Review: Apple's early 2010 MacBook Pros

1356

Comments

  • da585da585 Posts: 3member
    I would like to see more tests about the New MBP's screen quality, acceleration AES capability which should be provided by i5/i7, the power consumption/ability of playing 720p/1080p, the speed/stability with SSD… ,etc. That would be more realistic than just providing benchmarks. Thanks. \
  • dcj001dcj001 Posts: 301member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MonkeyFightingSnake View Post


    I have to agree with this. I had to purchase a new laptop this month, and a similarly equipped Dell Studio 16 with i7 and a better screen was $1000 less than the macbook....I was really disappointed. I couldn't justify that price difference.



    You mean that you couldn't justify buying the Dell, even though it's $1000 less than the MacBook. Right?
  • solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by da585 View Post


    I would like to see more tests about the New MBP's screen quality, acceleration AES capability which should be provided by i5/i7, the power consumption/ability of playing 720p/1080p, the speed/stability with SSD? ,etc. That would be more realistic than just providing benchmarks. Thanks. \



    Check out AnandTech and Barefeat's recent tests.
  • extremeskaterextremeskater Posts: 2,248member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Do you really think "30p" is going to make a difference on a 15" display? I much prefer a quality display than one that markets itself as simply having more pixels.



    The suggestion that MBPs could get Clarkfield CPUs means that you aren't aware of CPU microprocessor or architectures, just that 4 is more than 2 therefore it must be better.



    A Quad Core really only helps if you are running Windows. Based on every test I have done it really only helps durning boot up because bios is a pig and needs all the help it can gets. With EFI that isn't an issue. As far as applications its hard to find anything that really can take advantage of the Clarkfield.



    The only negative I have heard so far about the new MBP is that the Core i7 in the 17" is getting fairly hot.
  • trip1extrip1ex Posts: 109member
    It's a shame (or awesome) that the iPad screen is much nicer than the MBP screens.
  • r00fusr00fus Posts: 245member
    Comments on your apps:

    (Some of these make sense, others are a big WTF)



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bearboykahlo View Post


    Some apps that force discreet graphics:

    Cloud

    ShoveBox

    Tweetie

    HyperSpaces

    Skype -- ????

    iWeb

    iMovie

    GarageBand

    Parallels 5 Desktop

    Microsoft Office 2004 - I wonder how 2008 fares.

    Microsoft Office AutoUpdate daemon

    RapidWeaver

    PathFinder

    Mathematica

    Warp

    Droplr

    1Password -- really? sucks. Does this mean 1pwd plugins to browsers? or just the app?

    Clips

    NetNewsWire -- NN is a CPU hog, imho. I think they use some core libraries that are not needed.

    Koolclip

    atMonitor

    Delicious Library

    Fresh

    Little Snapper

    OmmWriter

    Picturesque -- amazing utility, but I never leave it open a second longer than needed. It's got some CPU spinning bug that easily heats up my Al-macbook.

    Pixelmator

    RipIt

    Rucksack

    Screen Sharing

    Scribbles

    Skim (after searching)

    The Hit List

    Times

    VMWare Fusion 3 (gfx acceleration disabled)



    Based on this list, I'm guessing if the app even loads some graphics library like say, Core Animation or Core Graphics, the GPU automatically switches on.



    Thanks for the list and I hope they fix GPU switching. Looking to buy a 15" MBP soon.
  • djdjdjdj Posts: 74member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JoeDyndale View Post


    I compared the Dell XPS 16 with the i7 15" MBP to see what might justify the $900 price difference (I used the Norwegian Dell and Apple stores online for price comparisons and converted it to USD).



    The Dell has a slightly better screen, or rather, a higher resolution screen. It also has faster RAM. It also has twice as much graphics RAM (1GB).



    However... The MBP's CPU is almost 1GHz faster. The MBP also has much longer battery life and the stronger unibody build. The MBP also has small things like the multi-touch trackpad going for it.



    So as far as value for money goes, it's almost a tie - the MBP being only very slightly more expensive. And this is absulutely worth it in my book, because of the much better design and OS X.



    The Dell's CPU is a quad core, whereas none of the MacBook Pros offer this. When TurboBoost is active on the Dell, it is runningnat the same speed as the MacBook Pro's i7, but with two cores. When TurboBoost kicks inaon the MacBook Pro, it drops to one core. With TurboBoost off, you have four cores running vs. two. Total performance on the Dell is always going to be better, and in most situations by a fairly wide margin. Add to that the full resolution HD screen (extra screen real-estate is a good thing), a price $1000 (43%) lower, a much higher end GPU, and the Dell offering ismpretty attractive. Plus you can bump up the Dell CPU to an even higher end model for even more speed and it's still considerably cheaper than the Mac. Five hours of battery life might not be 8nhours, but it's not bad considering all of the power you're getting.



