Wow...the 13" models actually got a great upgrade!

[stefan1975]

Just FYI those are dual core CPUs too.

well this is what they say: "The U30Jc is certainly no slouch when it comes to performance. It fields new Intel Core i3, i5 and i7 quad core CPUs"

and i would rather have a MBP really ... but this for under $900 makes it a tough break, i mean i use Win7 at work all day and it is actually pretty decent. I never had a BSOD anymore since migrating away from Vista.

the main thing going against it imho is OSX and the multitouch glass trackpad and the fact that itunes sucks even worse on windows then it does on OSX.

My main point about it is that as one can see it is actually quite possible to stuff all kinds of decent i7 goodness in a 13" alu casing and still have it fit, be cool and run for 9 hours ... so all the arguments about space and temperature ... and the fact that the MBP is a nice upgrade are pretty much moot.

it would mean that the wife'd be less angry with me if i got something that was cheaper then i initially planned for a change

 

[cathyy]

Just FYI those are dual core CPUs too. Depending on the clock speed it might not be much different from the 13" Macbook Pro. GPU I don't know...that's got 16 cores versus 48, but it's also got dedicated video RAM, so...no idea :-D

Probably a solid laptop for what it is, though if you want OS X...

Dual cores that offer more performance clock for clock, have hyper-threading, as well as Turbo Boost. The i5/i7 CPUs will perform significantly better.

The whole '48 cores' thing on the 320M doesn't really give us a good idea on how the 320M performs on a whole. If it did, why is it so much weaker than the 330M which has 48 cores too? And why is it still weaker than the 8600M GT and 9600M GT that have 32 cores each?

 

[cluthz]

it's the asus u30 jc: http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=IZfJRyRqVpStMi76

it's got:
aluminium body
13.3"
512mb-1gb nvidia GPU with optimus
>= 2.66ghz i7 or i5 quad core (with hyperthreading that makes 8 virtual cores against the two cores in the C2D)
seperate clickity mac like keyboard
Bluray drive
USB3 support
Win7 x64
1366x768 LED
7200rpm HDD
9hr battery

all for around $900

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/30/gigantic-asus-periodical-reveals-and-specs-numerous-new-laptops/

the only thing it seems to have going against it is that it is not a MBP....and i don't know about build quality

The Asus is 0.6 cm thicker, and 1 cm bit deeper too, with the low capacity battery.
It offers a nvidia 310M and a Intel HD. With a 310M you could put as much VRAM you like, it just won't matter... (omg gief nvidia fx5200 with 4096MB RAM!! 4096 is a big number )
It's also limited to a maximum of 4GB RAM which is horrible!

I'm also pretty sure the battery life is stated with the lowest version of i3, running on the Intel HD only with the extended battery.

The 13 inch MBP is a small very well performing computer, with decent GPU and CPU power, and superb battery life, nothing more, nothing less.

Edit: http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/13/asus-u30jc-1a-review/
Engadget got 4 hrs and 10 mins on their test with the i3 version. (MBP i7 which is claimed to reach 8-9 hrs did 5:18 in the same test)
3dMark06: 3686 for the Asus, The 13 inch MBP does 4700..

 

[stefan1975]

It's also limited to a maximum of 4GB RAM which is horrible!

well i am in no way defending the asus since i would much prefer a MBP13, but i believe the new model (which is even half decent looking too) has a max of 8gb RAM, or at least it says so on the asus product page.

 

[cluthz]

well i am in no way defending the asus since i would much prefer a MBP13, but i believe the new model (which is even half decent looking too) has a max of 8gb RAM, or at least it says so on the asus product page.

http://usa.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=IZfJRyRqVpStMi76
Says:

DDR3 1066 MHz SDRAM, 2 x SODIMM socket for expansion up to 4GB SDRAM
*Due to the 32-bit operation system's limitation, only 3GB will show up with a 4GB memory. The 64-bit operating system will not have this issue. For more information, please check Microsoft's support site: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946003

Where did you find the 8GB info?

Btw, updated my previous post, seems like the 512MB 310M is not even reaching 4k in 3DMark, and the 13 inch MBP is boasting a 4.7k score. So much for 512 MB VRAM on a low end graphics card.

 

[stefan1975]

http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=IZfJRyRqVpStMi76

it has 4gb ram and a socket expansion for up to 4gb more.

Small in stature, huge in power

The U30Jc is certainly no slouch when it comes to performance. It fields new Intel Core i3, i5 and i7 quad core CPUs and up to 8GB of RAM for unrelenting speed for whatever the task at hand may be. Size isn’t everything and ASUS once more proves spectacular, lean design shouldn’t come at the expense of generous features and performance.

 

[cluthz]

http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=IZfJRyRqVpStMi76

it has 4gb ram and a socket expansion for up to 4gb more.

