MacBook Pro 2010 user. Is getting a 2013 MacBook Air an upgrade?

[Spock1234]

Bought the CTO MacBook Air (i7,8 GB, 512 GB)

Guys (or Gals), thanks for sharing your views on the mid-2010 MBPro versus the 2013 MBAir. I was hoping you could help me with the choice I have to make.

I am planning to switch from a mid-2010 MBPro (2.4 GHz) to a top-of-the-line 2013 MBAir (i7, 8 GB RAM, 512 GB SSD). This will be my only computer.

OK - I made my decision. I bought a top-of-the-line 13" MBA (i7,8 GB, 512 GB) from my local Apple Store. After using it for two days, I am very happy with my choice. My thoughts on the MBA versus my mid-2012 MBP:

1. The MBA was a great improvement in portability. Not just while traveling, but also in everyday use. Much easier to handle, whether I am in bed or lying on the couch.
2. The battery life is amazing. I never got more than 5 hrs from my old MBP - the MBA lasted over 10 hrs in normal use (surfing the web, word processing, listening to music, watching movies in iTunes).
3. The MBA, with an external Apple SuperDrive, is faster than my 2010 15" MPB in ripping and encoding DVDs using Handbrake (approx. 20 min on the MBA versus 45 min on the MBP).
4. The CTO MBA costs $1849, the mid-2012 MBP costs $1799. Not a big difference. The additional $80 expense for the external SuperDrive was covered by the lower cost of AppleCare ($250 for the MBA vs $350 for the MBP).

I know the 2012 MBP would be even faster than the 2013 MBA, but I am quite happy with the improvement over my old MBP.

 

[Zaphyrus]

OK - I made my decision. I bought the MBP for a top-of-the-line 13" MBA (i7,8 GB, 512 GB) from my local Apple Store.

I am very happy with my choice. My thoughts on the MBA versus the MBP:

1. The MBA was a great improvement in portability. Not just while traveling, but in everyday use. Much easier to handle.
2. The battery life is amazing. I never got more than 5 hrs from my old MBP - the MBA lasted over 10 hrs in normal use (web, word processing, in listening to music iTunes).
3. The MBA is faster than my 2010 15" MPB in ripping and encoding DVDs using Handbrake (approx. 20 min on the MBA versus 45 min on the MBP).
4. The CTO MBA cost $1849, the MBP cost $1799. Not a big difference.

I know the 2012 MBP would be even faster than the 2013 MBA, but I am quite happy with the improvement over my old MBP.

Great choice! Glad it worked out.

 

[fedecape]

Well, I didn't read the second page seems like you bought it..

I'll leave my post anyways

//

If it's not too late, I'd like to add my story

I had a 2010 15inch MBP i7 2.6, 8GB GT330M and a 256SSD!
I used to do some video editing and some light-moderate gaming with it.

In 2012, after the WWDC12, I decided to go ahead and try the new 11inch i5/4gb/128 MBA... My MBP was too heavy and big so I thought it was gonna be a good idea to complement it with the smallest MBA..

After a week with it, and shocked by the performance, I ended up selling my MBP. The only thing I was losing was the double storage space, but since the Air had USB 3.0 I solved the problem with usb 3 1tb portable drive.

The performance was the same or even better, the battery was better, and the portability.. I don't even need to mention that..

There was some 'downgrade' with the Graphics power when playing heavy games (Bootcamp), but It really didn't bother me.


I currently own a 2013 maxed out MBA (signature) and I can't be happier!

It's the ideal computer for almost everybody, and at an affordable price.

 

[electronique]

Im going to chime in here.. Its a little bit of a highjack.

Im almost in the same boat as OP.. However im wanting to 'Upgrade' from a 2011 15" MBP 2.2GHz i7 - 8GB RAM, 120GB SSD + 500GB Seagate Momentus via a caddy.

While this thing still smokes.. Im wanting something a little more portable.

How much can one rate performance on a Geekbench score?

My 2011 MBP gets a score of 11075.. However the best MBA score I could see on Geekbench was around 8/9000.

