Whats faster? A 2010 MBP 15" Quad Core (2.66 i7) or a brand new 13" rMBP Duo Core (3.1 i7)

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by JD76, Jul 26, 2015.

  1. JD76 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    #1
    I need a new machine for music production... My 2010 has been upgraded to a SSD and has maxed out ram at 8 gigs... Would the new 13" rMBP with 16gigs ram ram and highest i7 processor handle programs such as Logic Pro X and Abelton better?
     
  2. Bending Pixels macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2010
    #2
    Common sense should tell you the new 13" rMBP will be faster. Yes - it can handle those programs better than a 5 year old MBP.
     
  3. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #3
    But the older machine is a quad core and the newer machine is only dual core. I wonder if the difference isn't as much as you postulate. Tbh, I have no idea, its a good question by the OP.
     
  4. MacModMachine macrumors 68020

    MacModMachine

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #4
    there is no 2010 macbook pro 15" with a quad , there all dual core.

    so yes , the macbook pro 13" will be quite faster , difference between 6500 and 9200 points in geekbench.
     
  5. vbedia macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2014
    #5
    It is my understanding the first quad-core macbook pro was released in 2011. Even so i would buy the current 13" being dual core. I don't think i would trade two more cores for fast SSD's, retina display, fast wifi AC, intel 6100.. etc.
    There might be some software that benefits from the extra cores, but overall the current 13" is a much better experience.
     
  6. snaky69 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    #6
    The 2010" 15" was not a quad core, but a dual core.

    If that is the one you're using, the newer computer will be faster, even with an i5. Don't waste your money on the i7, the benefits are marginal at best, even in your usage scenario.

    You're more likely being limited by RAM than by CPU regardless, unless you use a crapload of effects.
     
  7. Rhinoevans macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2012
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    #7
    http://www.everymac.com

    Here you can look at the Geekbench numbers. Newer model faster, even the 13' with the I5 is faster
     
  8. throAU, Jul 27, 2015
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2015

    throAU macrumors 601

    throAU

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia
    #8
    If it helps, the GPU on my new rMBP 13 seems about as strong as the Discrete GPU on my 2011 MBP 15" with the HD6750. If not stronger. It runs Civ 5 WAY faster. Unplayably bad on the 15" (yeah i thought that was weird, may need to re-test maybe it was an early yosemite beta driver thing) vs buttery smooth on the 13".

    The CPU isn't as much slower as you may think, because although its only a dual, it ramps up to 3.3 Ghz when on turbo... and the SSD is much faster than previous generation SSDs.

    Unless your workload is heavily multi-threaded and CPU bound, i think you'll find the new 13" machine faster all-round.


    edit:
    Didn't realise the 2010s were dual core. The 13" machine will smoke it in every way. CPU wise, the dual core in the current 13" isn't far off my 2011's quad core either. Higher clock, newer instructions for accelerating more stuff, way better cooling (so it can turbo more often), etc.
     
  9. mlts22 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2008
    #9
    The newer CPUs are hyper-threaded, so in VMWare, they appear as four vCPUs. This might also make a difference.
     
  10. JD76 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    #10
    Thank you all for your input.. It made my buying decision easier... rMBP 13" is a great option
     

Share This Page