Macbook pro 15" i7 vs HP ENVY 15" i7

[hellric]

I asked myself the same question, and went to the MBP because :
- I'm pretty sure it'll run Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 very well, at least in 1440*900, that's why I didn't chose the 1680*1050 display ;
- I don't trust HP (been lurking on Envy's lounge and I've seen few users without problems : heat issues, bad trackpad,... ), the few people I know had problems with HP laptops, at work we used to use HP's and their customer service is very bad
- I want to run OS X
- no backlight keyboard on Envy
- battery life too weak on Envy
- mbp has now good

 

[greg400]

Better GPU? You have got to be kidding me. The GT 330M is weaker than the ATI 5650. Not only that, the 5830 has twice the number of cores as the 5650. How on earth did you come to the conclusion that the GT 330M is better?

Since you used notebookcheck.net as your benchmarks, alright. Take a look at the 3DMark Vantage scores:

Nvidia 330M - min: 2192, avg: 2496, max: 2743 Points
ATI Mobility 5830 - min: 4528, avg: 4785, max: 5042 Points


Like gagaliya said, the 5830 will blow the lid off the GT 330M.

Lol, the 5830 also has a lower core speed, a lower shader speed and a lower memory speed. The MacBook Pro also has instant GPU switching, something non-existant on the 5830.

3D Mark 06:
5830:
max: 8050 Points

330m:
max: 7553 Points

Also look at the game benchmarks below. The 5830 is not much better, if at all when it comes to games. Especially when running at a higher resolution than what the 330m will be running at. The GPU combo on the MBP is a much better overall package for a laptop.

 

[Pressure]

is the radeon 5830 that big and hot to fit in a macbook pro ?
what about the 330M 1gb ? i would kill easily 1 hour of battery for that, beside who play Diablo 3 for hours without the power plug on ?

Actually, the Geforce GT 330M has a Thermal Design Power of 23 Watt and the Radeon Mobility HD 5830 has a Thermal Design Power of 24 Watt.

I am guessing Apple got the Geforce GT 330M dirt cheap from nVIDIA.

 

[Fasailmac]

Lol, the 5830 also has a lower core speed, a lower shader speed and a lower memory speed. The MacBook Pro also has instant GPU switching, something non-existant on the 5830.

3D Mark 06:
5830:
max: 8050 Points

330m:
max: 7553 Points

Also look at the game benchmarks below. The 5830 is not much better, if at all when it comes to games. Especially when running at a higher resolution than what the 330m will be running at. The GPU combo on the MBP is a much better overall package for a laptop.

Lol i have a 335m alienware and an HP envy with the 5830, in game performance is much better on the envy. Macs are not meant for gaming, it shouldn't be a surprise that the GPU is crappy.

 

[Pressure]

Lol, the 5830 also has a lower core speed, a lower shader speed and a lower memory speed. The MacBook Pro also has instant GPU switching, something non-existant on the 5830.

3D Mark 06:
5830:
max: 8050 Points

330m:
max: 7553 Points

Also look at the game benchmarks below. The 5830 is not much better, if at all when it comes to games. Especially when running at a higher resolution than what the 330m will be running at. The GPU combo on the MBP is a much better overall package for a laptop.

Please stop using Futuremark's 3DMark as a measure stick. That synthetic benchmark has been out for more than 4 years.

Use any contemporary game and compare the results.

The Radeon Mobility HD 5830 (Juniper based) with 800 Stream Processors IS faster than the Geforce GT 330M with 48 CUDA cores.

Even the Radeon Mobility HD 5650 (Madison based) with 400 Stream Processors is faster than the Geforce GT 330M and it uses significantly less power to boot. The Thermal Design Power of the Geforce GT 330M is 23 Watt, while the Thermal Design Power of the Radeon Mobility HD 5650 is between 15 to 19 Watt based on configuration.

Geforce GT 240M (GT216) = Geforce GT 330M (GT216).

 

[greg400]

Please stop using Futuremark's 3DMark as a measure stick. That synthetic benchmark has been out for more than 4 years.

Use any contemporary game and compare the results.