The most im pushing the MBP at the moment is with Reason 7.. Dont really even push the CPU to 50%.

Im hoping the benefits in regard to battery and portability, will outweigh the small decrease in CPU performance, if I were to go a MBA.

 

[tann]

Im going to chime in here.. Its a little bit of a highjack.

Im almost in the same boat as OP.. However im wanting to 'Upgrade' from a 2011 15" MBP 2.2GHz i7 - 8GB RAM, 120GB SSD + 500GB Seagate Momentus via a caddy.

While this thing still smokes.. Im wanting something a little more portable.

How much can one rate performance on a Geekbench score?

My 2011 MBP gets a score of 11075.. However the best MBA score I could see on Geekbench was around 8/9000.

The most im pushing the MBP at the moment is with Reason 7.. Dont really even push the CPU to 50%.

Im hoping the benefits in regard to battery and portability, will outweigh the small decrease in CPU performance, if I were to go a MBA.

The i5 MBA is about 6600 geekbench, i7 about 8100 (64bit).

Depending what you do, you probably won't notice the difference.

 

[munakib]

In my opinion buying into the top of the line Air is not a good idea. the performance boost is not worth 600$ more than base price. Yes, 8GB of Ram is a must but to max out the Proc and SSD is simply not economical - you can always increase space by an external HDD/Pen Drive. Rather upgrade to the next Macbook Air cycle (2014/15 full of magic and revolution) with the extra 600$.

If I had 1800$ to spare and wanted a lot of power, I would rather pickup the 13" MBP with higher Proc.

Thats my two cents...

 

[ZBoater]

In my opinion buying into the top of the line Air is not a good idea. the performance boost is not worth 600$ more than base price. Yes, 8GB of Ram is a must but to max out the Proc and SSD is simply not economical - you can always increase space by an external HDD/Pen Drive. Rather upgrade to the next Macbook Air cycle (2014/15 full of magic and revolution) with the extra 600$.

If I had 1800$ to spare and wanted a lot of power, I would rather pickup the 13" MBP with higher Proc.

Thats my two cents...

It may not be worth it to YOU. To others, it may very well be worth it. Like ME.

 

[saytheenay]

I am trying to figure this out too. I have a 2010 15" (1440x900) i7 2.8 MBP with a 500 gig 7200 HD; it gets a GeekBench score of 6670 (64-bit). I am considering a fully loaded 2013 13" MBA (i7/8/512).

I am a software engineer and I use Xcode (iOS and maybe Mac development), Java (NetBeans and Eclipse), other less IDE/tool-centric languages, and several VMs running WinXP, Win7, CentOS, etc. on VirtualBox. I rarely run more than two VMs at the same time.

I also do graphics design on the side and have CS6 (Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, Dreamweaver, and Acrobat X). I do this without an external monitor and will most likely continue to do so (if I do get an external, it will be a Dell U2413 24" 1920x1200). I also am into digital photography and will likely edit photos in PS, as I have on my 2010.

I don't game on my laptop or do anything 3D heavy at this time (although I am looking into Unity3D). I mess with Pixelmator, iPhoto, Garageband, and OmniGraffle once in a while.

I tend to be on my laptop from 4-12 hours a day. I considered the rMBP, but since InDesign CS6 and Acrobat X aren't being updated for retina (I just got CS6 earlier this year and don't want to rent software), my interest has waned. If I were to go retina, it would be the 15".

Would a MBA be able to handle all this, or would I be pushing it too much? Will a MBA have enough juice to handle a Dell U2413? How is it moving from a 15" to a 13" display at the same resolution? Would I notice much of a performance increase?

 

[munakib]

It may not be worth it to YOU. To others, it may very well be worth it. Like ME.

Thanks for realizing the fact that I was sharing an opinion...no need to get irritated with YOU vs MEs + Others! Chill pal. If you want to share why you feel its worth it, you can always defend your point of view.

 

[ZBoater]

Thanks for realizing the fact that I was sharing an opinion...no need to get irritated with YOU vs MEs + Others! Chill pal. If you want to share why you feel its worth it, you can always defend your point of view.