    Sorry for the typos. I'm trying to type this on the crappy iPad onscreen keyboard.
  • r00fusr00fus Posts: 245member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post


    A Quad Core really only helps if you are running Windows. Based on every test I have done it really only helps durning boot up because bios is a pig and needs all the help it can gets. With EFI that isn't an issue. As far as applications its hard to find anything that really can take advantage of the Clarkfield.



    The only negative I have heard so far about the new MBP is that the Core i7 in the 17" is getting fairly hot.



    Are you serious? Quad-cores are great for gaming... not to mention encoding or graphics processing.



    Once Steam hits OSX, Apple will have few excuses to not offer a decent number of cores (at least as an option) for their new gaming conscious customers.



    I trust Apple more than say, Dell or HP to have a cool, quiet, usable machine (they usually quickly fix such issues), but Apple really needs to provide some heavy-compute options for the MBP series.
  • djdjdjdj Posts: 74member
    Someone should mention that you should never buy any of Apple's SSD options... They use the slowest ones out there (that get terribly slow with time) and you can drop an afteremarket Intel or Indilinx drive right into the Macs without any problems. But OS X doesn't support TRIM, so after one write cycle all SSDs are going to get slower than HDDs on Macs, so I really wouldn't even recommend them at all with OS X. Just not worth it.
  • debusohdebusoh Posts: 78member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MonkeyFightingSnake View Post


    I have to agree with this. I had to purchase a new laptop this month, and a similarly equipped Dell Studio 16 with i7 and a better screen was $1000 less than the macbook....I was really disappointed. I couldn't justify that price difference.



    I haven't bought a Mac, ever actually (I used to have one at work), because of the price difference. I finally bit the bullet and bought one of the new Macbook pros and all I can say is that it's worth the extra cash - if you can afford it.



    I have been using thinkpads for years and they are fine, but Mac OS is just so elegant and intuitive. It just seems so much more refined than windows and/or linux. And you get so much out of the box. I used to hate touch pads and bought thinkpads partly because of the trackpoint. Now, when I use my wife's thinkpad, I can't believe how lame it seems in comparison to the Apple touchpad.



    I have had mine for under a week and I am having a blast with it. I can't see ever going back. I agree that it would be nice if you didn't have to pay as much, but in my opinion - it is worth it.
  • djdjdjdj Posts: 74member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post


    A Quad Core really only helps if you are running Windows. Based on every test I have done it really only helps durning boot up because bios is a pig and needs all the help it can gets. With EFI that isn't an issue. As far as applications its hard to find anything that really can take advantage of the Clarkfield.



    The only negative I have heard so far about the new MBP is that the Core i7 in the 17" is getting fairly hot.



    Try telling that to anyone rendering video ore editing large photographs. The extra cores make all the difference in the world.



    And the Bios doesn't come into play once the operating system is loaded; all Bios related functions get handed over to the os at that point.



    A machine that overheats and slows down to compensnate is a pretty significant limitation. We don't really yet know if it's a design thing, but if it is thats pretty serious.



    Again, sorry for the typos. iPad keyboard.
  • meshopemeshope Posts: 14member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Stevie View Post


    Apple never offers standard features. The ones they leave out are what makes their machines the best.



    Interesting comment, Apple leaves the matte display in the 13" MBP, does this make it better than Lenovo for example, or any other vendor of computers for professionals who equip their pro lines with anti-glare screens?



    I'd rather say Apple's marketing got a bit mentally deranged, perhaps they haven't been able to digest the companies recent success.
  • solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by r00fus View Post


    Are you serious? Quad-cores are great for gaming... not to mention encoding or graphics processing.



    Once Steam hits OSX, Apple will have few excuses to not offer a decent number of cores (at least as an option) for their new gaming conscious customers.



    I trust Apple more than say, Dell or HP to have a cool, quiet, usable machine (they usually quickly fix such issues), but Apple really needs to provide some heavy-compute options for the MBP series.



    You can't simply say more cores are better and leave it there. There are NO quad-core chips running at 35W or less. The only quad-core 1" notebook I know of is the HP Envy and that is a machine I suggest being the poster child for slim-mobile computers with quad-cores.



    Apple will add quad-cores when Intel finally offers them with decent TDPs. I forget the roadmap for those mobile chips; is it Sandy Bridge?



