As a side note, although I don't consider the 13" MBP a bad upgrade, it is still ridiculous when you compare it to the $1199 that is yet to be upgraded. Sure, it is a desktop, but the difference is so big it is ridiculous. For $1199 you get
A slightly faster CPU
A MUCH better, dedicated GPU (like, literally almost four times better)
like really. I have one in my lap and I'm happy but come on. I love th graphics in the 15 and 17 inch with brand new graphics cards but why does the 15 have a 256mb graphics card? also, the pro has less battery. I got the 13 inch and it has 88% with 6:57 remaining. strange. Other than that, applications boot faster than on the macbook air 13 inch with 4 gb ram and it weighs a ton. Glad I have the air and my old man has this pro. One more thing, could someone reply to this and tell me where I click to post a comment without having to reply to the main article and selete it?
Yeah but the base 15" model is now $1800. I thought there was a cheaper model before that.
Oh, just for the kicks I built an Alienware m15x and pit it against a 15" MBP. Since there was no 4Gb option for the Alienware I put 8Gb on both of them. I went for the Alienware because like Apple they are a premium brand (although with different audiences)
MacBook Pro------------------------Alienware M15x
2.3GHz Intel Core i7------------------2.13 GHz Intel Core i7 (both with 8 megs of cache)
OS X Snow Leopard-------------------Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
8GB of DDR3 RAM 1333MHz------------8Gb of DDR3 RAM (doesn't specify but I'm sure it is 1333MHz as well)
500GB 7200rpm HD------------------500GB 7200rpm HD
AMD 6750 with 1GB of GDRR5 memory----ATI 5850 with 1024MB of memory (again, not specified [oh the irony!])
Backlit keyboard---------------------Seriously cool backlit keyboard. (nerdy, but awesome)
Wireless N, BT 2.1--------------------Wireless N, BT 2.1
Little things like MagSafe, Thunderbolt,----PFFFFFFFFFFFFFFAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAH
aluminum casing, HD camera, Optical I/O,--HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAH
i feel like this update make pro machine much stronger.... excluding the 13'.... might as well discontinue that. at this point- might as well discontinue that line... a lot more speed and storage that the air 13' but with its GPU, you can't really do super intense things anyway, the Air's CPU should be enough.... also, this wierd thing called external HARD DRIVES (WHAT!!!!!?????)
Also i think thunderbolt is gonna be epic.... wish i could afford one of those...
The drop in battery performance from 10 to 7 hours - I don't care how you jiggle the figures that's a 30% delta and a marketing boo boo.
I don't think there's any other way they could have done this. I like this trait they have of deciding something isn't accurate and then rectifying it, no matter if it means damaging their marketing. What I don't like is when they hide graphics downgrades behind their 3x faster marketing that only refers to the $2200 Macbook Pro while every other model is actually slower than the previous generation equivalent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squarepants
My wife will be pleased - she'll be able to get a new washing machine!!
At least it'll render graphics better than the 13" MBP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukeskymac
Another one! Now is the time for the much-hated 13" to be put against the Alienware M11x!
And ThunderBolt? Any devices out there that support it? Apple just lost the game.
It's a Chicken and egg scenario and someone needs to take the first step. besides, since it's the same port as mini-displayport and it's all backed by intel, there's no gamble whatsoever. USB 3.0 seemed like a good idea until Light Peak came out, which just blows it out of the water in all respects.
Also, it seems like there will be adapters to make just about anything Thunderbolt capable so the devices ARE out there, they just need an adapter...
I have to say it looks like they just wanted to get this out of the way and move on to the actual main event, the iPad 2. iPad is the future.
No, it is not. Not if you actually need to do any significant amount of typing and editing.
For portable point-click-scan, sure -- absolutely even.
and since Apple is booking a special media event, they certainly want public attention focused onto the iPad -- the market for it is blooming, thus lots of potential new cash inbound.
But iPad is not for heavy duty computing use.
To wit, try imagining writing your dissertation on an iPad...
or laying out full documents, or editing multi-media, or...
Anyway, the realm of computing needs is certainly large enough to encompass workstations, laptops, ultra-lights and iPads. There will be plenty of folks needing each...
