Replace 2010 15" i7 8GB with 2013 rMBP 13" - will I notice?

[gr4z]

Hi
I am thinking about replacing my mid-2010 MBP 15" i7 8GB high res matte screen with a new late 2013 13" rMBP i5/7 8GB. I will mainly use the machine for Office, web, emails and running 1 or 2 work VMs (Windows) all day for corp email, Sharepoint etc on Parallels9.

Will I notice a performance difference going from the 2010 quad core i7 to a dual haswell i5 on the late 2013? Should I spec up to the i7?

Thanks

 

[raptor402]

Hi
I am thinking about replacing my mid-2010 MBP 15" i7 8GB high res matte screen with a new late 2013 13" rMBP i5/7 8GB. I will mainly use the machine for Office, web, emails and running 1 or 2 work VMs (Windows) all day for corp email, Sharepoint etc on Parallels9.

Will I notice a performance difference going from the 2010 quad core i7 to a dual haswell i5 on the late 2013? Should I spec up to the i7?

Thanks

Hi,

I'm typing on the machine you own (mid-2010 15" MBP, 2.66GHz i7, 8GB RAM, Hi-Res Glossy Display). First off, I would like to correct you: the mid-2010 15" MBP has a dual core i7. The laptop is quite underpowered.

My father has a late-2013 13" rMBP (2.6GHz i5, 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD) that I have used on occasion. I have found that the 13" rMBP performs much better than my mid-2010 15". It's smoother, even when upscaled to 1440*900. The SSD, of course, is much faster (SATA II vs (1x?) PCIe). The jump is definitely noticeable.

Furthermore, my 15" MBP suffers from the dreaded GT 330M kernel panic issue, forcing me to use the iGPU. The HD5100 of the Haswell rMBP is much more powerful than even the GT 330M.

I would say that it's a worthy upgrade.

Regards
Raptor

EDIT: Should you go for the 13" Haswell rMBP, you might want to consider 16GB RAM for your VMs and at least the 2.6GHz i5. The latter choice is due to the higher GPU clock speed (it's an inconsequential speed bump but worth it in my opinion).

 

[gr4z]

Fantastic thanks for the reply. You are indeed correct the mid 2010 is a dual core my bad.

I have upgraded the hard disk to a 512gb SSD and noticed a massive speed increase. Just want something with a better form factor. Knowing that my 2010 is a dual core I know that works very well with 2 VMs.

rRMP 13 seems a good choice then. 16gb seems the obvious choice. Don't know whether the i7 is worth it.

 

[durkkin]

rRMP 13 seems a good choice then. 16gb seems the obvious choice. Don't know whether the i7 is worth it.

In a dual core mobile chip the difference between i5 and i7 is really just clock speed. If I were you I'd save the money on the CPU and put that towards the RAM. I doubt you will notice the speed increase, but you might notice the heat and decreased battery life from the i7. If we were talking quad core, then the i7 would be worth it since it will hyperthread to 8 threads. The i5 tops out at 4 cores (either physical or virtualized through hyperthreading).

 

[raptor402]

Fantastic thanks for the reply. You are indeed correct the mid 2010 is a dual core my bad.

I have upgraded the hard disk to a 512gb SSD and noticed a massive speed increase. Just want something with a better form factor. Knowing that my 2010 is a dual core I know that works very well with 2 VMs.

rRMP 13 seems a good choice then. 16gb seems the obvious choice. Don't know whether the i7 is worth it.

As Durkkin said, the upgrade to i7 won't really be worth it. I would advise the following specs: 2.6GHz i5; 16GB RAM; 512GB SSD.

Best of luck.

Raptor

 

[gr4z]

Thank you chaps - decision made! i5 (2.6)/16/256 or 512.

 

[maflynn]

Thank you chaps - decision made! i5 (2.6)/16/256 or 512.

If you're asking which SSD to select, pick the one that you can live with. From this thread it seems you need the 512, so that would be the choice unless your utilization is below 256 with your current laptop

 

[daudi81]

Always get the higher storage. That's my philosophy =)

Especially with file sizes increasing dramatically. In a couple years 256gb will be very very limiting. It is even now.