Well, let's face it, now that Apple unveiled the "new iMac" we can speculate a little bit more about what would happened if the MBP 13" got the i3 on April. The movement of "faster cpu" didn't impress me that much, i was hoping almost all the iMac's with i5 and just the cheapest one with i3, though the desktop i3's are more powerful than mobiles, it's not comparable to i5's and it's just a gain of approximately 10%-25% (on CPU power) depending on the models of CPU, let's take a look at the benchmarks:
iMac Late 2009 21.5" (Intel Core 2 Duo E7600 @ 3.06 Ghz - 2099 // Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 @ 3.33Ghz - 2627)
iMac Mid 2010 21.5" (Intel Core i3 540 @ 3.06Ghz - 2806 // Intel Core i3 550 @ 3.20Ghz - 2794)
And these are the best "benchmarks" giving a full room to i3 to get the most "powerful" result, these are taken from www.cpubenchmark.net … but if you take a look at anandtech or notebookcheck, the desktop i3's are just getting a mid 10%-15% of boost comparing them to their similar models of Intel Core 2 Duo.
Now let's take a look about MOBILE i3's … the thing changes drastically:
MBP 13" Mid 2010 (Intel Core 2 Duo P8600 @ 2.4 GHz - 1609 // Intel Core 2 Duo P8700 @ 2.53 GHz - 1799)
"Possible" MBP 13" Mid 2010 (Intel Core i3 M 330 @ 2.13 GHz - 1995 // Intel Core i3 M 350 @ 2.27GHz - 2031)
Another time, the benchmarks are from cpubenchmark.net, and it's just a slight 10% of boost talking about CPU power. On some tasks, the Core 2 Duo it's still faster if you take a look at notebookcheck benchmarks. C2D P8600 is on #54 while i3 330M is on #55 and i3 350M on #49 … so maybe a 5% of boost in everyday tasks. Oh, and don't blame me yet, i know all the architecture changes that supposes the iX as HT, Turboboost or the integration of the memory controller onto the chip which reduces DRASTICALLY the use of the northbridge (though the M330 just has HT not TurboBoost). But sincerely, will you notice a BUMP on your everyday tasks just of this (at maximum) 10% extra? I don't think so.
Besides of that, if the MBP 13" had the i3 this will imply a discrete graphics (based on the quality of Intel IGP's) which was clearly going to eat a lot more of battery (not just for the room that will reduce the battery size … plus the "on the fly" change from IGP to Discrete Graphics is eating a lot of battery and making some 15" and 17" users get a lil bit depressed about it, just search around these forums, and they have a battery with more than 1000mAh than ours)
So, clearly, with THESE mobile i3's … i really love my MBP 13" Mid 2010 with C2D @ 2.4GHz which gives me a really powerful computer with acceptable 3D graphics and an incredible battery life and i won't renounce to this for just 5% boost of CPU or having "the last from Intel" for reducing the 10h battery to a 6-7h one and sure a bumped price of minimum 150-200$ for the "internal redesign" and added components as happened to the 15" and 17" models.
Just for your information and to take a more intelligent decision if you're planning to get a MBP 13" but you're not sure due to the "old" technology … because sincerely, this laptop it's just great and do all that has to do for its specs and it won't do it "a lot better" as much claim just for the fact of carrying an i3 inside.
Now you can blame me if you want.
iMac Late 2009 21.5" (Intel Core 2 Duo E7600 @ 3.06 Ghz - 2099 // Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 @ 3.33Ghz - 2627)
iMac Mid 2010 21.5" (Intel Core i3 540 @ 3.06Ghz - 2806 // Intel Core i3 550 @ 3.20Ghz - 2794)
And these are the best "benchmarks" giving a full room to i3 to get the most "powerful" result, these are taken from www.cpubenchmark.net … but if you take a look at anandtech or notebookcheck, the desktop i3's are just getting a mid 10%-15% of boost comparing them to their similar models of Intel Core 2 Duo.
Now let's take a look about MOBILE i3's … the thing changes drastically:
MBP 13" Mid 2010 (Intel Core 2 Duo P8600 @ 2.4 GHz - 1609 // Intel Core 2 Duo P8700 @ 2.53 GHz - 1799)
"Possible" MBP 13" Mid 2010 (Intel Core i3 M 330 @ 2.13 GHz - 1995 // Intel Core i3 M 350 @ 2.27GHz - 2031)
Another time, the benchmarks are from cpubenchmark.net, and it's just a slight 10% of boost talking about CPU power. On some tasks, the Core 2 Duo it's still faster if you take a look at notebookcheck benchmarks. C2D P8600 is on #54 while i3 330M is on #55 and i3 350M on #49 … so maybe a 5% of boost in everyday tasks. Oh, and don't blame me yet, i know all the architecture changes that supposes the iX as HT, Turboboost or the integration of the memory controller onto the chip which reduces DRASTICALLY the use of the northbridge (though the M330 just has HT not TurboBoost). But sincerely, will you notice a BUMP on your everyday tasks just of this (at maximum) 10% extra? I don't think so.
Besides of that, if the MBP 13" had the i3 this will imply a discrete graphics (based on the quality of Intel IGP's) which was clearly going to eat a lot more of battery (not just for the room that will reduce the battery size … plus the "on the fly" change from IGP to Discrete Graphics is eating a lot of battery and making some 15" and 17" users get a lil bit depressed about it, just search around these forums, and they have a battery with more than 1000mAh than ours)
So, clearly, with THESE mobile i3's … i really love my MBP 13" Mid 2010 with C2D @ 2.4GHz which gives me a really powerful computer with acceptable 3D graphics and an incredible battery life and i won't renounce to this for just 5% boost of CPU or having "the last from Intel" for reducing the 10h battery to a 6-7h one and sure a bumped price of minimum 150-200$ for the "internal redesign" and added components as happened to the 15" and 17" models.
Just for your information and to take a more intelligent decision if you're planning to get a MBP 13" but you're not sure due to the "old" technology … because sincerely, this laptop it's just great and do all that has to do for its specs and it won't do it "a lot better" as much claim just for the fact of carrying an i3 inside.
Now you can blame me if you want.
