Is the 13 inch MacBook Pro really that SLOW?

[NickZac]

Everybody and the dog is knocking the 13 inch MacBook 'Slow', but is it really that slow?

Are there any 13in MacBook Pro owners who think "damn, I wish I had some more power!". I don't...I find it to be faster than the brand new 'professional' desktops that my father's company send to clients and it blows away the laptop he has which is a year newer than mine (same price point and size wise). After putting a SSD in, it is almost too fast for me to handle (like a G6).

This doesn't make the laptop seem all that slow at all! Actually it beats out others in its class in numerous categories


Oh but wait! That was the base model for 2009!!! Here is 2010...

I want you to note that it holds its own with models using the i3 and i5 processors and in some categories, was faster. (The Sony Vaio S is a Core i5 @ 2.26GHz; the ASUS is i3 @ 2.26GHz).

Compared to laptops in its class, the 13 inch MBP is not slow nor outdated. If it was, then it would not get award after award over other laptops using 'newer' technology. If you are thinking about buying a 13 but but you are debating the 13 MBP's capability, buy it as capability is something it has plenty of.

 

[JKK photography]

There are many words that can describe the 13" MBP, but slow isn't one of them. Not in nearly any task you can throw at it.

 

[tigress666]

Honestly, I'm happy that my new MBP can do games where my old one (a 2007 Macbook) couldn't as it has a much improved graphics card. And the more RAM sure helps a lot too when loading a lot of stuff at once.

But the one thing I will say it's not much improved (surprise surprise) is its speed. But my MB was a 2 GB core 2 duo and the new one is a 2.4. So it's not like it's a big jump really. I wish it were more but can't have everything.

I've been wanting to upgrade for a while ever since they introduced the button-less track pad and back lit keyboard plus much nicer casing design (I like the aluminum unibody a lot) but couldn't get myself to justify. The new graphics card and 10 hour battery was just enough to justify upgrading. My only hesitation was if they introduce a whole new chip next year and then start making new OS's exclude the core 2 duo in compatibility (that's my biggest worry with having gone ahead and upgraded this year).

 

[wordoflife]

No one is saying its slow. They say its slow compared to the other processors out there, and yeah. but that doesn't matter unless you tax your CPU.

 

[SuperCachetes]

I don't get it; I haven't heard anybody or their dog saying the MBP is slow. That the bigger MBPs have newer processors doesn't really phase me. Good for them.

So, is the little MBP "12-core Mac Pro" fast? No. But not slow, either.

 

[cmzwirner]

Well. Its pretty competitive in the compact, ultra portable line of laptops. Its integrated 320M is actually pretty damn fast!

So yes. The 13" macbook pro is fast for being a 13". Even though it doesnt have the newest technology, it still can keep up with it! I only with it had a 330m. If sony can cram one into their vaio z, then apple can do it better. You also cant really compare it to the vaio z, seeing that the baseline model is $1800. For $800 more (microcenter price), it better be that much faster.

Recently, i posted that i wasnt happy with the laptop. But i have been watching video reviews on competitors laptops, and i just cant part with it. The combination of competitive price, great performance, unparalleled battery-life, build quality, OSX, trackpad, amazing styling, and other small things just make this thing great!

 

[tigress666]

I don't get it; I haven't heard anybody or their dog saying the MBP is slow. That the bigger MBPs have newer processors doesn't really phase me. Good for them.

So, is the little MBP "12-core Mac Pro" fast? No. But not slow, either.

I dunno if I'd say it's slow rather than I would have expected them to have a much faster computer than my 3 year old computer at this point.

I don't need speed, but I do like my computer to load things up quickly (it's what I notice most in a computer really).

If I could afford it I'd try putting an SSD in my computer (my computer already was a lot of money on my budget) but I couldn't afford a large enough SSD (I'd want at least 250 GB's as I already have filled half the hard drive on it now). But after being on this forum people have convinced me that would really help improve speed.

 

[JKK photography]

I dunno if I'd say it's slow rather than I would have expected them to have a much faster computer than my 3 year old computer at this point.

I don't need speed, but I do like my computer to load things up quickly (it's what I notice most in a computer really).