So what makes you think I'm not chilled? Did the not clue you in?

 

[cookies!]

I am trying to figure this out too. I have a 2010 15" (1440x900) i7 2.8 MBP with a 500 gig 7200 HD; it gets a GeekBench score of 6670 (64-bit). I am considering a fully loaded 2013 13" MBA (i7/8/512).

I am a software engineer and I use Xcode (iOS and maybe Mac development), Java (NetBeans and Eclipse), other less IDE/tool-centric languages, and several VMs running WinXP, Win7, CentOS, etc. on VirtualBox. I rarely run more than two VMs at the same time.

I also do graphics design on the side and have CS6 (Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, Dreamweaver, and Acrobat X). I do this without an external monitor and will most likely continue to do so (if I do get an external, it will be a Dell U2413 24" 1920x1200). I also am into digital photography and will likely edit photos in PS, as I have on my 2010.

I don't game on my laptop or do anything 3D heavy at this time (although I am looking into Unity3D). I mess with Pixelmator, iPhoto, Garageband, and OmniGraffle once in a while.

I tend to be on my laptop from 4-12 hours a day. I considered the rMBP, but since InDesign CS6 and Acrobat X aren't being updated for retina (I just got CS6 earlier this year and don't want to rent software), my interest has waned. If I were to go retina, it would be the 15".

Would a MBA be able to handle all this, or would I be pushing it too much? Will a MBA have enough juice to handle a Dell U2413? How is it moving from a 15" to a 13" display at the same resolution? Would I notice much of a performance increase?

My 2010 Macbook Pro's GPU was slower than the Intel 5000. The difference was night and day in actual, everyday use, not just benchmarks.

 

[saytheenay]

My 2010 Macbook Pro's GPU was slower than the Intel 5000. The difference was night and day in actual, everyday use, not just benchmarks.

That's great! How does the display compare--specifically color, viewing angles, etc.--to the non-retina MBP, i.e., good enough for graphics work?

 

[cookies!]

That's great! How does the display compare--specifically color, viewing angles, etc.--to the non-retina MBP, i.e., good enough for graphics work?

On my Samsung MBA screen, the colors are less vivid than my MBP, but I think they are more neutral. Viewing angles are atrocious, though. There's no getting around the fact that it is a TN panel. I can do most online graphic design on here, but nothing print.

 

[Spock1234]

On my Samsung MBA screen, the colors are less vivid than my MBP, but I think they are more neutral. Viewing angles are atrocious, though. There's no getting around the fact that it is a TN panel. I can do most online graphic design on here, but nothing print.

Don't all non-Retina MacBooks use TN panels? AFAIK, only the Retina MacBook Pros use IPS panels. So, the Air's display should not be any worse than the regular 15" MacBook Pro's.

 

[cookies!]

Don't all non-Retina MacBooks use TN panels? AFAIK, only the Retina MacBook Pros use IPS panels. So, the Air's display should not be any worse than the regular 15" MacBook Pro's.

I know the MBP was a TN. I was just saying that the MBA's panel is inherently limited.

 

[robvas]

Don't all non-Retina MacBooks use TN panels? AFAIK, only the Retina MacBook Pros use IPS panels. So, the Air's display should not be any worse than the regular 15" MacBook Pro's.

The screen in the Air isn't bad by any means, but it's not as nice as the screens in the Pros.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4528/the-2011-macbook-air-11-13inch-review/7

 

[throAU]

Im going to chime in here.. Its a little bit of a highjack.

Im almost in the same boat as OP.. However im wanting to 'Upgrade' from a 2011 15" MBP 2.2GHz i7 - 8GB RAM, 120GB SSD + 500GB Seagate Momentus via a caddy.

While this thing still smokes.. Im wanting something a little more portable.

How much can one rate performance on a Geekbench score?

I have basically the same machine, and am currently having similar thoughts.

