MacBook Pro 13" 2011 better than 2009 model?

[Draythor]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

I have a 2.26GHz 4GB RAM model from 2009. Are the new 13 inch models worth upgrading to? Or is advisable to wait until next year?

 

[Adidas Addict]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

I have a 2.26GHz 4GB RAM model from 2009. Are the new 13 inch models worth upgrading to? Or is advisable to wait until next year?

Thats the 9400m graphics model I think, in which case very much so.

The new i5 would be roughly 3 times quicker than your C2D and the graphics would be a decent upgrade too.

 

[aberrero]

Thats the 9400m graphics model I think, in which case very much so.

The new i5 would be roughly 3 times quicker than your C2D and the graphics would be a decent upgrade too.

no, not even close to 3 times faster. Maybe 20-40%, tops.

I certainly wouldn't upgrade. The new graphics chip isn't very good either. If you do anything graphics intensive, get a 15".

Otherwise, wait until next year. Ivy Bridge should be a pretty nice upgrade over Sandy Bridge and you should be able to get a quad core in the 13". That would be something that is actually worth upgrading to.

 

[henrikrox]

Thats the 9400m graphics model I think, in which case very much so.

The new i5 would be roughly 3 times quicker than your C2D and the graphics would be a decent upgrade too.

Haha 3 times quicker? We Are talking 30%. How is that 3 times? Haha 3 times is 300% better. Which they Are not.

Most people wont even notice the difference between a core 2 duo and a sandy bridge in day to day task. Because the hdd is the bottleneck.

Also the intel 3000hd is just a tiny bit better then 9400m

Why do you give answers when you are just making wild assumptions?

 

[gdeputy]

if your laptop is covering all your needs stick with it. Don't get caught up into the upgrade hype if you don't really need it. If you can go another year you'll see a better machine and at that point you might actually benefit from the upgrades (assuming your current laptop is hitting all your needs).

If your in the market for a new laptop then it's a nice machine, but don't get one just because, get it if you need it.

 

[Draythor]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

It absolutely is meeting all my needs. Apart from needing a HD upgrade I really can't fault it. Thanks for the feedback! I guess re growing concern is the reduced trade in value now.

 

[MacMadeInHeaven]

MacBook Pro 13" 2011 better than 2009 model?

No.

 

[SerrQ]

If your MBP covers all your needs then you should wait, or that's what I would do.

 

[rawCpoppa]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

Yes the 13" 2011 Mbp is better than the 09 you have. The question is how much better. Intel's gpu is not blazing but it certainly beats the 9400m and is closer in performance to the 320m in the 2010 Mbp.

The 2nd gen core i5 is faster than the core2duo but like others have said you may not truly notice this depending on what you do. The i5 would shine for video encoding and decoding as it has dedicated hardware for this built into the chip.

The ram in the 2011 Mbp runs at 1333 MHz vs 1066 in yours so that's faster as well but this may also not be noticed depending on what one does with both Mbps.

The best upgrade would be to replace the hdd with ssd. The 5400 rpm hdd and also 7200 rpm hdd really can't compare to ssds.