Can somebody in the know give me an idea of how the Intel HD integrated graphics in the new Pro's compares to the nVidia 320M?
I'm interested in either the low end 13" MBP or the 13" MBA. Obviously the MBP has better CPU, more RAM and what have you, but I don't really know how the two graphics solutions stack up. Some insight would be helpful.
The other issue is the 5400rpm hdd in the MBP. The MBA really seems to fly with the SSD and I suspect if I went for the MBP i'd want to upgrade to an SSD.
Don't you get tired from saying that for four years straight? I certainly did. But then again, if you need professional graphics, you're not buying a laptop, anyway.
Yes. Go Thunderbolt.
That quote might be a little off; it's been a while since 1995.
Wrong. You're not buying an Apple laptop. Virtually every other manufacturer out there offers higher end graphics than the middling options Apple gives you. Lenovo, for instance, will gladly take your money and give you a workstation class Thinkpad with certified OpenGL graphics (a decidedly pro feature) and faster processors for a similar price.
Can somebody in the know give me an idea of how the Intel HD integrated graphics in the new Pro's compares to the nVidia 320M?
I'm interested in either the low end 13" MBP or the 13" MBA. Obviously the MBP has better CPU, more RAM and what have you, but I don't really know how the two graphics solutions stack up. Some insight would be helpful.
The other issue is the 5400rpm hdd in the MBP. The MBA really seems to fly with the SSD and I suspect if I went for the MBP i'd want to upgrade to an SSD.
The 320M card is much more superior than the Intel HD Int.Graphics. better colors and more vivid especially with various games.The SSD on MBA not that faster than the 5400 HD. Good Luck mf
For those who say Apple will never put USB3 on, remember that Ivy Bridge has native USB3 support next year. As soon as Intel supports it, so will they. Next year I'm sure we will see laptops with 2 or 3 USB3 ports and at least a pair of Thunderbolts
The act of ejaculating on the pillow, following sex in another person's bed, and leaving it for them to find. "I left a nice texas pillow mint for Teddy after hooking up with Jen last night".
Next year I'm sure we will see laptops with 2 or 3 USB3 ports and at least a pair of Thunderbolts
Or laptops with MagSafe, five Thunderbolt, and audio in/out.
There's no reason to have USB 3 at all given Thunderbolt's existence.
Adapters is the answer to any question you may have regarding the above sentence. I in no way say that it's the best solution, I'm saying that it is the solution.
The 320M card is much more superior than the Intel HD Int.Graphics. better colors and more vivid especially with various games.The SSD on MBA not that faster than the 5400 HD. Good Luck mf
Not by much, according to the information I've found. It's about halfway between the old GeForce 9400M and the 320M in the last gen machine and "showed a performance level on par with the current entry level generations from NVIDIA (e.g. GeForce 310M) and AMD (HD 5450)."
Or laptops with MagSafe, five Thunderbolt, and audio in/out.
There's no reason to have USB 3 at all given Thunderbolt's existence.
Adapters is the answer to any question you may have regarding the above sentence. I in no way say that it's the best solution, I'm saying that it is the solution.
Except that there is no need to have Thunderbolt for a mouse. a couple of USB3 ports make perfect sense to support the lower speed peripherals. It also keeps the number of adapters you have to buy down. All TB and making people buy adapters for everything is certainly A solution, but I doubt it will be THE solution
Geekbench scores show that the new $1,199 model is slightly faster than the outgoing top-of-the-line MacBook Pro. This is probably the most significant performance upgrade Apple's laptops have ever seen, and people are writing it off as unimpressive and disappointing. Some people's kids.
What I don't like is when they hide graphics downgrades behind their 3x faster marketing that only refers to the $2200 Macbook Pro while every other model is actually slower than the previous generation equivalent.
The 15" MBPs are slower? WTF?
Quote:
At least it'll render graphics better than the 13" MBP.
I understand how games on this generation *may* get a bit worse (I'm still praying for Turbo), but then again I'm a real black sheep: I like gaming (not serious FYI) but I love Macs. However most other 3D applications got improvements from last gen, even on the 13".
Go again to Apple's MBP performance page. There is a 13" tab, you know?