Geekbench is a bit of a useless benchmark. As far as benchmarks go it is entirely synthetic, does not make use of any advanced instruction sets, doesn't do openCL, doesn't do video benchmarking, doesn't benchmark storage, etc. All it does is CPU, which is pretty much NOT a bottleneck for most people for the vast majority of the time they spend on the machine (i.e., all the time they aren't ripping DVDs). Most people tend to be bottlenecked by disk speed, memory capacity and in some cases (games mostly), GPU.

Thinking along those lines.... CPU upgrade in the MBA = meh. Max the RAM, buy as much SSD as you need/can afford - or rather just max the RAM and buy an aftermarket SSD when they are available.

If you have a specific business/professional application YMMV and you'd be best off asking apple if you can test your software on one of their machines...

Unless you are heavily using all 8 threads on your current pro, the rest of the hardware in the MBA is far superior other than the GPU. And from what i've seen of benchmarks and people's comments the HD5000 seems comparable in many performance benchmarks to the 6750 in the 2011 15" Pros in any case. Maybe not exactly as fast, but we're not talking about HALF the performance or anything as catastrophic as that. Integrated GPUs have moved on...

The only thing holding me back from taking the plunge really is the ability to have so much more storage internally.

 

[throAU]

I am a software engineer and I use Xcode (iOS and maybe Mac development), Java (NetBeans and Eclipse), other less IDE/tool-centric languages, and several VMs running WinXP, Win7, CentOS, etc. on VirtualBox. I rarely run more than two VMs at the same time.

For that workload you will probably be bottlenecked by RAM and disk IO speed (compiling is IO intensive, VM is more memory intensive than anything else).

Best bang for buck will probably be SSD + RAM upgrade in your current machine. But of course, a new MBA has other benefits... much faster SSD, more portable, etc.

 

[saytheenay]

For that workload you will probably be bottlenecked by RAM and disk IO speed (compiling is IO intensive, VM is more memory intensive than anything else).

Best bang for buck will probably be SSD + RAM upgrade in your current machine. But of course, a new MBA has other benefits... much faster SSD, more portable, etc.

My 2.8 is a first gen i7--it's a dual core, not quad core. I will be bumping up the ram to 8 gigs since my wife wants it to supplement her iMac. Considering the performance boost of the MBA SSD, would getting and SSD for my MBP really buy me all that much?

 

[throAU]

My 2.8 is a first gen i7--it's a dual core, not quad core. I will be bumping up the ram to 8 gigs since my wife wants it to supplement her iMac. Considering the performance boost of the MBA SSD, would getting and SSD for my MBP really buy me all that much?

In short, yes.

Disk performance has a number of factors:
- sequential read rate
- sequential write rate
- random read rate
- random write rate
- sustained throughput

SSD, regardless of connection (PCIe vs SATA2, SATA3) is hundreds to a thousand times faster at random read/write than a spinning disk in terms of number of requests per second - because there is no physical movement involved (rotation of the disk to to a particular sector and the movement of the read/write head to a particular track).

This is what provides the dramatic "general use" speed up (especially when multitasking or low on RAM and the machine starts having to swap) - your machine can throw say 10,000 operations at the SSD and it can fulfil them in a matter of a second or so, whereas a spinning disk will max out at around 100-150 per second worst case - it will spend most of its time seeking from track to track.

e.g., worst case scenario for a fast spinning SATA disk (i.e., 10k RPM) - 10,000 4kb random reads - at 100 operations per second (roughly what a 10k rpm disk is rated for, for random IO) will take 100 seconds, at 400kb per second (random IO kills spinning disk performance!). On an SSD that will be done in a second or less. Typically your disk and IO is organised a bit better than that, but it is an illustration of how much faster SSD can be in a bad situation.

If you're doing heavy streaming you will obviously be limited by your connection (Sata2/3/PCIe, etc) speed but the number of operations per second is the biggest factor for most people.

 

[Ronnoco]

I came from the same 2010 MBP (2.4GHz i5, 8GB RAM, 500GB Seagate Momentus) to the Ultimate 2013 MBA...night and day difference...the Air smokes the older first gen i5.