Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New 21.5" iMac 2.5Ghz i5 VS New 13" MacBook Pro 2.3Ghz i5?

thiagos

thiagos

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 20, 2007
371
0
NYC (Manhattan)
I am thinking of getting either the new 21.5Ghz iMac or the new 13" 2.3Ghz MacBook Pro.
Although I don't really need a laptop, it would be nice if I were to go on a trip and take it with me, other than that I don't really need one.
My main question is besides the iMac being a Quad-Core, is the difference is speed much greater?
I do a lot of HD video encoding, photoshop and streaming. Will the entry level MacBook Pro be able to keep up with the tasks? Would the encoding be much faster on the iMac?

Thanks in advance.
 
How about get yourself 21.5 iMac and save some more money, get yourself Macbook Air 11inch in several months

That should fit your need, traveling once a while with lovely MBA, and get in your room with iMac.
 
I was thinking about the same thing. I'm going to be getting an iPad eventually, so I can use that for everything on the go. I'm leaning toward the iMac. It will last me longer as well.
 
The base 2011 13" MBP benchmarks faster than the 2.66 i7 CPU in the fastest 2010 MBP's. The 2011 geek benchmarks for the 13" is almost 2x faster than the base 13" 2010 MBP's (I had one of those).

So CPU wise you have plenty of power, not as much as a quad core but plenty nonetheless. What you do not get with the 13" is a dedicated graphics card. This can be very useful for gaming, streaming videos... since the graphics card will make difference for screen refreshes. I do mostly still photography so a graphics CPU is nice but not very important, but for your stated needs it might make a difference.

The question you need to ask yourself is, do you want portability? If not then the iMac is much better value. I had a 2009 iMac and a 2010 13" MBP for travel. I sold both in November and picked up a base 15" MBP, upgraded the RAM and hard drive and use a high end external monitor and have zero regrets. I love the 15" screen size and only use my external for serious photo editing.

If you can swing it then a 2011 15" base MBP will give you everything you need, graphic chip, quad core power, but it will cost more
 
Do you want a portable or not?

CAn you live with a portable or not?

The only reason to get the MBP is for portability. But that's a big selling point as Apple sells more laptops than desktops.

YOu always get more computing power/screen for your money with the iMac.
 
Last edited:
Vantage Point said:
The base 2011 13" MBP benchmarks faster than the 2.66 i7 CPU in the fastest 2010 MBP's. The 2011 geek benchmarks for the 13" is almost 2x faster than the base 13" 2010 MBP's (I had one of those).

So CPU wise you have plenty of power, not as much as a quad core but plenty nonetheless. What you do not get with the 13" is a dedicated graphics card. This can be very useful for gaming, streaming videos... since the graphics card will make difference for screen refreshes. I do mostly still photography so a graphics CPU is nice but not very important, but for your stated needs it might make a difference.

The question you need to ask yourself is, do you want portability? If not then the iMac is much better value. I had a 2009 iMac and a 2010 13" MBP for travel. I sold both in November and picked up a base 15" MBP, upgraded the RAM and hard drive and use a high end external monitor and have zero regrets. I love the 15" screen size and only use my external for serious photo editing.

If you can swing it then a 2011 15" base MBP will give you everything you need, graphic chip, quad core power, but it will cost more
Click to expand...

Now that's an answer I was looking for! Thank you for taking your time to explain the different machines, that was very helpful in making my decision.
 
If you need portability on a regular basis, get a laptop. If not, get a desktop.

Portability has a price, so a laptop with the power of a desktop is always much more expensive. With a desktop, you get more power for a lower price than you would a desktop, in exchange for the lack of portability.

-----

Don't buy for edge cases (I might buy lumber once in the next 8 years, so maybe I should get a pickup truck). Buy for the 95%.
 
thiagos said:
Now that's an answer I was looking for! Thank you for taking your time to explain the different machines, that was very helpful in making my decision.
Click to expand...

Great. FYI, the geek scores for the new iMacs are out. It shows the base 21.5 iMac now bench around 7,000+ while the base 13" MBP are about 6,000. Very close but the base iMac only has a 500gb drive while all the MBP's can be user upgraded to to 1tb drives. I upgraded to a faster, 7200 rpm 750gb drive - see my review from amazon for $109.