If I could afford it I'd try putting an SSD in my computer (my computer already was a lot of money on my budget) but I couldn't afford a large enough SSD (I'd want at least 250 GB's as I already have filled half the hard drive on it now). But after being on this forum people have convinced me that would really help improve speed.

I think that in the processor department they are a little behind with the 13", but Apple's reasoning behind keeping it a C2D makes sense: the graphics card is leaps and bounds better than what your computer from 2007 had, even though it is integrated.

 

[cmzwirner]

I think that in the processor department they are a little behind with the 13", but Apple's reasoning behind keeping it a C2D makes sense: the graphics card is leaps and bounds better than what your computer from 2007 had, even though it is integrated.

As i said. I dont get why they didnt just stuff a 330m into the 13. Its literally an inch and a half square. Then they could have used an i3 or i5.

 

[tigress666]

I think that in the processor department they are a little behind with the 13", but Apple's reasoning behind keeping it a C2D makes sense: the graphics card is leaps and bounds better than what your computer from 2007 had, even though it is integrated.

Oh yeah, I agree there. I mean my 2007 MB couldn't even do games well that were new/slightly old in 2007 (it seemed to only be able to do outdated stuff).

And honestly, for me if one has to be sacrificed they did the right one cause my biggest complaint with the MB was that I couldn't even do light/moderate gaming on it (it slowed down once you got any decent sized city in Sim City and the Sims 3 outright listed it's graphics card as incompatible. Funny/annoying cause usually games just say you need at least this. To me it takes a special kind of crappy graphics card for them to outright mention it as incompatible).

It's not that I game much but I'd like my computer to at least be capable of doing some games.

Nothing is ever perfect and I'd say the biggest disappointment with current one is that it isn't much faster. Overall I'm pretty happy with it though .

 

[biscuitsxluv]

Um.. Your post title says MBP, then in your post you say MB. Two different laptop.
No the MBP is not slow, but it also depends on you're doing with. If you're just browsing, email, chatting then you're fine. If maybe you're editing videos, then probably.

 

[pricej636]

I don't think anyone can say the 13" MBP is slow on day to day tasks. There are a few times that I would like more processing power, but for 75% of the time it fits my needs just fine. Even when I am maxing it out it still performs well.

 

[JKK photography]

As i said. I dont get why they didnt just stuff a 330m into the 13. Its literally an inch and a half square. Then they could have used an i3 or i5.

heat, battery, price (it would probably cost more to manufacture all of that into a smaller body), who knows. They didn't, though, and honestly I find that it is plenty fast for my needs (which can be pretty taxing at times).

If you are looking to do some really heavy duty stuff (hardcore video editing, hardcore music creation, more than just casual gaming, etc.) then you are already looking at the 15 inch MBP, just because of the extra resolution.

 

[NickZac]

I am talking in general. A lot of people have called the 13 inch outdated; not necessarily people on this forum and largely they aren't Mac people. Some people who sell them have told customers not to buy the 13 inch until the next one comes out. None-the-less, there is a LOT of criticism directed to the 13 which is silly and largely unfounded.

Obviously the 15/17 in MacBook Pros have more capabilities, but the base price of either is much more than the 13 inch and puts them in a class of different buyers. The 13 favors mobility over capability, and the 15 and 17 favors capability instead of mobility. People who compare the 13 to 15 must consider that each computer is very different and one design may suit you better than the others. I figured it would be interesting to hear what people had to say.

 

[iphone3048]

It really depends on what your using it for!
As long as you are not multitasking heavy programs you will be ok.

I like playing a game while I convert a movie to HD. My 13 cannot do this well even with an ssd and 8gb ram. I tried iMovie to edit a dvd file I made and it was VERY SLOW. Compared to my 15 i7 2.8 that is.

And the screen on the 13 gives me a headache after an hour. The matt screen on the 15 is just plain awesome!

So as long as you don't need TRUE power the 13 is okay.

 

[tigress666]

Obviously the 15/17 in MacBook Pros have more capabilities, but the base price of either is much more than the 13 inch and puts them in a class of different buyers. The 13 favors mobility over capability, and the 15 and 17 favors capability instead of mobility. People who compare the 13 to 15 must consider that each computer is very different and one design may suit you better than the others. I figured it would be interesting to hear what people had to say.

