which one are you using?

    Since that's less than twice in the benchmarks, I think I'm going to hold off for a while... I guess I hoped for more of an improvement in 3 years!
     
  13. sprtnbsblplya macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    Arlington, VA
  14. iDisk macrumors 6502a

    iDisk

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Location:
    Menlo Park, CA
    #14
    The current MacBook Pro 15" Line is very stale and overpriced, the 13" base model is no different then the MacBook (white) Apple is over charging for "portability" the iMac is Apple's best price per performance IMO....and If I were to buy any portable I would but the MacBook or if I need a bigger screen the base MacBook Pro 15"
     
  15. gnasher729 macrumors P6

    gnasher729

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    #15
    There _are_ significant differences: Backlit keyboard, space for 12mm hard drives (so you can upgrade to 1 TB, can't do that on the white MacBook), 8 GB RAM supported. I'll tell you whether the case is better three years from now :D

    I think it is definitely worth the difference.
     
  16. tpg thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    #16
     

Share This Page