The Radeon Mobility HD 5830 (Juniper based) with 800 Stream Processors IS faster than the Geforce GT 330M with 48 CUDA cores.

Even the Radeon Mobility HD 5650 (Madison based) with 400 Stream Processors is faster than the Geforce GT 330M and it uses significantly less power to boot. The Thermal Design Power of the Geforce GT 330M is 23 Watt, while the Thermal Design Power of the Radeon Mobility HD 5650 is between 15 to 19 Watt based on configuration.

I never said it wasn't faster. I said the difference is negligible when comparing it to a 330m running at a lower resolution and that the MacBook Pro GPU combo is a better deal for a laptop.

As for that image, again the 330m will not be running at 1920x1200 making that chart worthless as to what we are talking about.

Lol i have a 335m alienware and an HP envy with the 5830, in game performance is much better on the envy. Macs are not meant for gaming, it shouldn't be a surprise that the GPU is crappy.

You've got to be kidding me. That M11x you're on has a measly 1.3 GHz processor. Of course the performance is going to be worse.

 

[Pressure]

I never said it wasn't faster. I said the difference is negligible when comparing it to a 330m running at a lower resolution and that the MacBook Pro GPU combo is a better deal for a laptop.

As for that image, again the 330m will not be running at 1920x1200 making that chart worthless as to what we are talking about.

The Madison based Radeon Mobility HD 5650 will still be faster than the Geforce GT 240M / Geforce GT 330M at 1440x900.

They could also have used graphics switching for the ATI / Intel combo. It is not an nVIDIA thing.

 

[greg400]

The Madison based Radeon Mobility HD 5650 will still be faster than the Geforce GT 240M / Geforce GT 330M at 1440x900.

They could also have used graphics switching for the ATI / Intel combo. It is not just an nVIDIA thing.

Great, I'm not comparing them running at the same resolutions because again, that isn't what we're talking about.

They could have, but did they? No.

 

[Pressure]

Great, I'm not comparing them running at the same resolutions because again, that isn't what we're talking about.

They could have, but did they? No.

Then I am lost for parameters to compare. I think your point being that the Geforce GT 240M / 330M is fast enough for most games at 1440x900?

The technology behind graphic switching is something Apple came up with, as the Optimus solution from NVIDIA is limited to Windows and the driver needs profiling for every application to make the switch automatically. Which is cumbersome to say the least.

Apple made it transparent to the end user in that regard that it automatically switches upon using certain graphic frameworks in Mac OSX.

 

[greg400]

Then I am lost for parameters to compare. I think your point being that the Geforce GT 240M / 330M is fast enough for most games at 1440x900?

The technology behind graphic switching is something Apple came up with, as the Optimus solution from NVIDIA is limited to Windows and the driver needs profiling for every application to make the switch automatically. Which is cumbersome to say the least.

Apple made it transparent to the end user in that regard that it automatically switches upon using certain graphic frameworks in Mac OSX.

Also the fact that the HP Envy will be at 1920x1200 meaning the card performance differences will dwindle.

And I don't see how explaining Apple's graphics switching is helping your argument...

 

[MatthewAMEL]

Also the fact that the HP Envy will be at 1920x1200 meaning the card performance differences will dwindle.

And I don't see how explaining Apple's graphics switching is helping your argument...

You are really clinging to this resolution issue. The ATI GPU is faster at every resolution than the Nvidia.

Apple really stumbled with this graphic adapter selection. Minimum should be a 335M with option for a 1GB 360M.

 

[greg400]

You are really clinging to this resolution issue. The ATI GPU is faster at every resolution than the Nvidia.

Apple really stumbled with this graphic adapter selection. Minimum should be a 335M with option for a 1GB 360M.

You really have no idea what this thread is about. It's comparing an HP Envy running at 1920x1200 to a MacBook Pro running at 1440x900. You have to take resolution difference into consideration when comparing performance.

 

[zer0sum]

ATI 5830 benchmarks: http://www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Mobility-Radeon-HD-5830.24733.0.html
NVIDIA 330m benchmarks: http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-330M.22437.0.html

I'd go for the MacBook Pro for the two extra hours of battery life, better GPU, better build and you don't need a shoddy hack just to make it useable.