Seems reasonable, although the spec sheet doesn't say so. I guess they forgot to add the socketed.

With an i5/i7 it seems like a pretty sweet machine, but tests indicate that battery life and graphics performance is behind the 13 inch MBP

 

[stefan1975]

well were i to go for the asus, i'd skip the i3 and go for the i7 quad core with 8gb and bluray anyway. it is a redesign from the i3 1st model too. don't know about battery life though, they advertise it as 9hours same as the MBP. from what i read a 1gb nvidia is optional, cant see how that could be worse then the 320. so all in all it seems like a decent price for the package at sub $1000.

but then i have never seen it in real life (yet) so have no clue as to how it looks and feels....unlike the MBP13 which looks awesome if crippled.

S.

 

[cluthz]

well were i to go for the asus, i'd skip the i3 and go for the i7 quad core with 8gb and bluray anyway. it is a redesign from the i3 1st model too. don't know about battery life though, they advertise it as 9hours same as the MBP. from what i read a 1gb nvidia is optional, cant see how that could be worse then the 320. so all in all it seems like a decent price for the package at sub $1000.

but then i have never seen it in real life (yet) so have no clue as to how it looks and feels....unlike the MBP13 which looks awesome if crippled.

S.

The 310M is doing 3700 in 3Dmark06 with 512MB, since the RAM isn't the bottleneck you'll perhaps get close to 3800. The 320M is doing 4700, which is in another league.

The i3 is doing 4:10 hrs on battery according to engadget, the i7 uses a lot more power, so expect 3 hrs.

btw: upgrade from i3 to i7 and 8GB ram will probably push the Asus over $2000.

 

[smelly cat]

Agree with the OP. The new 2010 MacBook pro has been a solid upgrade. Pretty much the best graphics you can jam in there without making compromises to power and heat. Apple made the right choice as far as I'm concerned.

there's little debating as to whether or not apple could fit a dedicated chip and an i3 into the 13" MBP and making it a 3 chip solution. Just look at the original MB from 2006. It had a 3 chip solution consisting of CPU, NB, and SB. So hell of course apple could make the new pro a 3 chip solution as well (CPU, GPU, SB), but that would give it far less desirable thermal and power characteristics than it actually has.

 

[stefan1975]

upgrade from i3 to i7 and 8GB ram will probably push the Asus over $2000.

well i dont know those models are due in may i heard. but last i checked the default i5 model with4gb would set me back around €900

my current plan probably is to use this eee 6 months longer (if i can stand it) and wait for the fall 2010 refresh i guess. i even have office2008 and a crumpler sleeve already waiting for a MBP13 ... unless i win a lottery and can afford the MBP15 2.4 suddenly...

 

[jnc]

arent they pretty much identical apart from the backlit keyboard and the plastic unibody?

Firewire 800, SD reader, glass screen, thinner lighter, longer battery, up to 8GB RAM, faster CPU & GPU.

Plus aluminium unibody and backlit keyboard

 

[vant]

Agree with the OP. The new 2010 MacBook pro has been a solid upgrade. Pretty much the best graphics you can jam in there without making compromises to power and heat. Apple made the right choice as far as I'm concerned.

there's little debating as to whether or not apple could fit a dedicated chip and an i3 into the 13" MBP and making it a 3 chip solution. Just look at the original MB from 2006. It had a 3 chip solution consisting of CPU, NB, and SB. So hell of course apple could make the new pro a 3 chip solution as well (CPU, GPU, SB), but that would give it far less desirable thermal and power characteristics than it actually has.

A discreet GPU requires a lot of thermal dissipation. In some cases it exceeds the CPU in thermal output. By that logic, we would need twice the cooling power. Dual fans and dual heatsinks like the 15"/17".

Also, the i3 350 (top end) is slower in most cases then the 2.66C2D. The 330 vs 2.4C2D is pretty much even. What a waste of time just to fit a processor that does the same thing.

 

[alust2013]

I definitely agree, although it may not have been a huge reworking, it is pretty solid for what it is. For everyone who thinks they could stuff a discrete graphics card in there and not have plenty of problems, look at some pictures of the logic board. And no, they couldn't have used the 320 with the i3/i5 because of Intel's apparent problem with NVidia, they simply won't allow it.

I think people also forget that the 13" MBP is still a 13" Notebook. If you really need more than they are capable of, you shouldn't be buying such a small laptop. The simple fact that it is as small as it is requires that a bit of performance be sacrificed for portability. They are on the low end for physical size and weight, almost to the ultraportable category (only about half a pound too heavy), and yet they still have very competent components and performance. Certainly nothing to sneeze at.

If someone can find a computer of the same form factor, build quality, and all of the capabilities (including 10 hour battery, standard 4 GB memory, etc) for the same price, then you can complain.