Modo 501
3D render
2.1x
Cinebench 11
Multiple-processor render
1.9x
Mathematica 8
MathematicaMark 8
1.9x
iPhoto 9.1.1
Common application tasks
1.7x
Aperture 3.1.1
Common application tasks
1.7x
EDIT: I am aware these are all thanks to the CPU. But that's kind of my point.
Please. That's almost like those people that say Mac Pros are the greatest rip off in history without even knowing about the server parts. You really are pissed off at the HD3000, aren't you?
Oh, and to whoever said the 5730 should beat the 6750: No effin way. This would go against AMD's numerology: the 6750 is a generation newer (6 vs 5), in the same mid-high classification (7 and 7) and is a superior model (50 vs 30)
The entry 15" Radeon 6490 only has 160 stream processors vs 480 in the 6750 bundled with the $2200 model. Notebookcheck lists it close to the 9600M GT from 2 generations back. This is lower than the 330M in the old model.
Why doesn't Apple give us graphs comparing the 6490 to the 330M?
Why doesn't Apple give us graphs comparing the HD 3000 with the 320M?
Because they are both downgrades. The only upgrade is the 330M to the 6750 at the $2200 price.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukeskymac
EDIT: I am aware these are all thanks to the CPU. But that's kind of my point.
Your point is that the latest CPUs in the entry models are double the speed of 2.5 year old Core 2 Duos and the graphics chips are only slightly slower than last year's models.
You can look at it two ways. The way I look at it is that Apple has held back CPU upgrades that other manufacturers were using in 13" models so now they look great and they downgraded the graphics.
The whole idea with buying a new machine is that it is better than the old one, not worse in important areas like graphics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukeskymac
Please. That's almost like those people that say Mac Pros are the greatest rip off in history without even knowing about the server parts.
The server parts in the entry MP don't cost a great deal more than the desktop parts. Apple used to sell the Mac Pro $500 cheaper when the parts cost the same.
FWIW I picked up a 2.4GHZ Core 2 Duo mid-2010 MBP 13" with 320M graphics for the equivalent of USD$150 less than what it was before (ie. $150 less than the latest baseline MBP 13"). I have my own 7200rpm drive, so I popped that in the new MacBook Pro (I had a MacBook Alu 2ghz before this).
Bottom line: Sweet for me, the latest MBPs can kiss my a**
I still love Apple though, don't doubt me on that. It's just that the Mac division has not been making the best choices IMO these past few years. But that leaves opportunities for the more discerning customer to capitalise on price drops on previous models, etc.
My dad is getting my Macbook Alu 2ghz and my mum his MacBook white (non unibody). My mum's iBook G4 just died a day before the announcements, can you believe it.
BTW The illuminated keyboard is the BOMB. Can't go back to anything (eg. Air?) without it!
I'm loving the MBP 13" colours compared to the much-maligned (and rightly so) MacBook screen. Though there is a bit of backlight "bleed" on the bottom edge. But overall the colours seem a bit desaturated, but really vivid "where it is supposed to be". Eg. a rose might not look as "red" overall compared with the previous MacBook but the "right" parts of the rose is really nice and deep red. That is, there seems to be better colour accuracy. I haven't even done any calibration yet. Not sure if I want to.
It just feels right having an Nvidia GPU (my nickname notwithstanding) inside that I know can handle the tasks thrown at it in the next few years).
Comments
A slightly faster CPU
A MUCH better, dedicated GPU (like, literally almost four times better)
the same RAM speed
a TB 7200rpm HD
a 21.5 IPS LED screen
wireless keyboard and magic mouse
better speakers (obviously)
Yeah but the base 15" model is now $1800. I thought there was a cheaper model before that.
Oh, just for the kicks I built an Alienware m15x and pit it against a 15" MBP. Since there was no 4Gb option for the Alienware I put 8Gb on both of them. I went for the Alienware because like Apple they are a premium brand (although with different audiences)
MacBook Pro------------------------Alienware M15x
2.3GHz Intel Core i7------------------2.13 GHz Intel Core i7 (both with 8 megs of cache)
OS X Snow Leopard-------------------Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
8GB of DDR3 RAM 1333MHz------------8Gb of DDR3 RAM (doesn't specify but I'm sure it is 1333MHz as well)
500GB 7200rpm HD------------------500GB 7200rpm HD
AMD 6750 with 1GB of GDRR5 memory----ATI 5850 with 1024MB of memory (again, not specified [oh the irony!])