Waaay more than 2 hours battery life...more like 4 hours +
Envy 15 is prob 2 flat unless you add the slice which weighs 2lbs or so.
Love the envy but the battery life is shocking!

MBP can also take another hdd if you replace the optibay. If thats important to you.

Z

 

[bobdobalina]

edit

 

[shadygrove]

The backlit keyboard, magsafe power adapter, huge multi-touch track pad, OSX, all the 3rd party OSX based programs, battery life, and customer service all outweigh the increased specs of the envy. Honestly in the real working work, I bet there would be fractional differences in productivity from the specs of both machines. Plus you throw some Windows to the mix and the added productivity is gone by the need to run anti-viruses in the background and in a constant process of cleaning the machine and clean from malware, spyware, and bloatware.

I am biased towards OSX for sure. But talking specs for specs the Envy is HIGHER but in the real world it doesn't necessarily equate to increased productivity or higher profit margins. I am sure both new models will do any task your work throws at you.

(I can't speak for PC/Mac gaming though. I have always been a console gamer, and used my computers for work/light recreation.)

I type this on my 2005 PowerBook G4 that after having been dropped numerous times, having survived a serious car accident in which the entire case was tweaked, and having just lived through being stuffed into a back pack and dragged around Cambodia for a month, works well today. I was most concerned by the ants that invaded the keyboard, but no, this thing has a will to live.

Yup... I have two of them. Both have been dropped, battered, and bruised. But I use them both everyday for work and recreation.

 

[Pressure]

Also the fact that the HP Envy will be at 1920x1200 meaning the card performance differences will dwindle.

And I don't see how explaining Apple's graphics switching is helping your argument...

Ah, I get your comparison now.

1920 x 1080 (HP Envy) with the Radeon Mobility HD 5830 vs 1680 x 1050 (MacBook Pro) with the Geforce GT 330M. 240 x 30 more pixels will really not slow the Radeon Mobility solution that much.

Well, I still think this is a battle the Radeon Mobility HD 5830 will easily win.

I was merely stating that the graphic switching had absolutely nothing to do with NVIDIA.

Myself, I would definitely pick the MacBook Pro over the Envy, even though it has a vastly more superior graphic card.

 

[ippikiokami]

You really have no idea what this thread is about. It's comparing an HP Envy running at 1920x1200 to a MacBook Pro running at 1440x900. You have to take resolution difference into consideration when comparing performance.

Doubt a user who is talking about gaming speed really gives a flip about the graphics switching. It doesn't really save THAT much energy.

And i didn't see the user talk about the two resolutions. The fact is the HP Envy's card is noticeably faster. BTW I don't know about you but I like higher resolutions when gaming so if it can run at a higher resolution and still be faster that's a double bonus

 

[greg400]

Doubt a user who is talking about gaming speed really gives a flip about the graphics switching. It doesn't really save THAT much energy.

And i didn't see the user talk about the two resolutions. The fact is the HP Envy's card is noticeably faster. BTW I don't know about you but I like higher resolutions when gaming so if it can run at a higher resolution and still be faster that's a double bonus

This is a thread about the HP Envy and the MacBook Pro. Not a GPU vs another GPU. In the case of a laptop, which is being compared, the switching IS worth it. You buy a laptop for portability, and you aren't very portable when you have to charge so often due to power consumption. Over time that adds up.

Didn't see what user talking about resolutions? The entire thread is about the HP Envy vs the MacBook Pro. You have to take resolution into consideration for gaming performance.

 

[nomad421]

The envy is clearly more hardware for a lower price. I struggled with the same decision; and I chose the new 15" MPB; I'll tell you why. First there is battery life. The 6hrs claimed for the envy is with the extra-large battery being used. The battery slides underneath the laptop and covers the entire undercarriage. It makes the otherwise sexy looking envy much thicker and heavier. The second issue (with the envy with those specs) is heat. The Quad Core processors produce significantly more heat; and draw a good bit more power, than their dual core brethren. Now clearly, they perform better as well; but I always have been and always will be a desktop AND laptop guy; I want a high performance laptop, but I don't need a desktop replacement. Third, is build quality. Now it's very nice that HP went with the aluminum body for the Envy, and I'm not claiming it has bad build quality. Undoubtedly, someone will flame me for saying this, but from personal experience, I find the unibody MBPs to be among the sturdiest laptops (along with the business class Lenovos) out there.

