Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

I am ready to get my first mac computer but....

C

calvinc

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 29, 2010
97
0
I am about to get a 13' MBP. But the lack of i3 processor concerns me. I don't know much about computers but I keep reading that C2D is an old technology. Would I actually notice a difference if the 13' MBP had an i3 processor?

I mainly use my computer for web surfing, streaming music and videos, instant messaging and emails. I do not play games or run any special softwares. Thanks a lot 🙂
 
The C2D will be fine for your uses, the i3 will not give you any speed increases for what you do.

My 2007 iMac with a C2D CPU can do that just fine, and it can do much more.
 
miles01110 said:
A G4 can handle the tasks you list just fine. Why would an i3 matter?
Click to expand...

Do you think I should go for the MacBook instead of the MacBook Pro then? I want it to last 3-5 yrs. Will the technology in MacBook be sufficient?
 
calvinc said:
Do you think I should go for the MacBook instead of the MacBook Pro then? I want it to last 3-5 yrs. Will the technology in MacBook be sufficient?
Click to expand...

The MacBook and the MacBook Pro with the C2D will suffice for 3-5 years with your needs. The i3 would not give you any advantages, the i7 would, but those gained advantages bring nothing for your needs.
 
Get a MacBook, even a MacBook Air would suit your needs.

Getting a Mac Computer, ah yes. I remember when I got my first Ford Car and I love Coca-Cola soda.

XD
 
Opening poster,
I am in the same dilema right now. I hate the fact that I am being forced to buy a 15" because I do nopt want he C2D eventhough I know for a fact it would be plenty for what I do right now. The reason I am going up is because:

1)as more demanding/beefier technology comes out I want to make sure my computers longjevity will be there to accomidate.

2) I refuse to pay that much dang money for something that isn't even going top be made that much longer

3) better resale value if I decide to get the i5 proccessor

4) also, if I decide I want to venture into more video/photo editing
 
There you people go complaining about things that are done for your own good.

There is a reason Apple won't put an i3 in the 13", but I doubt you'd take a break from complaining to look that up.

Are you going to B#*$% about stair rails because they limit you? Damn stair rails! Damn them all! You should have the right to slip off of a stairway when and where you please!
 
MrCheeto said:
There you people go complaining about things that are done for your own good.

There is a reason Apple won't put an i3 in the 13", but I doubt you'd take a break from complaining to look that up.

Are you going to B#*$% about stair rails because they limit you? Damn stair rails! Damn them all! You should have the right to slip off of a stairway when and where you please!
Click to expand...


I want to be able to fall as fast as damn possible, even if I will only ever stroll peacefully down the stairs.
 
I started a thread about this last week. I have the same philosophy about buying "old" technology. I decided to buy the 13" MBP because, for my needs, I wouldn't really be taking advantage of the i5 processor. If it were my main computer, I would probably chose differently.
 
stefan1975 said:
and it's about as old as the current MBP13 so it is a fair comparison.
Click to expand...

Tongue in cheek?

T7300
P8600

The current C2D used in the MBP is more energy efficient and has more transistors than the C2D in my iMac and it is faster than my iMac and early 2008 MB with 2.4GHz (T8300).

Geekbench results:

C2D 2.0GHz (T7300): 2794
C2D 2.4GHz (T8300): 3325
C2D 2.4GHz (P8600): 3703

all machines have 4GB RAM
​
 
calvinc said:
I am about to get a 13' MBP. But the lack of i3 processor concerns me. I don't know much about computers but I keep reading that C2D is an old technology. Would I actually notice a difference if the 13' MBP had an i3 processor?

I mainly use my computer for web surfing, streaming music and videos, instant messaging and emails. I do not play games or run any special softwares. Thanks a lot 🙂
Click to expand...

YES thank you for posting this!! i needed to know the same thing also! lol
 
1.) C2D is old, there is no question about that. I had a MacBook running C2D at 2GHz in 2006 and that wasn't even the fastest model at the time.

2.) Despite this, current MBPs are expensive. In the case of the 13", you are really paying a hefty premium for having a Mac. In terms of hardware, there is no justification for it, although the aluminium case and the trackpad are nice.

3.) What you do can be done excellently on a used Windows laptop. Or you can get a 13" i3/i5 machine for less than half the price of its Mac equivalent.

4.) It doesn't really matter what computer hardware you have. What matters is what you achieve with them. I suggest you preserve your cash and go on a holiday or spend the money that you save wisely. You can still have a ridiculously cheap old eMac or another PPC, maybe even a few years old MacBook or Mac Mini if you really want to see how Macs are.

5.) These C2D MacBooks and MacBook Pros are already so dated that it's safe to assume that there will be no more 13" MBP with C2D. Can you wait for the refresh? If you really want a MacBook Pro, I think you should.
 
Same here

I'm in the same boat, I'm thinking about buying an MBP 13" today, but the C2D is just holding me back...
 
Meh, I was kinda in the same boat but I just bought the 13"

Reason being... if I am going to do tasks that involved a better processor, such as photo or video editing, then I would be foolish to get a 13" since a 15" would better suit my needs. With that being said, even the difference between the C2D and i3/5 is miniscal amount and I doubt you would be able to tell the differences unless, maybe, you were planning on doing major photo and video editing and I do mean major, like a video of a typical weekend.

I perfered the 13" over the others is because of the portability for *currently* due to school reason. Yea, yea, yea... some will say the 15" is portabilty but so the 17 for the same reasons as you might say the 15" is. Well, to me... 13" is barely pushing portability when you compare it to my old Sony SZ with a much lighter feel to it.

Obviously, you need to find what your needs are with the laptop. This laptop is 2.4 C2D and my old Sony was 2.2 C2D...and to be honest, the difference in speed is a HUGE difference. I optimized my laptop to run very efficient too, but this one feels almost twice as fast... like I am comparing a computer in the 1990s vs a computer in 2010 even the "difference is only 0.2"
 
MrCheeto said:
There you people go complaining about things that are done for your own good.

There is a reason Apple won't put an i3 in the 13", but I doubt you'd take a break from complaining to look that up.
Click to expand...

Sad but true. I was curious enough to find the answer and supposedly find one answer to that question.
 
Honestly... with the way technology is now a days your always going to be behind. At best youll have the "BEST" computer for 6 months. If you need/want the computer buy it, Honestly for what all of you are using the computer for you could all just buy a netbook, But you all like the OS so either sack up and pay or dont.
 
kernkraft said:
2.) Despite this, current MBPs are expensive. In the case of the 13", you are really paying a hefty premium for having a Mac. In terms of hardware, there is no justification for it, although the aluminium case and the trackpad are nice.
Click to expand...


If Apple sold it for $899- they would make far more profit than Sony and HP do on $999- laptops.
--
 
I got a C2D 2.4GHz 13" back in July and this thing does everything I need it to. And I do video editing, music, and photos. I love this thing to pieces, it's my first mac as well.

I went for a pro because of the aluminum body, I wanted something that wasn't the classic plastic.
 
the i3 only offers hyper thready, which give the processor the characteristics of a quad core (not an actual quad core) but does not has turbo boost, so would no notice a difference not unless you have spent 5 years with a c2d and then switch 2 a i3 and it would be minimal, the i5 and i7 would be a noticeable difference, but for the extra battery life the c2d will be more then enough for even light - moderate movie editing, and some decent photo editing as well, plus smaller games pending you ever choose to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back