Backlit keyboard---------------------Seriously cool backlit keyboard. (nerdy, but awesome)
Wireless N, BT 2.1--------------------Wireless N, BT 2.1
Little things like MagSafe, Thunderbolt,----PFFFFFFFFFFFFFFAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAH
aluminum casing, HD camera, Optical I/O,--HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAH
fantabulous trackpad, FireWire.....--------UIOHHEIEHIEHEIHEIEHAHhahahahHAHAHAHAAH!
The Price $2650 against $2999
(and that's with Dell's "super savings")
So you pay an extra $350 for a colored keyboard backlight and a slightly faster GPU. Congratulations. Anything to say now, DaHarder?
well apple's CPU is way faster (Sandy vs new I cores (i think, please corrects :S) but also alienware is a rip off...
THINKPAD W510 (3369 before discount, 2439 after)
2.0 (old I7, 8mb cache)
15'6 270nit 95% gamut display (beats 95%+ of other laptop screens, including those on the MBP's)
8GB @ 1067 (8 more for 320, 4 DIMMS)
fingerprint reader
500 GB @ 7200
FX880M 1GB DDR3 (workstation specialized)
IDEAPAD Y560d (1599 before discount, 1499 after)
1.73 (old I7, 6mb cache)
HB 5730 (should beat 6750)
6gB @ 1333
500 GB @ 7200
__________________________________________________ _________
i feel like this update make pro machine much stronger.... excluding the 13'.... might as well discontinue that. at this point- might as well discontinue that line... a lot more speed and storage that the air 13' but with its GPU, you can't really do super intense things anyway, the Air's CPU should be enough.... also, this wierd thing called external HARD DRIVES (WHAT!!!!!?????)
Also i think thunderbolt is gonna be epic.... wish i could afford one of those...
The drop in battery performance from 10 to 7 hours - I don't care how you jiggle the figures that's a 30% delta and a marketing boo boo.
I don't think there's any other way they could have done this. I like this trait they have of deciding something isn't accurate and then rectifying it, no matter if it means damaging their marketing. What I don't like is when they hide graphics downgrades behind their 3x faster marketing that only refers to the $2200 Macbook Pro while every other model is actually slower than the previous generation equivalent.
My wife will be pleased - she'll be able to get a new washing machine!!
At least it'll render graphics better than the 13" MBP.
Another one! Now is the time for the much-hated 13" to be put against the Alienware M11x!
How would you say it compares to this one:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16834115987
And ThunderBolt? Any devices out there that support it? Apple just lost the game.
It's a Chicken and egg scenario and someone needs to take the first step. besides, since it's the same port as mini-displayport and it's all backed by intel, there's no gamble whatsoever. USB 3.0 seemed like a good idea until Light Peak came out, which just blows it out of the water in all respects.
Also, it seems like there will be adapters to make just about anything Thunderbolt capable so the devices ARE out there, they just need an adapter...
And ThunderBolt? Any devices out there that support it? Apple just lost the game.
Thats gotta be my vote for brain dead quote of the day.
I have to say it looks like they just wanted to get this out of the way and move on to the actual main event, the iPad 2. iPad is the future.
No, it is not. Not if you actually need to do any significant amount of typing and editing.
For portable point-click-scan, sure -- absolutely even.
and since Apple is booking a special media event, they certainly want public attention focused onto the iPad -- the market for it is blooming, thus lots of potential new cash inbound.
But iPad is not for heavy duty computing use.
To wit, try imagining writing your dissertation on an iPad...
or laying out full documents, or editing multi-media, or...
Anyway, the realm of computing needs is certainly large enough to encompass workstations, laptops, ultra-lights and iPads. There will be plenty of folks needing each...
I'm interested in either the low end 13" MBP or the 13" MBA. Obviously the MBP has better CPU, more RAM and what have you, but I don't really know how the two graphics solutions stack up. Some insight would be helpful.
The other issue is the 5400rpm hdd in the MBP. The MBA really seems to fly with the SSD and I suspect if I went for the MBP i'd want to upgrade to an SSD.