Now there is the graphics card issue. I was disappointed with apple's call on the 330M. There are really two issues at play here though. I would have preferred the 360M, but not the AMD(ATI). This is particular to a sub-class of users, but I program in CUDA. This means that for me, ATI is not an option. In terms of performance (and heat, and power draw) the ATI card produces a good deal more. I don't really think that's debatable. Like I said, I would have preferred the 360M, but I'll use the MBP to make sure that my CUDA code works; not to performance test it. Also, Apple's optimius-esque graphics card switching solution was/is a big plus here.

Finally, there are the details. The MBP is thinner, has the backlit keyboard, weighs less than the Envy (if you consider the extra battery), but still includes an optical drive (which is an addon for the Envy). The hardware is officially supported by Apple, so I know I won't run into one of the plethora of hackintosh bugs which pop up on unsupported hardware (though when I was considering an Envy, my plan was to pop Ubuntu 10.04 on it . . . not OSX-86).

At the end of the day, even though the MBP offers lower performing hardware at a premium price, it still edged out the envy in terms of what I want/need from a laptop. That said, if the Envy adopted some minor modifications (like the option of choosing an Nvidia card and a better battery life w/o the extra battery, I might have gone with it). Either way, I'm sure you'll be happy with your purchase if you choose to be.

 

[PandaOnslaught]

Nice Nomad, you said that well
my thing is your buying an hp envy and trying to compare specs, when its been a known fact, that windows pc's have more power, obviously but what your paying for gets returned in resale by FAR,

Analogy Time:
lets look at the nissan altima 2.5s vs Mazda RX-8 go out and buy an RX-8 brand new for 26,000$ great car, its way faster and more powerful than the nissan altima, you can get a nissan altima for about the same price

now the nissan has way less power, but lasts for twice as long in mileage, and will sell at a higher value than the rx8 when your ready to sell

to my experience mac vs pc has been about the same , ones more powerful dies in 2 years, macs enough to get the job done, great os, lasts for 4-6 years

 

[Max(IT)]

How could you compare a Mbp to an Hp Envy is well beyond my understanding, but I know: a lot of people keep comparing Mac with Pc based on tech specs

 

[joecool99]

is the radeon 5830 that big and hot to fit in a macbook pro ?
what about the 330M 1gb ? i would kill easily 1 hour of battery for that, beside who play Diablo 3 for hours without the power plug on ?

there will be 2 more MBP revisions before this game will ever make it to the release stage.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

Go with the Envy. It's cheaper, better, and Windows 7 is pretty darn close to - if not on par or above - OS X.

Remember, the Envy is about 1/2 the price of the MBP, so you'll save somewhere around $1000.... In a more realistic sense, that means when you go to Starbucks with your Envy, you'll have saved enough money for over 200 cups of coffee. If you got a MBP, you'll be giving up 200 cups of coffee*.

*Assuming the coffee is around $4 a cup. Not some sissy drink mind you, but a real frappuccino.

 

[Ice Dragon]

I would think the nVidia GeForce 330M at 512 MB would be enough to run Diablo 3 with no problem, no?

I realize the Envy tops the MB Pro but I don't honestly see Diablo 3 out until closer to Sandy Bridge anyway at the rate Blizzard is going. I mean it's been 10 years since Diablo 2 which is sad.

 

[TWIXMIX]

I would think the nVidia GeForce 330M at 512 MB would be enough to run Diablo 3 with no problem, no?

I realize the Envy tops the MB Pro but I don't honestly see Diablo 3 out until closer to Sandy Bridge anyway at the rate Blizzard is going. I mean it's been 10 years since Diablo 2 which is sad.

I'd say Diablo 3 should be able to run fine when it's released. This is considering that on the new i7 15" Macbook Pro I can run Left 4 Dead 2 on max settings with 2x antialiasing and still get 60fps.