Right now I'm still trying to decide whether to go for the 13.3" or the 15" from the stand point of the GPU and lesser extent CPU.
The 15" includes the AMD Radeon HD 6490M with 256MB GDDR5 and the main focus I have for wanting to get it is:
1) OpenCL compatible which will be useful long term - some video encoders are already taking advantage of it.
2) I've had a bad set of experiences with the GMA950 and GMA X3100 from from the point of view relating to drivers and performance - so when it comes to longevity I want to get at least 4 years out of the computer.
Then there is the CPU which I wonder whether it is a 'down step' going from the 13.3" 2.7GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 to the 2.0GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 then there is also the comparison between the CPU's in terms of features:
2.0GHz quad-core Intel Core i7
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=53463
2.7GHz dual-core Intel Core i7
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52231
And whether I'm getting possibly a faster one with a quad-core but less features by way of Apple maybe in the future taking advantage of some of the extensions being offered.
My background is that I'm primarily going to be using it for video recording/compression, looking at the internet, writing documents etc with Office 2011, some Flash and Photoshop stuff but nothing major.
I'm tempted to go with the 13.3 model because I wonder whether the 15" is an overkill but at the same time I've been burnt by Intel GPU's in the past and wondering whether the 3000 HD is the big 'step up' (from previous versions) that some reviewers claim it is.
The 15" includes the AMD Radeon HD 6490M with 256MB GDDR5 and the main focus I have for wanting to get it is:
1) OpenCL compatible which will be useful long term - some video encoders are already taking advantage of it.
2) I've had a bad set of experiences with the GMA950 and GMA X3100 from from the point of view relating to drivers and performance - so when it comes to longevity I want to get at least 4 years out of the computer.
Then there is the CPU which I wonder whether it is a 'down step' going from the 13.3" 2.7GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 to the 2.0GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 then there is also the comparison between the CPU's in terms of features:
2.0GHz quad-core Intel Core i7
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=53463
2.7GHz dual-core Intel Core i7
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52231
And whether I'm getting possibly a faster one with a quad-core but less features by way of Apple maybe in the future taking advantage of some of the extensions being offered.
My background is that I'm primarily going to be using it for video recording/compression, looking at the internet, writing documents etc with Office 2011, some Flash and Photoshop stuff but nothing major.
I'm tempted to go with the 13.3 model because I wonder whether the 15" is an overkill but at the same time I've been burnt by Intel GPU's in the past and wondering whether the 3000 HD is the big 'step up' (from previous versions) that some reviewers claim it is.
