i7 Mbp improvement over C2D worth it right now?

[bjoplin21]

I currently have a 2.66ghz Core 2 Duo 17" Mbp with a 240GB OWC SSD and 8GB ram so it is basically maxed out. I love it and it works great for me especially with the SSD. My main uses for my MBP are software music production and HD video editing in final cut express. The music production is going great with what I currently have but I would love it if my HD video renders were alot faster.

I am considering selling this MBP and keeping the SSD for my next macbook pro if I decide to get one. Do you guys think it would be worth it for me to go ahead and get the 17" 2.66ghz i7? I'd put my current SSD drive in that if I do buy it. Thanks

 

[Erasmus]

I don't think so. The present i7 isn't all that much better than Core 2 Duo. I'm thinking like 10% faster, although you could look at benchmarks to find out.

I think you should wait, like the rest of us, for Sandy Bridge. It can't be more than a couple of months away (hopefully) and should be a reasonable upgrade, even if they keep using dual core CPUs. If they change up to quads, it will be amazing, like over twice as fast. And quads should be almost certain as a BTO on the 17".

Plus a whole lot of other upgrades, of course.

 

[The-Pro]

Yes it really will be worth it. Performance increase of about 50%, mainly due to the the 2 extra virtual cores. i have an i7 15" and had a 2.66 C2D 15". my 3D rendering (in FormZ) were done in roughly half the time, or quicker. Your Video work should profit alot from it. Benchmarks do show this as well.

I don't think so. The present i7 isn't all that much better than Core 2 Duo. I'm thinking like 10% faster, although you could look at benchmarks to find out.

I think you should wait, like the rest of us, for Sandy Bridge. It can't be more than a couple of months away (hopefully) and should be a reasonable upgrade, even if they keep using dual core CPUs. If they change up to quads, it will be amazing, like over twice as fast. And quads should be almost certain as a BTO on the 17".

Plus a whole lot of other upgrades, of course.

i7 is a S*** load better than C2D's!!!!

OMG, what is it with you people and Sandy Bridge?????? The move to sandy bridge from current ix processors seems to be a bigger of a deal then the move from C2D to ix ever was. All these people going, wait for sandy bridge, shall i wait for sandy bridge, blah blah blah. Seriously, sandy bridge is not going to all of a sudden boooooooooost performance jus like that. C2D to ix was a complete change in everything. 2nd generation ix is are just more refined 1st generation with, yes mostly pretty big, improvements here and there. Yes the quad models will, but there is not that high of a chance apple will put those into the MBP's, but we'll see. the current ix processors are extremely powerful and more than enough for normal consumers.
Chill down with the whole sandy bridge stuff, only reason worth waiting for a refresh in the MBP line is because of a design change, and maybe a GPU.

 

[orfeas0]

Yes it really will be worth it. Performance increase of about 50%, mainly due to the the 2 extra virtual cores. i have an i7 15" and had a 2.66 C2D 15". my 3D rendering (in FormZ) were done in roughly half the time, or quicker. Your Video work should profit alot from it. Benchmarks do show this as well.



i7 is a S*** load better than C2D's!!!!

OMG, what is it with you people and Sandy Bridge?????? The move to sandy bridge from current ix processors seems to be a bigger of a deal then the move from C2D to ix ever was. All these people going, wait for sandy bridge, shall i wait for sandy bridge, blah blah blah. Seriously, sandy bridge is not going to all of a sudden boooooooooost performance jus like that. C2D to ix was a complete change in everything. 2nd generation ix is are just more refined 1st generation with, yes mostly pretty big, improvements here and there. Yes the quad models will, but there is not that high of a chance apple will put those into the MBP's, but we'll see. the current ix processors are extremely powerful and more than enough for normal consumers.
Chill down with the whole sandy bridge stuff, only reason worth waiting for a refresh in the MBP line is because of a design change, and maybe a GPU.

well the big difference sandy bridge will make is in the better integrated GPU, but most important, it will get into the 13" macbooks, which still use the crappy c2d (as you said, current gen i7 is twice as fast in video rendering than the c2d).
the 13" will see big improvement, the 15-17 not so much. So if you need a good 15-17" macbook pro now, just get it now, it's worth it. Unless you wanna wait for the new generation to be released so you can buy the current one a lot cheaper in the refurbished store.

 

[negatv1]

I own a i7 2.66 17-inch MBP, and it is awesome. But as my opinion, and considering your current machine- would wait for the next revision, which couldn't be more than a few months off.

But, if you're not concerned about a new model coming out in a couple months, and just need a faster machine to be more productive in your business today- Everymac.com claims geekbench results of 3585 for your 2.66machine, and 5546 for the i7. Which by the raw benchmark numbers, I'd say that is pretty substantial.

