New macbook Air's compared to 2006 MAcbook Pro

Discussion in 'MacBook Air' started by omegaphil6, Oct 20, 2010.

  1. omegaphil6 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    Fort Myers Florida
    #1
    I am using an old beat up 1.83 Core Duo (not even Core 2 Duo) Macbook Pro.

    I want to get rid of this clunker and get an AIR as i just use it as a couch machine. I am assuming the 1.4 C2D in the 11 inch wont match or beat the old 1.83, but will the 13 inch 1.86 C2D with the 6MB on-chip L2 be faster and more responsive than this thing?

    What i am using right now has these specs:

    CPU Speed: 1.83 Core Duo
    Bus Speed: 667 MHz
    RAM Speed: 667 MHz
    RAM: 2GB
    Level 1 Cache: 32 kB data, 32 kB instruction
    Level 2 Cache: 2 MB on-cpu


    Will either the 11 inch or the 13 inch give me significant speed gains over those specs?
     
  2. C64 macrumors 65816

    C64

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    #2
    You'll notice most speed gain from the flash storage, not the CPU.
     
  3. instantempo macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    #3
    Hi,
    I am curious as well, because I have a macbook (the white one) with the core2 cpu and 4 gb ram and I'd like to replace it wi th the MBA 13'' with 4 GB ram.

    I am working mainly with Photoshop and I would be glad if so eone could give me some advice.
     
  4. omegaphil6 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    Fort Myers Florida
    #4
    so core duo vs core 2 duo wont harvest anything relevant or the faster memory and bus speed?
     
  5. Stetrain macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    #5
    I think that, because of newer processor architectures, higher bus speeds, and the speed of the flash memory, that the 11" model will be pretty close if not slightly better (in some scenarios) than your old MBP.

    The 13", especially the 2.13Ghz model, will be faster.
     
  6. C64 macrumors 65816

    C64

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    #6
    Photoshop is very memory-intensive. Check the Activity Monitor, it won't use that much of your CPU, so a slightly lower clocked CPU won't make any difference. The flash storage will be used when you run out of memory though, and swapping to flash is fast, and will almost seem like you have a lot more RAM available. In practice you will definitely not be worse of; everything will be much snappier instead.
     
  7. instantempo macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    #7
    Very interesting, C64, Thanks!! The MBA is tempting me :)
     
  8. omegaphil6 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    Fort Myers Florida
    #8
    how about VRAM wise... this thing has a RadeonX1600 with 128MB of discrete VRAM... how would the intel integrated graphics in the new MBA's compare?
     
  9. thejadedmonkey macrumors 604

    thejadedmonkey

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Location:
    Pa
    #9
    The 320m is about 2x as fast as the 9400m it replaced, which was about the same speed as the x1600. So basically, a twice as good video card.

    I'm in the same boat, only with the c2d model. I'm thinking of selling it, and my dell, which would net me about a grand, and buying an 11" netbook air.
     
  10. omegaphil6 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    Fort Myers Florida
    #10
    do you thinik the 1.4 C2D is fast enough tho? I mean back in 2006 when they first switched to intel the slowest they used was a 1.6Ghz... this seems like a step backwards in speed.
     
  11. elvineet macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    #11
    I am no expert, so I am NOT trying to be sarcastic, just curious. Are you suggesting that the flash storage that has replaced the HDD will serve as storage space as well as extra RAM?
     
  12. Scottsdale macrumors 601

    Scottsdale

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    #12
    The MBA will be so much faster than the old MBP in virtually all "normal" situations. Startup, app opening, big files, multitasking, RAM access, and etc.

    The CPU will probably do CPU intensive things 25 to 35% faster depending on the task. The extra L2 will help and so will the NAND Flash over even SSDs. I suspect when Jobs said 2X performance he was talking over SSDs. Remember, with an SSD we still have the drive controller at SATA-II which can be saturated, whereas the NAND is going to be fast fast fast.

    Add in other features like same workspace in a 13.3" display, faster RAM, and ability to drive up to a 2560 x 1600 display in addition to its native display. The mini display port is an advantage too.

    Lightweight, and the former MBA was my favorite Mac ever. I am going to miss the backlit keyboard, but with all of the other features, I cannot pass it up due to the keyboard.

    I think you will be happy with the speed and performance. I don't see many downsides to this other than you will lose the express card slot. That slot is pretty valuable to the <9% who use it.
     
  13. omegaphil6 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    Fort Myers Florida
    #13
    The expressCard slot is the most useless thing ever!!!! I would prefer a SD slot ANYDAY!
    Looks like the low end 13" model is the sweet spot between the 4 retail-ready models. Ill be headed to the Apple store tomorrow to pick one up.
     
  14. outsidethebox macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    #14
    Thanks for this, I am in the same situation. It's too bad about the backlit keyboard!! What were they thinking?!!
     
  15. Stetrain macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    #15
    This is generally how modern operating systems work. When the RAM gets full, rather than just crashing, the computer starts to write stuff to disk (usually called "swap" or "page file") and then reading it back into RAM when needed.

    On a magnetic hard drive, it's very slow in comparison to RAM, which is why your computer slows down so much when you fill your RAM.

    With flash, the speed difference is less. Flash is still nowhere as fast as DDR3 RAM though, so you would still notice a major slowdown when you max out your RAM, but not as bad as with a traditional hard drive.
     
  16. alust2013 macrumors 601

    alust2013

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Location:
    On the fence
    #16
    The new MBA uses the Nvidia 320m, which is considerably faster than the intel integrated graphics, and it also has twice the VRAM. I'm fairly certain that the 320m is a bit better than the graphics in your MBP as well. If you are just couch surfing, you could get away with the 1.4 or 1.6 in the 11", and probably still have at least equal performance to your MBP (C2D was a big improvement over CD), and the 13" models will be a bit faster processor wise. Either way it will feel faster due to the flash storage.
     
  17. Stetrain macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    #17
    I believe that the 256mb of Vram that the 320M uses is actually from the system RAM (That's generally how integrated graphics works). So if you're going to be maxing that out for sure, might want to go with the 4GB option. :)
     
  18. chrfr macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    #18
    Core 2 Duo processors are quite noticeably faster than Core Duos; you won't have an issue with the speed.
     
  19. stockscalper macrumors 6502a

    stockscalper

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2003
    Location:
    Area 51
    #19
    Xbench and Geekbench tests put the new 2.13 Air 20 some percent faster than the old core duo 2.0 MBP. The average between the two tests is in the mid 20 percentile. That's processor speed. I think, as others have pointed out, the machine might just feel faster due to the flash drive. Plus if you get the 4 GB ram upgrade that will certainly help. The old Core Duo's topped out at 2 GB and could bog down in Photoshop with several windows open. Photoshop should run faster on the new Airs.
     
  20. shanmugam macrumors 68020

    shanmugam

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    Blazer town!
    #20
    GeekBench scores for MBA

    if new owners post Geekbench score, that would be great!

    thank you :D
     

Share This Page