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

New clues that may point to Macbook pros refresh

macdud said:
so how would a 2,1 ghz i3 compare to current 2,4 ghz C2D ?
Click to expand...

From passmark which has a huge list of CPU benchmark scores...


first gen Intel Core i3 330M @ 2.13GHz -- 1953
Intel Core2 Duo P8600 @ 2.40GHz -- 1609
Intel Core i5 520M @ 2.40GHz -- 2335 (currently in the 15" MBP now)

the Sandy Bridge i3 will only be even better than the first gen i3 at 2.1Ghz and the i5 SB will be that much better at 2.5Ghz with the new architecture.. GOING TO BE AWESOME!!
 
aznguyen316 said:
From passmark which has a huge list of CPU benchmark scores...


first gen Intel Core i3 330M @ 2.13GHz -- 1953
Intel Core2 Duo P8600 @ 2.40GHz -- 1609
Intel Core i5 520M @ 2.40GHz -- 2335 (currently in the 15" MBP now)

the Sandy Bridge i3 will only be even better than the first gen i3 at 2.1Ghz and the i5 SB will be that much better at 2.5Ghz with the new architecture.. GOING TO BE AWESOME!!
Click to expand...

Do you think the second gen core i3 will have a better benchmark than the current Intel Core i5 520M @ 2.40GHz -- 2335 ?
 
Camps23 said:
I was at work all day expecting to come home to some big news an still nothing? Announced event for iPad but nothing for new MacBook ? Is this going to be Thursday still ? Is it just going to be a small spec upgrade ? I really would be shocked if there was a big change with a big announcement wouldn't they want the media to be all over this to bump sales?
Click to expand...

I'm right there with ya. Only difference for me since I'm 14 hours ahead is I have to wait until Thursday night for anything definitive. Will make for an interesting waiting game at work that day :).
 
nygfan80 said:
Do you think the second gen core i3 will have a better benchmark than the current Intel Core i5 520M @ 2.40GHz -- 2335 ?
Click to expand...

I think it will be very close. I would think the i5 520m would beat it but I wouldn't be surprised if the i3 SB would bench around 2200+. Current desktop i5 sandy bridge systems are outbenching extreme first gen core i7 desktop cpus. Quite amazing!
 
aznguyen316 said:
I think it will be very close. I would think the i5 520m would beat it but I wouldn't be surprised if the i3 SB would bench around 2200+. Current desktop i5 sandy bridge systems are outbenching extreme first gen core i7 desktop cpus. Quite amazing!
Click to expand...

However, according to notebookcheck.net new i5 is only slightly better than old i5. Thus, I guess new i3 would between old i5 and old i3.
 
good luck everyone.... we made it this far. now all we need to do is to make it one more day. and if we find out that it will not be on thursday, theres going to be huge disappointment coming from this forum and then we just go back to waiting. =]
 
Last edited:
Faux Carnival said:
Is watching HD conent with black bars?
Click to expand...

Most people spend more time doing something else and there the extra vertical pixels are very appreciated. Besides, lots of content is not 16:9 but even wider so 16:9 screen would not guarantee a black bar-less experience.
 
No, the truth is Uncle Steve wants so. And because you guys gave thousands of dollars, you want to want a 16:10 screen. Wake up, the whole world uses 16:9 now. If you appreciate vertical pixels, you might just go with a 4:3 as well.
 
Faux Carnival said:
No, the truth is Uncle Steve wants so. And because you guys gave thousands of dollars, you want to want a 16:10 screen. Wake up, the whole world uses 16:9 now. If you appreciate vertical pixels, you might just go with a 4:3 as well.
Click to expand...

I thought you know better...if the whole world uses something it doesn't really means it's the best thing, if that was true...windows was amazing... XD ...

16:10 is definetly much better than 16:9 which is only good to watch movies and play with an xbox360 or ps3...for that there's the TV...
 
