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

Which 13" MBP choice is better?

Which 13" MBP choice is better?

  • 2010 13" MBP 2.4 GHz, 500 GB 7200 rpm, 320M

    Votes: 37 77.1%

  • 2009 13" MBP 2.26 GHz, 128 GB SSD, 9400M

    Votes: 11 22.9%
  • Total voters
    48
dmk1974

dmk1974

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Sep 16, 2008
2,491
540
I'm trying to decide which 13" MBP choice is better. I bought the 2010 version new and the 2009 version for cheap on craigslist (came with AppleCare till late 2012).

A.)
2010 13" MBP
C2D 2.4 GHz
4 GB RAM
500 GB 7200 RPM HDD (Hitachi 7K500)
320M video


B.)
2010 13" MBP
C2D 2.26 GHz
4 GB RAM
128 GB SSD (Crucial RealSSD C300)
9400M video

(A) has a slightly faster processor, is newer, has more drive space (though I only need about 80-90 GB), and a much faster video card. (B) was cheaper, has about 1 extra year of warranty already included, and obviously the faster SSD drive.

Price for what I paid and upgraded is about dead-on even. Thanks for your feedback!
 
What are you going to do with it? If you don't need the better GPU and 128GB SSD is fine, then I would get the older model.
 
Hellhammer said:
What are you going to do with it? If you don't need the better GPU and 128GB SSD is fine, then I would get the older model.
Click to expand...

Wife will likely be the primary user. E-mail, web browsing, office apps, as well as a lot of iPhoto and iMovie.
 
So even for iPhoto, the graphics card really won't have as much effect compared to the slightly faster processor/much faster drive?
 
dmk1974 said:
Wife will likely be the primary user. E-mail, web browsing, office apps, as well as a lot of iPhoto and iMovie.
Click to expand...

iPhoto and iMovie may slightly benefit from the better GPU but unless she or you are planning to use Aperture or Final Cut, the 9400M will be adequate. Plus, the SSD should show a greater improvement in performance than the GPU.
 
dmk1974 said:
Wife will likely be the primary user. E-mail, web browsing, office apps, as well as a lot of iPhoto and iMovie.
Click to expand...

If that's the case, the "new" status of the 2010 would win for me.

SSD drives are very cool, but you can upgrade that in the future when prices come down if you need to. That said, I do much much more than what you listed on the stock 2010 13" drive without any problems. And you get a little processor bump with the 2.4GHz too. A little extra CPU power never hurts, especially when it's not an upgradeable part.
 
thejadedmonkey said:
I use a 2006 Macbook Pro for more than that! :eek:
Click to expand...

Well, that may not be all that she uses it for, but probably 90-95% of the time though. She also would use iTunes, SlingPlayer, Netflix. Probably no gaming (unless the kids play a few of their first-grader games).
 
If it makes a difference, I think the 2010 outputs HDMI audio and the 2009 doesn't. Double check though.
 
dmk1974 said:
I'm trying to decide which 13" MBP choice is better. I bought the 2010 version new and the 2009 version for cheap on craigslist (came with AppleCare till late 2012).
Click to expand...

Color me silly but if you already bought both of these then your choice(s) have already been made.

If you're asking which one to give to your wife then the answer is obvious. (The remaining macbook after you decide which one to keep for yourself :D).
 
Richard1028 said:
Color me silly but if you already bought both of these then your choice(s) have already been made.

If you're asking which one to give to your wife then the answer is obvious. (The remaining macbook after you decide which one to keep for yourself :D).
Click to expand...

Close :). I like my iMac for my main computer. She tried both (barely) so far and thinks they are the same. I (and everyone on this thread) knows differently. Just want to have whichever is best for her to use for the next couple years. Whichever I don't keep, I'll flip on eBay or Craigslist.
 
dmk1974 said:
Whichever I don't keep, I'll flip on eBay or Craigslist.
Click to expand...

For the use stated, I would flip the newer one and keep the older one. You can get more for the newer one and the older one will do the job just as well, with a longer warranty!
 