    Gaming isn't the popular on Windows compared to consoles so to expect it be a focus for Mac doesn't make sense. It's more likely iPhone OS gaming will get pushed as it's already a great option for those that want a pocketable system.



    Have you seen the reviews of the Quad-core systems. They don't give you much more performance and give you a lot of heat and very little battery life. The average person want a notebook to last all day, not be slightly faster than another notebook but die in a fraction of the time. It's like running a marathon by starting with a sprint. You take the lead, but you piddle out pretty quickly.
  • spotonspoton Posts: 645member
    I checked out the new MacBook Proś at the Apple Store and can honestly say the 15" high resolution matte is one SWEET machine, better than earlier matte models even.



    While all the other Mac´s had reflections and glare of the overhead lights, the high res matte MPB was clear, crisp and sharp, with no glare or reflections at all when rotated around on the table, and certainly not the dull matte like previous versions at all.



    Very professional looking machine, serious, not cheapy flashy looking at all like the others.





    Very nice job there Apple, congrats!!! My next machine for sure.
  • digitalclipsdigitalclips Posts: 15,028member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Stevie View Post


    And Dell includes things that the MBP can't offer at any price, like a quad-core processor for the heavy jobs and 1080p screen for movies.



    oh and don't forget Windows too, oh wait a minute that's not a plus
  • digitalclipsdigitalclips Posts: 15,028member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by debusoh View Post


    I haven't bought a Mac, ever actually (I used to have one at work), because of the price difference. I finally bit the bullet and bought one of the new Macbook pros and all I can say is that it's worth the extra cash - if you can afford it.



    I have been using thinkpads for years and they are fine, but Mac OS is just so elegant and intuitive. It just seems so much more refined than windows and/or linux. And you get so much out of the box. I used to hate touch pads and bought thinkpads partly because of the trackpoint. Now, when I use my wife's thinkpad, I can't believe how lame it seems in comparison to the Apple touchpad.



    I have had mine for under a week and I am having a blast with it. I can't see ever going back. I agree that it would be nice if you didn't have to pay as much, but in my opinion - it is worth it.



    Welcome to the light
  • extremeskaterextremeskater Posts: 2,248member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by r00fus View Post


    Are you serious? Quad-cores are great for gaming... not to mention encoding or graphics processing.



    Once Steam hits OSX, Apple will have few excuses to not offer a decent number of cores (at least as an option) for their new gaming conscious customers.



    I trust Apple more than say, Dell or HP to have a cool, quiet, usable machine (they usually quickly fix such issues), but Apple really needs to provide some heavy-compute options for the MBP series.



    I'm very serious. Quad core does next to nothing for gaming seeing that gaming has just started taking advantage of dual core. For encoding yes a quad core is going to make encoding faster.



    However on average most software is not taking advantage of quad core technology its the OS that benefits from Quad Core in some cases.



    Apples main issue isn't going to be how many cores they have in their system its going to be the fact that they offer weak GPU's and always have issues with heat once Steam is available.



    The current Core i7 MBP with its very nice looking alu case is hitting about 100c with moderate bench testing. Yet another example of Apple more worried about what name they give something or how it looks compared to how it performs.



    Here is the link if you want to check out the testing.



    http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/1...0-degrees.aspx
  • steviestevie Posts: 956member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post


    Windows 7 is ok. I think the major "con" for PC notebook is a lack of multi-touch pad. That's alone worth a lot more than 4 cores vs 2 cores or Blu-Ray drive or...



    Dell laptops have multi-touch pads.
  • steviestevie Posts: 956member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SteveMinne View Post


    That alone should call the "Pro" moniker into question.



    The moniker is ad-speak. They could have called it anything.
  • steviestevie Posts: 956member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by djdj View Post


    The Dell's CPU is a quad core, whereas none of the MacBook Pros offer this. When TurboBoost is active on the Dell, it is runningnat the same speed as the MacBook Pro's i7, but with two cores. When TurboBoost kicks inaon the MacBook Pro, it drops to one core. With TurboBoost off, you have four cores running vs. two. Total performance on the Dell is always going to be better, and in most situations by a fairly wide margin. Add to that the full resolution HD screen (extra screen real-estate is a good thing), a price $1000 (43%) lower, a much higher end GPU, and the Dell offering ismpretty attractive. Plus you can bump up the Dell CPU to an even higher end model for even more speed and it's still considerably cheaper than the Mac. Five hours of battery life might not be 8nhours, but it's not bad considering all of the power you're getting.



    Sorry for the typos. I'm trying to type this on the crappy iPad onscreen keyboard.



    The MPB is somewhat lighter than the Dell.
Sign In or Register to comment.