Just for your information, for all the -I wanted an i3 in the new MBP 13" !!!-

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Neilkot, Jul 27, 2010.

  1. Neilkot macrumors newbie

    Jul 27, 2010
    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.
  2. kgeier82 macrumors 65816

    Feb 18, 2008
    Dont iMac's have notebook cpu's in them??? Or was that just the gpu.
  3. wordoflife macrumors 604


    Jul 6, 2009
    No. Recently iMacs have been using desktop class processors.
  4. Neilkot thread starter macrumors newbie

    Jul 27, 2010
    According to the sources of wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMac_(Intel-based) from Early 2006 to Early 2008 they used Intel Core 2 Duo TXXXX chips which were mobile ones but from Early 2008 they have been using "standard" intel desktop chips.

    For the GPU it has been a kind of mix as you will see also on the article, this is the only time they include discrete graphics on every single model of iMac.
  5. El Zanto macrumors newbie

    Jul 20, 2010
    I made a thread recently stating my hesitation of buying a mbp13 on the basis of it having a c2d instead of an i3. Many users convinced me that for everyday tasks c2d = i3 and on some occasions (due to higher clock speeds) c2d > i3 and that made me feel alot better about going for a c2d.

    Your thread and the reasons you stated as to why you prefer c2d to i3 (especially the batter life one) has doubly reassured me about going for a c2d.

    Thanks. Great thread. :D
  6. aeboi macrumors 65816


    Sep 20, 2009
    Bay Area
  7. stefan1975 macrumors 6502a

    Apr 15, 2010
    forget i3, it is Average at best. it should've gotten a i5-450m for the base at least. and an i7 quad ulv in the high end.
  8. jjahshik32 macrumors 603

    Sep 4, 2006
    I dont see the point of the i3 anyways as its pretty much on par with the core 2 duos in terms of speed.
  9. vant macrumors 65816

    Jul 1, 2009
    Couldn't have said it better myself.

    Anyone who complains about wanting an Core i3 Mobile over a C2D is simply just uneducated.
  10. Sneakz macrumors 65816


    Jul 17, 2008
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Correction, they started using desktop processors in the Late 2009 models (21.5" and 27")
  11. Neilkot thread starter macrumors newbie

    Jul 27, 2010
    That's precisely what i was trying to point out, i'm very well aware that how i5's and i7's are really blowing out the way and performing really well (even they need another refresh to solve all the problems they're having with their first experience on mobile iX's)

    But, if the renewed iMac base gets the poorest i3 without even TurboBoost (and upgraded prices)... what will we receive from Apple on 2011 on the refreshed MBP's? Clearly i won't expect an i5 till the "third configuration" as it happened for the iMac. First they upgraded the iMac 27" with the new i5/i7 (same as happened with 15" and 17" MBP) and when most of people was waiting for the new iMac 21.5" with all i5's (even the low performers one) and faster ones for the 27" they appear with this ... which is not clearly between their famous slogans of "2x faster" or "4x faster"

    So maybe an i5 will let all of us impressed on the "future new" 13" MBP but sure the price also will bump according to this ... and they'll have to think in how to merge it all (size, graphics and battery), cause an update means "i don't want to lose what i had" ... maybe also will be the time when MB and MBP should get the real differences on terms of CPU, using an i3 for MB and offering an i5 for the base MBP, who knows.

    Yeah, you're right, i thought the E8*35 were desktop processors as the E8**0 series but as far as i can read they were still "mobile" even they were branded with a non-mobile letter (intel used to name T**** or P**** to mobile processors and E**** to desktop ones)

    Sorry for misunderstanding and thank you for pointing it.

Share This Page