Regarding the ideal resolution:

I have a Vaio Z with a FullHD screen, it's not as bright as the 1600x900 screen but otherwise clearly superior. It's the "Retina-effect", images, letters, symbols - everything appears sharper, more refined. The size is sometimes an issue because most applications are not designed for these dpi-values, but that will change when these resolutions become more popular.

The Z itself is a mess, it's fast, has a superior screen and is lightweight - but only two components consist of high-quality materials (carbon cover and aluminum-frame), the rest is plastic and starts to fall apart after a few months (the hinges rip off!), the fan broke and is noisy, the battery lasts less than four hours, speaker broke...

My last Unibody-Macbook broke down after one year and Apple neglected service but admitted it was their fault - just not oficially... arrogant a....
But what can you do? Lousy chinese slave-labour work but with tighter QC and clever design and innovative approaches and at least supports some high-wage R&D-jobs - I will have to buy a matte 13" ...
Alternative with superior quality and support? Toughbook F9, twice as expensive, twice as thick, half as fast... I don't know... I want IBM back!
 
Georgl said:
Regarding the ideal resolution:

I have a Vaio Z with a FullHD screen, it's not as bright as the 1600x900 screen but otherwise clearly superior. It's the "Retina-effect", images, letters, symbols - everything appears sharper, more refined. The size is sometimes an issue because most applications are not designed for these dpi-values, but that will change when these resolutions become more popular.

The Z itself is a mess, it's fast, has a superior screen and is lightweight - but only two components consist of high-quality materials (carbon cover and aluminum-frame), the rest is plastic and starts to fall apart after a few months (the hinges rip off!), the fan broke and is noisy, the battery lasts less than four hours, speaker broke...

My last Unibody-Macbook broke down after one year and Apple neglected service but admitted it was their fault - just not oficially... arrogant a....
But what can you do? Lousy chinese slave-labour work but with tighter QC and clever design and innovative approaches and at least supports some high-wage R&D-jobs - I will have to buy a matte 13" ...
Alternative with superior quality and support? Toughbook F9, twice as expensive, twice as thick, half as fast... I don't know... I want IBM back!
Click to expand...

Actually, Sony is infamous for this. You are not alone.
 
Hellhammer said:
I didn't know you are Steve.



So? It's cheaper to manufacture, that's all. It does not mean it's better. 16:9 would be a downgrade from 16:10 (1366x768 in 13", 1600x900 in 15" and 1920x1080 in 17").
Click to expand...
Come on, you can't be that much of a fanboy. 16:9 is a world standard and why won't Apple just follow? Oops, sorry. That's what Apple is all about.

Anyway, I like Apple and stuff but come on. If tomorrow Steve goes and says they'll be using 16:9 screens in their computers from now on, you'll be supporting 16:9. (They actually do in most of their products including the new Air)
 
Faux Carnival said:
Come on, you can't be that much of a fanboy. 16:9 is a world standard and why won't Apple just follow? Oops, sorry. That's what Apple is all about.

Anyway, I like Apple and stuff but come on. If tomorrow Steve goes and says they'll be using 16:9 screens in their computers from now on, you'll be supporting 16:9. (They actually do in most of their products including the new Air)
Click to expand...

16:10 has numerous advantages over 16:9. I can't speak from personal experience, but what I've heard is that in Final Cut Pro (as an example) you can edit 1080p video file AND have room for all the tools, because of that extra space.

Only reason (AFAIK) why 11" Air has 16:9 screen, is because Apple had to make it as small as possible and still have full sized keyboard. Wouldn't have worked with 11" 16:10. Apple still uses 16:10 on 13" air, why? Perhaps they think it's better, and so do I (on laptops that is).
 
Since so many professional apps can take advantage of 1200p maybe it's the reason why apple chooses to keep the resolution? Every wedding party dance or function for as long as I remember all I've seen being used are 17" pros. A friend of mine who Also is a heavy photoshoppe user claims he and his colleagues will never use 1080p.
 
What time will they be announced tomorrow?
If I show up at my local Apple store ready to buy a 13' tomorrow at 7pm, will they have them?
 
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