Well my opinion is just cause I want portability doesn't mean I also don't want a powerful computer. I think it was Sony that made what I'd really want (except that it doesn't run OSX).

I mean I can easily connect it to a monitor when I want a big screen. Just cause it doesn't come with one doesn't mean I don't want the faster specs.

That being said, I'm perfectly happy with my MBP and I think honestly in a figure of speech my eyes are bigger than my stomach (What I think I want is more than what I really would use). Cause my MBP is pretty much perfect for what I want (it's very mobile, it does what I went well, and it can do some gaming. And is good for a desktop machine which is its main use but I do want portability). It's a good overall computer. Maybe not exceptional specs but really good at some stuff (like portability with its small size and great battery) and still moderate-good at the stuff it doesn't excel in.

 

[biscuitsxluv]

I have a 13" and I am in favor of mobility. I move from room to room all day. Living room, master, kitchen, living and back upstairs quite a bit. I had a 17" HP and that made it very hard to do. If I wanted to do something more than just browsing, I will jump on my iMac or Windows desktop.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I think people complaining about the 13" MPB really need to have a look at actual benchmarks and figures.
The C2D is not that slow. Despite its age, it still is pretty decent.
Have a look at the laptops most people buy. You are talking Celerons, Atoms, low end Pentiums and i3's. All less than, or equal to the power of the C2D.

 

[kamalds]

I think people complaining about the 13" MPB really need to have a look at actual benchmarks and figures.
The C2D is not that slow. Despite its age, it still is pretty decent.
Have a look at the laptops most people buy. You are talking Celerons, Atoms, low end Pentiums and i3's. All less than, or equal to the power of the C2D.

^ This. I find my macbook pro pretty powerful. I do everything on it except gaming (because I am not into gaming).

 

[elpmas]

I think people complaining about the 13" MPB really need to have a look at actual benchmarks and figures.
The C2D is not that slow. Despite its age, it still is pretty decent.
Have a look at the laptops most people buy. You are talking Celerons, Atoms, low end Pentiums and i3's. All less than, or equal to the power of the C2D.

I agree. There are deals out there that still uses Celerons on 15"-16" laptops...wth =.=

 

[RedburnIV]

I don't find the 13 MBP to be slow what so ever. I think those looking for the bigger and better models are looking for overkill unless they actually use it for instense purposes. The 13" is perfect for everyday general use, the use that most people do on their computer, but I don't think that's all that it can do. It's a beast.

 

[shyam09]

i dont know what other people are talking about, but my 13" MBP is faster than my PC QUAD CORE (TOP of the LINE model!)

and its the base model
the only time it is slow is when comparing it to the i core processors. and well pffft pish pish posh posh.. i love my MBP os who cares about the i processors.

 

[JKK photography]

It really depends on what your using it for!
As long as you are not multitasking heavy programs you will be ok.

I like playing a game while I convert a movie to HD. My 13 cannot do this well even with an ssd and 8gb ram. I tried iMovie to edit a dvd file I made and it was VERY SLOW. Compared to my 15 i7 2.8 that is.

And the screen on the 13 gives me a headache after an hour. The matt screen on the 15 is just plain awesome!

So as long as you don't need TRUE power the 13 is okay.

True power is subjective.

I am a console guy. I'm a Sony fan when it comes to games: I own a PS3, and I do nearly all of my gaming on that. I don't need a computer that can play the newest games at the highest settings at native resolution. I need a computer that I can blog with, that I can run Photoshop with, that I can send emails with.

Which is why I went with the better battery life and more portability of the 13 inch MacBook Pro.

 

[skiltrip]

i dont know what other people are talking about, but my 13" MBP is faster than my PC QUAD CORE (TOP of the LINE model!)

and its the base model
the only time it is slow is when comparing it to the i core processors. and well pffft pish pish posh posh.. i love my MBP os who cares about the i processors.

What are the specs on your PC quad? I have a Q6600 PC and it definitely outperforms my 13" MBP for audio (Pro Tools, Studio One).

 

[wordoflife]

I agree. There are deals out there that still uses Celerons on 15"-16" laptops...wth =.=

Agreed. Those laptops don't last very long because of their limited specs ... and once you start installing a bunch of stuff and actually using it, it shows its true power. Otherwise, those computers run fine on the demo software in stores.