 

[newdeal]

...

the current i7 will be far faster than the c2d on video tasks like that. Sure the new models may be even quicker but likely the differance won't be as huge as c2d to i7 is and you probobly will need to wait 2 months before they hit (possibly longer) so if you need one now I would buy a refurb i7 and if not then wait and buy a new one in a couple months when the refresh hits

 

[Erasmus]

OK, maybe the present i7's are substantially faster than the old Core 2 Duos. Although I personally wouldn't call 30% faster worth upgrading for.

https://www.macrumors.com/2010/01/0...hmarks-show-major-improvements-for-notebooks/

But seeing as it's only going to be like 2 months before almost guaranteed quad core CPUs, why not wait? Why get 30% now, when you can get more like 120%?

 

[jjahshik32]

I've owned both the 17" 2.66GHz i7 and a 17" 2.8GHz core 2 duo mbp and I can say, hell yea!!

Huge difference in performance if you ask me. i7 finally allows a notebook to be a true desktop replacement.

 

[upinflames900]

OK, maybe the present i7's are substantially faster than the old Core 2 Duos. Although I personally wouldn't call 30% faster worth upgrading for.

https://www.macrumors.com/2010/01/0...hmarks-show-major-improvements-for-notebooks/

But seeing as it's only going to be like 2 months before almost guaranteed quad core CPUs, why not wait? Why get 30% now, when you can get more like 120%?

Agree... your better off to wait a little bit

 

[aCondor]

But seeing as it's only going to be like 2 months before almost guaranteed quad core CPUs, why not wait? Why get 30% now, when you can get more like 120%?

Do you think it's likely that quad-core will make it into the smaller 13" and 15" MBP models? From what I've read the chances are quite slim.

 

[Erasmus]

Do you think it's likely that quad-core will make it into the smaller 13" and 15" MBP models? From what I've read the chances are quite slim.

13" no.
15" hopefully.
They use more power than the CPUs Apple normally uses, but they have far better power management systems than the old generation of quads, and are also 32nm, whereas the old gen lagged behind at 45nm.

 

[ayeying]

OK, maybe the present i7's are substantially faster than the old Core 2 Duos. Although I personally wouldn't call 30% faster worth upgrading for.

https://www.macrumors.com/2010/01/0...hmarks-show-major-improvements-for-notebooks/

But seeing as it's only going to be like 2 months before almost guaranteed quad core CPUs, why not wait? Why get 30% now, when you can get more like 120%?

How are you so sure its going to be a real quad core and not dual core with 4 threads again? It seems more and more likely Apple would adopt the i7-2620M CPU, which is the next generation to the current 2.66GHz Core i7. That CPU is still a dual core with 4 threads, same as the current i7 model.

Imo, the Core 2 Duo -> i7 jump would be big. The current i7 -> 2nd generation i7 won't be as big as the C2D -> i Series. If there is anything big, it would be in the other areas such as ports and GPU.

 

[axu539]

How are you so sure its going to be a real quad core and not dual core with 4 threads again? It seems more and more likely Apple would adopt the i7-2620M CPU, which is the next generation to the current 2.66GHz Core i7. That CPU is still a dual core with 4 threads, same as the current i7 model.

Imo, the Core 2 Duo -> i7 jump would be big. The current i7 -> 2nd generation i7 won't be as big as the C2D -> i Series. If there is anything big, it would be in the other areas such as ports and GPU.

Well, the reason people keep hoping for one of the QMs is that Sandy Bridge has much better power/thermal management, allowing it to run cooler and more efficiently. This would make 45W CPUs somewhat more feasible in the MBPs. Also, Sandy Bridge brings 1333 or even 1600 MHz RAM to the MBPs which would be a pretty nice upgrade from the 1066 they've been using since 08.

If quad cores come, it can easily be argued that current i7 -> Sandy Bridge will be a bigger leap than C2D to current i7, simply due to more cores, and faster RAM, all on top of the already significant 15% processor efficiency increase.

 

[The-Pro]

Well, the reason people keep hoping for one of the QMs is that Sandy Bridge has much better power/thermal management, allowing it to run cooler and more efficiently. This would make 45W CPUs somewhat more feasible in the MBPs. Also, Sandy Bridge brings 1333 or even 1600 MHz RAM to the MBPs which would be a pretty nice upgrade from the 1066 they've been using since 08.

If quad cores come, it can easily be argued that current i7 -> Sandy Bridge will be a bigger leap than C2D to current i7, simply due to more cores, and faster RAM, all on top of the already significant 15% processor efficiency increase.

Yeah ok. quads and faster ram make the upgrade significant. the dual core sandy bridge arnt that big of a difference, atleast not noticeable for "average" or standard consumers.
I hope they put the quads into the 17" and also a better and different discrete gpu than in the 15". I think they should make the 17" more of a pro workstation, and the difference between the 15 and 17 more distinct.

 

[Erasmus]

Because if Apple don't start putting quad CPUs in now, Apple are going to start losing a lot in the professional market, as a lot of other manufacturers will continue to sell quad core solutions that cost much less than Apple's dual core MBPs.

For one glorious year (2007), Apple had the fastest Windows laptop available. Wouldn't it be fantastic if Apple did the same in 2011? Taking MBA SSD's and a secondary HDD, a quad CPU, and a better GPU would most likely win that title back, resulting in a large influx of pro users, and maybe a small number of gamers too.