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

Windows fanboy needs help making the switch!

ThirtyThr33

ThirtyThr33

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 13, 2011
278
1
Boulder, Colorado
Hey guys,

So for the longest time I've been a huge anti-mac guy, and a big supporter of windows. That is until recently I've had a change of heart and I started looking at macs in detail and now I'm soooo ready to make the switch to a mac.

However I am a little confused about the hardware specs that are customizable on the apple website. I'm most likely going to get a mac pro 13" because of portability and price (I'm a student) however I would like a really powerful mac pro because I don't want to be obsolete in less than a year.

I was wondering why the 13" model has the highest GHz processor though. People keep saying the 17" and 15" are more powerful but when I go to buy a macbook pro online it says the 13" i7 macbook has a 2.7 GHz processor which is the highest option available. Even the most expensive 17" only has a 2.2GHz. Does that mean that the 13" is the fastest and best way to go?
 
The 13" 2.7ghz i7 MacBook Pro does have the faster clock speed, however it's a dual core processor and the 17" maxed out MacBook Pro has a quad core, plus 50% more level 3 cache (6mb to 4mb) and an actual video card with 1gb of dedicated memory instead of onboard video which the 13" has. The 17" Geekbench scores are almost 50% higher than the 13" scores.

Compare the specs for each at EveryMac.com.
 
Last edited:
ThirtyThr33 said:
Hey guys,

So for the longest time I've been a huge anti-mac guy, and a big supporter of windows. That is until recently I've had a change of heart and I started looking at macs in detail and now I'm soooo ready to make the switch to a mac.

However I am a little confused about the hardware specs that are customizable on the apple website. I'm most likely going to get a mac pro 13" because of portability and price (I'm a student) however I would like a really powerful mac pro because I don't want to be obsolete in less than a year.

I was wondering why the 13" model has the highest GHz processor though. People keep saying the 17" and 15" are more powerful but when I go to buy a macbook pro online it says the 13" i7 macbook has a 2.7 GHz processor which is the highest option available. Even the most expensive 17" only has a 2.2GHz. Does that mean that the 13" is the fastest and best way to go?
Click to expand...

To put it crudely:
The 13" models have dual-core processors:
2.3+2.3GHz=4.6GHz
2.7+2.7GHz=5.4GHz.
The 15" and 17" models have quad-core processors:
2.0+2.0+2.0+2.0GHz=8.0GHz
2.2+2.2+2.2+2.2GHz=8.8GHz
2.3+2.3+2.3+2.3GHz=9.2GHz

This, of course, is not entirely accurate, but hopefully it paints a clearer picture as to why the 15" and 17" models are more powerful and more expensive than the 13" models. ;)
 
Read some articles on processors. It is confusing but if you read about it, it will make more sense why GHz alone aren't the tell anymore of a powerful CPU.

I still enjoy Windows through Boot Camp on my MBP.

I am a fan of both OS's! It's possible you know. ;)
 
gorskiegangsta said:
To put it crudely:
The 13" models have dual-core processors:
2.3+2.3GHz=4.6GHz
2.7+2.7GHz=5.4GHz.
The 15" and 17" models have quad-core processors:
2.0+2.0+2.0+2.0GHz=8.0GHz
2.2+2.2+2.2+2.2GHz=8.8GHz
2.3+2.3+2.3+2.3GHz=9.2GHz

This, of course, is not entirely accurate, but hopefully it paints a clearer picture as to why the 15" and 17" models are more powerful and more expensive than the 13" models. ;)
Click to expand...

clearly op is not super tech savvy so it is dangerous to put it like that.
a 2.0Ghz quad does not mean 2.0Ghz*4=8.0Ghz

it is a lot more complex than that.

OP when looking for a new computer it is easy to just look for the one with the biggest number but bigger is not always better.
the base 13" should be more than enough for whatever you are gonna do, it uses the newest intel sandy bridge cpu and i can assure you it will not be obsolete in the next three years.

though it does lag in the graphics department but thats an entirely different topic
 
FnuGk said:
clearly op is not super tech savvy so it is dangerous to put it like that.
a 2.0Ghz quad does not mean 2.0Ghz*4=8.0Ghz

it is a lot more complex than that.

OP when looking for a new computer it is easy to just look for the one with the biggest number but bigger is not always better.
the base 13" should be more than enough for whatever you are gonna do, it uses the newest intel sandy bridge cpu and i can assure you it will not be obsolete in the next three years.

though it does lag in the graphics department but thats an entirely different topic
Click to expand...

I know :D but how else can you explain multi-core concept to a non tech savvy person without losing him/her in the jargon :confused:
 
Wow guys, I appreciate all the great feedback, I guess I was just confused because before I had decided I wanted a mac I looked into HPs and I honestly didn't even know there was such thing as a dual core i7. Does that mean it still has hyperthreading to create 2 more virtual cores?

