is the 13" MBP a 'MacBook Pro' in name only? I've used two 13" MBPs, the 2009 and 2010 one. The 2010 one was really questionable to be using Core 2 Duos, and the 2011s even took a step backwards to Intel graphics, which I thought is unworthy of a "Pro" as a primary graphics engine. And further, the 2011 13" MBP is still stuck on dual cores while the 15 and 17 have moved onto quad cores. Furthermore, there's no anti-glare option on the 13" MBP.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
is the 13" MBP a "Pro in name only"?
- Thread starter bniu
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If the 2010 had not used Core 2 Duos, it would have been stuck with Intel graphics. It was a one or the other choice. As for the quads, they are too hot to put in the 13", simple as that. However, the "pro" moniker is debatable. I have the 2008 version, which was nearly identical to the 2009, except for the "pro" badge
It depends in what PRO means for you.
If PRO means a dedicated GPU, then yes, the 13" is PRO only by the name
If PRO means Firewire, thunderbolt, up to 8GB of ram, speakers with subwoofers, backlit keyboard, SDXC slot, dual external monitor capacity, sandy bridge, all in a lighter, stronger and slightly smaller case than Macbook, then yes it is a PRO.
I know the Macbook will eventually get most of the 13" features, but honestly most computers will, the difference lays in that the 13" get the newest components first.
I think the term pro actually means very little in the modern Apple line up, as long as the given notebook meets you needs, heck might as well be "pro". I personally think the last real pro was the PowerBook G4 12" , that's what a pro should have if you going to go compact. These days the "pro" is a nice marketing catch, as one year the 13" went from not being a pro to suddenly carrying the pro name
It is a "pro" model. It is superior in almost every way to the 13" MBA and 13" Macbook, and it has the distinctive build of the pro line, so what other product line would you put it into? Granted, it doesn't perform as well as the 15 and 17, but at 13" I wouldn't really expect it to do so. There is clearly a market for professionals who want a high performance computer, but don't necessarily plan to do video editing and the like on a 13" screen.
The Intel graphics in the 2011 13" MBP are on a par with the GT330 graphics in the 2010 15" and 17", so it's not a downgrade in that respect. And even though it's dual core, it's a lot quicker than the 2009 15" 2.66GHz MBP I had before.
Marketing hype has a negative connotation to me. Why criticize Apple for differentiating their product lines?
I think Apple is targeting consumers with products that will appeal to them, and naming the computers accordingly. The Air line is for people who want mobile computing, and value portability over power. The Macbook is for a general audience that doesn't necessarily need it for professional (money making / job related) purposes. The pro line is for people who want the highest performance (ostensibly for work, but probably for play as well). The 13" fits because there are people out there (like me) who want a powerful computer, but don't need or want a larger screen.
Where else would you stick the 13" MBP. If it isn't for professionals, then who is the target?
Um, no it isn't. Benchmarks say it's just about comparable to the 320M but (in my testing) isn't even comparable to the 320.
Last edited:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1102579/
It loses about 150 points to the GT330, but it's still in the same ball park figure, which is pretty darn impressive for an on-board Intel gpu.
It loses about 150 points to the GT330, but it's still in the same ball park figure, which is pretty darn impressive for an on-board Intel gpu.
Pro is meaningless
They're only Pro in the garden of Apple.
Take them out in public & compare them to a workstation class HP, ThinkPad or even the new Dell and their just regular notebooks lacking features that virtually all the others have.
Apple should have stayed on track and not abandoned The Best Model Name Ever: PowerBook. Only Apple would do something this stupid.
After many years of success they killed off a great name.
I really like my new MBP, but I'm not in denial like so many. There's a lot lacking from the MBP.
You can argue for hours but it doesn't change the fact that the skinny silver laptop is missing many "Pro" features that comprise a professional's laptop.
They're only Pro in the garden of Apple.
Take them out in public & compare them to a workstation class HP, ThinkPad or even the new Dell and their just regular notebooks lacking features that virtually all the others have.
Apple should have stayed on track and not abandoned The Best Model Name Ever: PowerBook. Only Apple would do something this stupid.
After many years of success they killed off a great name.
I really like my new MBP, but I'm not in denial like so many. There's a lot lacking from the MBP.
You can argue for hours but it doesn't change the fact that the skinny silver laptop is missing many "Pro" features that comprise a professional's laptop.
The Intel Inside sticker
Intel=unprofessional?