Also, the base 15" MBP's are faster than the base iMacs, around 8800. You can see a comparison of the MBP models, all sizes from 2010-2011 at the link below. The new MBP's are just amazing starting with the 13"
http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2011/02/macbookpro-benchmarks-early-2011/

One last thing, since you are in NYC, there is a Microcenter store in northern NJ that offers a special price of only $999 for the 2011 base MBP and that store only charges 3.5% sales tax. The deal is for pickup only but you can reserve one for pickup. This is a fantastic deal and it is completely legit. Many people on this site have taken advantage of this deal. I bought my 2010 13" from them for the same great price and actually sold it on ebay for slightly more than I paid when I got my 15"
 
Last edited:
I've also been having the same debate. I currently have a 2007 white crackbook to which I've upgraded the harddrive to 320 at 7200 and 4GBs of RAM. I also have an iPad for extreme portability.

I primarily use my macbook for web-browsing, media management (itunes, AppleTV streaming, handbrake, iPhoto, etc.), Office and VPN, and some light Photoshop, all of which it does reasonably well. I would like something capable of playing the occasional game of Starcraft 2.

I love having the ability to move from room to room in my apartment to work on the laptop as well as the occasional work travel and coffee shop visit, so not owning one is out of the question. However, my thought is that I could get a iMac as my primary computer to play games and manage media, and keep the macbook as my portable machine. Once it dies, I would get a 11" MBA.

My problem is, do I really need two machines plus and iPad and an iPhone? I could save myself a bundle with the 13" pro and by selling my macbook. The 13" pro can easily do everything I need with some sacrifice in graphics and game play, which isn't a huge deal. I also live in a relatively small city apartment with not a lot of space. Would the iMac be that big of an improvement over the MBP? The shelf life of the iMac also appeals to me, and I like the idea of having a home base station.

Also, the 15" MBP really doesn't appeal to me. It's a little big for travel and the cost is high for what you get. Thoughts?
 
I am really surprised that the new base imac is only about 1000 points better than the base 13" MBP. I guess its the jump from i5 to i7 that makes a real difference!
 
My problem is, do I really need two machines plus and iPad and an iPhone? I could save myself a bundle with the 13" pro and by selling my macbook. The 13" pro can easily do everything I need...

A 13" MBP and an external monitor and an iPhone might be a good combo for you. Also, adding and SSD and more RAM done the line would be like getting another upgrade. I managed two computers, iMac and MBP and didn't really care for it, but that's me. I also expect my external monitor to outlast 2-3 MBP upgrades - especially since it gets used only when I need big.

There is a reason why Apple doesn't put dedicated graphics in the 13" MBP and that reason so people will agonize and end up buying two Macs instead of one. They got you and they know it. However, when I had my 2010 13" MBP I never had a problem watching videos but I also do not play games
 
Vantage - I agree, they definitely get you with the graphics card. The only game I plan to play is Starcraft 2, and it supposedly runs reasonably well on the new MBP 13". I also hate that the max resolution is 1280 x 800 on the MPB. If the graphics weren't a concern, there's no doubt I would go with the MBP.

I also have concerns over managing two different machines. I think if I bought an iMac I would end up still using the macbook 90% of the time. I've done this a bit before, I previously had another macbook at work. Luckily with dropbox it's pretty easy to transfer files.

I'm not in a rush to buy either, and would like to wait for Lion to be released before buying anything. I also have an external display that doubles as a TV, so I'm already set in that regard.
 
One other way to go if you want to save money and also have a graphics card and plenty of power is a refurb base 2010 15" 2.4Ghz i5 - what i have. The price for this model is extremely reasonable, only $1,269 with 'same as new warranty' and free shipping. Yes, you can still get Apple Care as well.

This site http://www.refurb.me/us/ is better for refurbs than Apples because if they run out then Apple removes it from their site until a new batch is in. Refurb.me will keep you up to date with prices, models and availability. I wish I bought mine refurb but I got a great deal on Amazon on black friday weekend. If you need the graphic then this is most cost effective solution and you are less likely to need an external - size matters. Apple refurbs look brand spanking new. I bought my 2009 27" iMac refurb and it was indistinguishable from new except for the box. I sold it in favor of my current setup

Remember, it is cheap and easy to boost these. 8GB ram upgrade is less than $100.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back