Excuse the rant, but it is rather annoying when people expect more than is reasonably possible and incessantly complain about it. I am an engineer and no solution to a problem is ever as simple as it seems. Compromises do have to be made.

 

[WisdomWolf]

well i dont know those models are due in may i heard. but last i checked the default i5 model with4gb would set me back around €900

my current plan probably is to use this eee 6 months longer (if i can stand it) and wait for the fall 2010 refresh i guess. i even have office2008 and a crumpler sleeve already waiting for a MBP13 ... unless i win a lottery and can afford the MBP15 2.4 suddenly...

I find it odd that you are getting by with an eee and yet you are worried about the performance difference between a C2D and iX CPU. Even a ULV C2D would blow the crap out of what you are using now. If the eee works even slightly for your current uses then you'll most likely be just fine with the base 13". If you already have software and accessories you might as well use them.

 

[stefan1975]

If someone can find a computer of the same form factor, build quality, and all of the capabilities (including 10 hour battery, standard 4 GB memory, etc) for the same price, then you can complain.

well the asus mentioned above claims the same capabilities (... oh well i admit they claim a 9 hour battery instead of a 10 hour). does that give me the right to complain now?

 

[stefan1975]

I find it odd that you are getting by with an eee and yet you are worried about the performance difference between a C2D and iX CPU. Even a ULV C2D would blow the crap out of what you are using now. If the eee works even slightly then you'll most likely be just fine with the base 13". If you already have software and accessories you might as well use them.

well true. and i really intended to buy it this spring, after sitting out the waiting for arrandales threads. and yes the C2D will be lots faster then the atom i am using now.

but i dont buy laptops very often and the MBP should last me at least 4 years or so, by then the C2D will be 7 years old and probably not able to run OSX 10.[8-10] or CS6 or whatever 3d browser. so yes it would be plenty fast now

... but it hurts investing €1150 (without discount) in a 2007 C2D laptop. i want to step in on 2010 tech so it will last me until 2014 hopefully....

 

[WisdomWolf]

well true. and i really intended to buy it this spring, after sitting out the waiting for arrandales threads. and yes the C2D will be lots faster then the atom i am using now.

but i dont buy laptops very often and the MBP should last me at least 4 years or so, by then the C2D will be 7 years old and probably not able to run OSX 10.[8-10] or CS6 or whatever 3d browser. so yes it would be plenty fast now

... but it hurts investing €1150 (without discount) in a 2007 C2D laptop. i want to step in on 2010 tech so it will last me until 2014 hopefully....

Well I understand the hesitation because the CPU appears old. What, exactly, do you expect that you'll be able to do with a i3 that you won't be able to do with a C2D? If anything I'd be a lot more concerned about having a decent GPU as that's where things are heading with OpenCl and other GPGPU tech.

The only difference 4 years from now is that you'll be able to say...hey I have an iX processor so I can run X benchmark 3% faster than you can.

In the meantime you have spent money on things you can't use and are punishing yourself by sticking with an eee instead of a fully usable computer. What happens if you wait 6 mos and they STILL aren't using iX?

 

[stefan1975]

well i know the i3 is hardly better (without decent GPU at least), but i was kinda hoping more for a quad core hyperthreaded i5. that would make a difference. it runs 8 threads at once. besides in 4 years maybe just maybe an i5 will have resell value but a C2D? that is like selling a P4 now.

and if in 6 months i still wont have an i5? well dont know. hope for a lucky break and get the MBP15 ... or just get the asus mentioned above and be done with it and get on with my life and real world issues again. or just get it over with and get the MBP13 and know i will always have this nagging feeling it was old when i got it ....

 

[archurban]

Okay, so the GT 330 is boring but predictable...but I was just looking at the 13" models, and had completely missed that they actually got a huge GPU upgrade! It's still integrated, so memory bandwidth will be a big issue (and you'll REALLY need to keep those things in dual-channel mode)...BUT...they went from only 16 cores up to 48.

Granted for the price you can still do a lot better, but it's still a huge upgrade, and for the first time would probably make the 13" model legitimately useful for games (or other programs that can use the GPU).

In a way, all you're getting going up to the 15" model is dedicated video RAM (and only 256MB unless you jump up two more models).

So...actually a pretty nice upgrade! Don't know how I managed to miss that they'd TRIPLED the GPU hardware on those things!

Just saw a thing last night, where Steve Jobs had apparently answered the "why don't these have i5" question with "because a massively more powerful GPU is a bigger deal than 10-20% more CPU performance" type answer, and shockingly that's not spin. That really is a much better setup than had they gone say Core i5 and only used the Intel graphics, or only used a 16 core GPU or whatever.