It's pretty much a fight for GPU vs SSD. Also a little on resale-ability which the 320M will help being newer.

I'd pick the GPU simply because the harddrive can always be updated later, but a GPU cannot.
 
For sure the newer tech. The processor bump is not that significant, but the audio out over mini display port is a plus. Likewise, the newer graphics card is a pretty significant increase over the 9400M. An ssd can always be added later.
 
Two pretty evenly matched devices...

This is actually a really interesting comparison. I think the two units are well matched, especially considering the usage model that you describe.

One thing that piqued my curiosity was the Slingplayer reference. I don't know about you, but I have a Slingbox PRO-HD (I had the Slingbox PRO before that). I just received my 2010 13" 2.4GHz MBP yesterday. Plus I have a 2009 Mac Mini, which has the same specs as your 2009 MBP (except the memory on the Mac Mini GPU is dedicated and not shared). I have been a little disappointed in OS X with respect to the Slingplayer software. I think the Windows software is much better overall. That said, I went to compare watching my Slingbox PRO-HD in HD using the two computers.

The result.... the same. Both computers used approximately 50% of the CPU (+/- 2%) while watching an HD TV channel using Firefox. The Mac Mini has 4GB and the MBP has 8GB (which used to be in the Mac Mini). It's not too surprising really. The Slingplayer plug-in for Safari or Firefox uses no hardware graphics acceleration so it's entire CPU dependent. Since both CPU's are so similar (2.26GHz vs. 2.4GHz), the difference is negligible.

For the record, Thanks! Because of this thread, I found out that Slingplayer now work on Firefox without modification. To watch HD video on Safari (previously the only supported browser), you had to force Safari into 32bit mode. That always annoyed me.

So, final answer.... I would sell the 2009. Technically speaking, the 2010 has a faster CPU, better battery life, audio over HDMI (should you ever use that feature via the MDP) and a better graphics card for whatever comes down the road (there's always something). Plus it will simply have better resale value down the road. While the SSD in the 2009 is very nice, there's nothing to stop you from pulling the SSD out of the 2009 and sticking it into the 2010 if you really like it that much.

Good luck. Let us all know what decision you went with!
 
Get the older slower model with the SSD. The only time you will see a performance difference from the slower processor is if you are doing say a long video conversion, or high end gaming (which won't be that great given the graphics of either model). For what you are using it for, (web, email...) everything you do will seem much quicker. Apps will open almost instantly and and the whole experience will feel much faster even though the clock speed of the processor is slightly lower.
 
Keep the 2010 and swap the HD for the 2009's SSD, and then you have the best of both (well, except for the apple care)
 
Jaro65 said:
That's what I would do. Alternatively, I would just keep the 2010 MBP and get an SSD for it.
Click to expand...

I agree that it would make that the fastest option with what I have, but I would like to be able to flip one of the two and moving a ~$250 drive from one to the other means approximately $500 increase in net spend.

If the MBP was for me, I'd do it amd justify it...but wifey probably doesn't care as much as I do. :)
 
Well, I gave her the 2010 model tonight...hopefully after a day or so she'll still be happy with it :)
 
Just as a note on the power of the machines...

Right now I am using a 2009 2.26Ghz MBP with 4GB ram and a WD Scorpio Black hard drive. At the moment I am running iTunes, have 5 tabs open in Safari, HandbrakeCLI is converting 6 different .mkv movies from a networked drive in 6 different Terminal tabs, and am screen sharing with the Mac Mini in the next room.

It shows NO signs of slowing down at all. I love this machine.

Note: I'm not a fool. Putting the SSD into the 2010 model was probably the best option. This post was mostly just my showing that either model is more than sufficient for most things.
 
Yeah, I think either realistically would be fine for her. In the end, I decided to give her a "new" laptop that in the future, I can throw a SSD into if needed.

I'd still like to maybe keep the 2009 MBP for myself as a light add-on to my iMac. Just kinda pricey to have as an "extra" computer. I'll just have to figure something out :)
 
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