I'm a professional. The MBP is a great product that perfectly fits my needs. It seems plenty professional to me.
They changed the name from powerbook to pro. So what? Mac has traditionally been strong in educational institutions, but I think they are trying to appeal to business users, and the new name reflects it. It's a great computer, it fits well within the "pro" product line, and it is clearly distinguished from their other lines.
Judging by the popularity of the 13" model in my unscientific sampling of Apple employees, I'd say Apple has done a great job building and marketing the computer.
It was a joke, suggesting the only thing missing between the MBP and a professional laptop was the Intel Inside sticker, since Apple forbid the use of other branding on any of their PCs, phones, etc.
LOL. Sorry for missing that. Good point. It is nice not to have to peel those stickers off and/or take solvent to my new computer on the first day. In fact, it was also nice to open it up and get to work right away, without the regular hour or so devoted to removal of bloatware. Of course, I guess I also paid dearly for it too
Where do you people come up with this nonsense? We are talking about the 13" here, but the 15" and 17" MBPs were the fastest laptops available when they came out. There are a few released since then that are in the same league, but not many. What "pro" features are missing? Please don't tell me USB 3.0 or I'll have to do a serious face palm.
Oh, and welcome to my ignore list.
Of course not, the 'Pro' name is very prestigious.
It's really hard to tell whether people are trolling sometimes...
It's really hard to tell whether people are trolling sometimes...
Since the current Macbook is quite an old design, the 13" MBP is a nice step up for only $200 more. So in that sense, yes the 13" is part of the "Pro" line.
But, Pro really is a marketing term, and it seems that the 13" is pretty far behind the 15" and 17" models right now. I know part of the reason is heat issues (hence no quad cores and dedicated graphics), but I'm also quite surprised at the screen on the 13". Very low resolution, and no AG option. I hope that with Intel concentrating on power consumption with Ivy Bridge, and Apple's probable case re-design for the next release, heat dissipation will become less of an issue, and the 13" will become just a small, similarly-speced version of the 15" and 17" versions.
Polbit
But, Pro really is a marketing term, and it seems that the 13" is pretty far behind the 15" and 17" models right now. I know part of the reason is heat issues (hence no quad cores and dedicated graphics), but I'm also quite surprised at the screen on the 13". Very low resolution, and no AG option. I hope that with Intel concentrating on power consumption with Ivy Bridge, and Apple's probable case re-design for the next release, heat dissipation will become less of an issue, and the 13" will become just a small, similarly-speced version of the 15" and 17" versions.
Polbit
It loses about 150 points to the 320M. Not the 330M- the 330 is not mentioned anywhere in the test in the post you linked to.
Both the 320M and HD3000 are integrated GPUs and the tests were performed in OS X with Apple's highly optimised drivers so not quite as impressive as you think
Maybe with well developed drivers it can keep up, but in reality, for gaming in Windows (where the graphics really matter), the Intel drivers are basically useless while nVidia has extremely finely tweaked drivers.
Case-in-point:
I had a 13" Pro (has since been returned)- 2.7GHz i7, 4GB RAM, 256GB SSD, HD3000 graphics. Windows 7 Ultimate with the default Boot Camp Intel graphics drivers.
Still have my 11" Air- 1.6GHz C2D, 4GB RAM, 128GB SSD, 320M. Windows 7 Ultimate with the latest nVidia graphics drivers from laptopvideo2go.
Test was Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, native res, ultra [high] settings, both plugged in and the High Performance power management profile selected.
Both had nothing else running other than a stock copy of Windows.
The Pro achieved around 20 fps while the Air achieved 30+ fps.
These numbers carried over to several special ops missions so it's not just because nothing was happening on the screen.
I was extremely surprised, seeing as how the SB i7 was benchmarked to be around 2x faster than the Core 2's and I really did think that the processor would make up for what the graphics lacked. Still, real world results don't lie.
I don't doubt that the HD3000 can perform similar to the 320M if you're in OS X with the highly optimized drivers from Apple. For many users it matters most in Windows for gaming though and that's where the pathetic Intel drivers fall flat on its face.
You're right, that was a mistake on my part. But it's the 320M that's in the 2010 13" MBP.
In terms of benchmarks, the two are still very close, with the onboard Intel being a bit slower, but not much.
nVidia 320M
Intel HD 3000
As you pointed out, in Windows it can be a different matter and benchmarks are somewhat artificial.