As someone pointed out earlier I am really being sucked in by the whole "big numbers" factor. I guess I'm just really paranoid about buying a laptop that will be obsolete soon because I have an obsolete laptop now and it sucks lol. I have an Acer Aspire 3690 and it's running a skechy version of XP. A lot of my drivers won't work (I've tried for hours to fix) and I keep reading about all the new featurs that are coming out in the new macbooks and I'm afraid that my dual core i7 wont be fast enough for next years programs and such
 
ThirtyThr33 said:
As someone pointed out earlier I am really being sucked in by the whole "big numbers" factor. I guess I'm just really paranoid about buying a laptop that will be obsolete soon ... I keep reading about all the new featurs that are coming out in the new macbooks and I'm afraid that my dual core i7 wont be fast enough for next years programs and such
Click to expand...
If it gives you some perspective, I've been running the same 15" MBP for 3 years, still running Leopard. It does everything I've needed it to do, is fully compatible with any new hardware I add, and runs as fast as it did out of the box. I haven't upgraded to a new notebook or a new OS because I haven't needed to. By comparison, when I was on Windows, I was buying a new notebook about every 12-18 months, to keep up. You don't have to fear buying any of the Macs that are out today. Sure, new bells and whistles will be added to models in the future, but that's always going to be true. As long as you buy something that does what you need it to do, there's no point in trying to chase the "bleeding edge" of technology.
 
first of you must understand that when buying computers there is not such thing as future proofing!!
What you can do is trying to avoid buying right before a refreshing cycle. The current gen mac books was updated not long ago so they have the latest tech in them.
 
get the 13" mbp, buy yourself a ssd.
bang.... you have a mac for 4 years of high performance.

next genaration of intel processors are every 5 years aprox~
no worries about the being obsolete.

i have a mbp 13 late 2009 with a ocz vertex,small, portable enough blazzing fast for a 2 years machine since day one.

xbench score : 210

dont see myself updating this baby anytime soon.
unless... next wednesday apple release a magical macbook air with thunderbolt.
 
In my experience, Mac's don't become obsolete as quickly as PC's. Mac OSX is a much leaner OS than Windows and can run smoothly on more modestly spec'd machines.
 
if you can switch to mac,SWITCH, ive been using windows since kindergarten and i just graduated highschool and purchased a mac for college. Macs are so much easier to use. Im not real super savy on the latest processors and stuff but i did know that the mbp 13in is the right mac for me because i looked up videos of people using it with the things that i was going to use on it.
 
Order the MBP. Size?

I went from Windows to Mac OS with the 13 inch MBP 2011. I like it a lot, but don't do gaming. I would recommend you try out the form of the 13, 15 or 17 inch to see what size is best for you, then load it up with an OEM SSD from Apple and get AppleCare. You should be set for a long time and if you decide to do some moderate gaming you will also be happy.
 
jimbo1mcm said:
I went from Windows to Mac OS with the 13 inch MBP 2011. I like it a lot, but don't do gaming. I would recommend you try out the form of the 13, 15 or 17 inch to see what size is best for you, then load it up with an OEM SSD from Apple and get AppleCare. You should be set for a long time and if you decide to do some moderate gaming you will also be happy.
Click to expand...

In all honesty I really like the 13" MBP. I don't know why because I'm downgrading from a 15" acerbic screen but for some reason the 13" almost seems just as big when I'm at the apple store because the resolution is sharper than that of my current laptop. My only fear is the dual core i7 instead of quad core. I'm sure even the i5 will be fast enough for me (upgrading from celeron pos) but my gut feeling is I need the biggest and fastest or I'll already be in the dust next year when all the new processors come out. I guess I'm a huge sucker for that "big numbers sell" strategy.

What do you think?
 
getz76 said:
What are you planning on using the computer for?
Click to expand...

Well I don't really know. As I mentioned earlier, this MBP is my upgrade from a Acer 3690 which came with 512gm ram and vista (aka it can't do ****) so I don't have any current computer habits and uses to compare it to because I can barely run the stuff I have now. My ideal use would be photoshop and some mild gaming (portal and steam games) but I have an xbox so I wouldn't need it to run cod mw3 every night
 
ThirtyThr33 said:
Well I don't really know. As I mentioned earlier, this MBP is my upgrade from a Acer 3690 which came with 512gm ram and vista (aka it can't do ****) so I don't have any current computer habits and uses to compare it to because I can barely run the stuff I have now. My ideal use would be photoshop and some mild gaming (portal and steam games) but I have an xbox so I wouldn't need it to run cod mw3 every night
Click to expand...

Well if you're going to game a little and use photoshop, I'd recommend getting the base model 15 inch.
 
13in only equips with dual core i5/i7s.
15 and 17 equips with higher graphics card and quad core CPU.
But since they both are a mobile CPU, of course the desktop Mac Pro/iMac will be way faster.
 
The only advice I can give you with your switch is to watch ot for Apples lack of GPU's in anything other that their 15-17" models.

Be prepared.
 
So the 15" is a better way to go you think? I mean I'm kind of glad you guys are steering me in a directtion because I am so split. Although the 13" has a 2.7GHz i7 (even though it's dual core) does that make a difference?
 
Like some posters previously said, dual core and quad core makes a lot of difference. It depends on the type of applications that you are running, but the general message is that GHz alone isn't everything.


Personally I think the 13" is fine for light gaming, runs most games in bootcamp on low-medium. 15" should run most games at medium/high, depending on the game.
 
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