It's not like a 2.4 or 2.66GHz Core 2 is anything to sneeze at, and the current units are actually fairly well balanced (assuming memory bandwidth doesn't slow them down TOO much).

wow, where have you been? great upgrade? you must be kidding right? 13 inch macbook pro doesn't have intel core i processor. it just remains with intel core 2 duo. you say it is great?

in terms of graphic, it seems to improve way better than previous model. it has two graphic card. one intel HD shared processor which is still good for playing any HD. NVIDIA 320M is decent graphic card. but it's not 512MB anyway.

only thing I like for this upgrade is that automatic switch share graphic and dedicated graphic, and 10 hours more battery life.

but unfortunately new graphic card somehow got restricted when macbook pro is on windows mode just like previous model. I don't see why I have to buy one. if I really want, get 17 inch macbook pro (512MB dedicated memory with better NVIDIA (330M) graphic card.)


I don't still understand why Apple is stick with 256MB for 15-inch. they think that we don't need more than 256MB on working with laptop? they are wrong.

 

[WisdomWolf]

wow, where have you been? great upgrade? you must be kidding right? 13 inch macbook pro doesn't have intel core i processor. it just remains with intel core 2 duo. you say it is great?

in terms of graphic, it seems to improve way better than previous model. it has two graphic card. one intel HD shared processor which is still good for playing any HD. NVIDIA 320M is decent graphic card. but it's not 512MB anyway.

only thing I like for this upgrade is that automatic switch share graphic and dedicated graphic, and 10 hours more battery life.

but unfortunately new graphic card somehow got restricted when macbook pro is on windows mode just like previous model. I don't see why I have to buy one. if I really want, get 17 inch macbook pro (512MB dedicated memory with better NVIDIA (330M) graphic card.)


I don't still understand why Apple is stick with 256MB for 15-inch. they think that we don't need more than 256MB on working with laptop? they are wrong.

I am not entirely sure what you are trying to say here. You mention two graphics cards, but that only applies to the 15 and 17", the 13" has only one IGP and no discrete. Then you mention something about being restricted in windows, but it runs the IGP on 13" (since that's all there is) and the more powerful discrete graphics is used in windows on the other two models.

 

[vant]

wow, where have you been? great upgrade? you must be kidding right? 13 inch macbook pro doesn't have intel core i processor. it just remains with intel core 2 duo. you say it is great?

in terms of graphic, it seems to improve way better than previous model. it has two graphic card. one intel HD shared processor which is still good for playing any HD. NVIDIA 320M is decent graphic card. but it's not 512MB anyway.

only thing I like for this upgrade is that automatic switch share graphic and dedicated graphic, and 10 hours more battery life.

but unfortunately new graphic card somehow got restricted when macbook pro is on windows mode just like previous model. I don't see why I have to buy one. if I really want, get 17 inch macbook pro (512MB dedicated memory with better NVIDIA (330M) graphic card.)


I don't still understand why Apple is stick with 256MB for 15-inch. they think that we don't need more than 256MB on working with laptop? they are wrong.

Terrible grammar and logic. Read it twice and I'm still confused.

 

[WisdomWolf]

Terrible grammar and logic. Read it twice and I'm still confused.

Glad it's not just me.

 

[mikeo007]

well i know the i3 is hardly better (without decent GPU at least), but i was kinda hoping more for a quad core hyperthreaded i5. that would make a difference. it runs 8 threads at once. besides in 4 years maybe just maybe an i5 will have resell value but a C2D? that is like selling a P4 now.

and if in 6 months i still wont have an i5? well dont know. hope for a lucky break and get the MBP15 ... or just get the asus mentioned above and be done with it and get on with my life and real world issues again. or just get it over with and get the MBP13 and know i will always have this nagging feeling it was old when i got it ....

There are no i5 quad core laptop processors yet. It would be dual core, with 4 threads.

Your reasoning about the resale value is sound though, C2Ds are going to be worth dirt in a couple years, whereas the i-series will at least be around for a few generations, even if only in name.

Terrible grammar and logic. Read it twice and I'm still confused.

Sure it makes no sense, but do you seriously have to take shots at his grammar? I mean it's obvious English isn't his first language, give the guy a break.

 

[wisty]

Your reasoning about the resale value is sound though, C2Ds are going to be worth dirt in a couple years, whereas the i-series will at least be around for a few generations, even if only in name.

Pentiums are now C2D, they are just lower speed. C2D will soon mean low end i3. Intel likes shifting the brands around to make it's high speed chips look even shinier.

I think the current ranking is Celeron, Pentium, C2, i3, i5, i7. Celeron and Pentium will soon be low-speed i3s. But if you don't know the processor numbers, you can get a crap chip. They want to make it as hard as possible for people to shop around for anything that's not bleeding edge.