Don't you get tired from saying that for four years straight? I certainly did. But then again, if you need professional graphics, you're not buying a laptop, anyway.
Yes. Go Thunderbolt.
That quote might be a little off; it's been a while since 1995.
Wrong. You're not buying an Apple laptop. Virtually every other manufacturer out there offers higher end graphics than the middling options Apple gives you. Lenovo, for instance, will gladly take your money and give you a workstation class Thinkpad with certified OpenGL graphics (a decidedly pro feature) and faster processors for a similar price.
Can somebody in the know give me an idea of how the Intel HD integrated graphics in the new Pro's compares to the nVidia 320M?
I'm interested in either the low end 13" MBP or the 13" MBA. Obviously the MBP has better CPU, more RAM and what have you, but I don't really know how the two graphics solutions stack up. Some insight would be helpful.
The other issue is the 5400rpm hdd in the MBP. The MBA really seems to fly with the SSD and I suspect if I went for the MBP i'd want to upgrade to an SSD.
The 320M card is much more superior than the Intel HD Int.Graphics. better colors and more vivid especially with various games.The SSD on MBA not that faster than the 5400 HD. Good Luck mf
Texas pillow mint
The act of ejaculating on the pillow, following sex in another person's bed, and leaving it for them to find. "I left a nice texas pillow mint for Teddy after hooking up with Jen last night".
........
Next year I'm sure we will see laptops with 2 or 3 USB3 ports and at least a pair of Thunderbolts
Or laptops with MagSafe, five Thunderbolt, and audio in/out.
There's no reason to have USB 3 at all given Thunderbolt's existence.
Adapters is the answer to any question you may have regarding the above sentence. I in no way say that it's the best solution, I'm saying that it is the solution.
The 320M card is much more superior than the Intel HD Int.Graphics. better colors and more vivid especially with various games.The SSD on MBA not that faster than the 5400 HD. Good Luck mf
Not by much, according to the information I've found. It's about halfway between the old GeForce 9400M and the 320M in the last gen machine and "showed a performance level on par with the current entry level generations from NVIDIA (e.g. GeForce 310M) and AMD (HD 5450)."
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-H...0.37948.0.html
Or laptops with MagSafe, five Thunderbolt, and audio in/out.
There's no reason to have USB 3 at all given Thunderbolt's existence.
Adapters is the answer to any question you may have regarding the above sentence. I in no way say that it's the best solution, I'm saying that it is the solution.
Except that there is no need to have Thunderbolt for a mouse. a couple of USB3 ports make perfect sense to support the lower speed peripherals. It also keeps the number of adapters you have to buy down. All TB and making people buy adapters for everything is certainly A solution, but I doubt it will be THE solution
What I don't like is when they hide graphics downgrades behind their 3x faster marketing that only refers to the $2200 Macbook Pro while every other model is actually slower than the previous generation equivalent.
The 15" MBPs are slower? WTF?
At least it'll render graphics better than the 13" MBP.
I understand how games on this generation *may* get a bit worse (I'm still praying for Turbo), but then again I'm a real black sheep: I like gaming (not serious FYI) but I love Macs. However most other 3D applications got improvements from last gen, even on the 13".
Go again to Apple's MBP performance page. There is a 13" tab, you know?
Modo 501
3D render
2.1x
Cinebench 11
Multiple-processor render
1.9x
Mathematica 8
MathematicaMark 8
1.9x
iPhoto 9.1.1
Common application tasks
1.7x
Aperture 3.1.1
Common application tasks
1.7x
EDIT: I am aware these are all thanks to the CPU. But that's kind of my point.
How would you say it compares to this one:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16834115987
Please. That's almost like those people that say Mac Pros are the greatest rip off in history without even knowing about the server parts. You really are pissed off at the HD3000, aren't you?
Oh, and to whoever said the 5730 should beat the 6750: No effin way. This would go against AMD's numerology: the 6750 is a generation newer (6 vs 5), in the same mid-high classification (7 and 7) and is a superior model (50 vs 30)
The 15" MBPs are slower? WTF?
The entry 15" Radeon 6490 only has 160 stream processors vs 480 in the 6750 bundled with the $2200 model. Notebookcheck lists it close to the 9600M GT from 2 generations back. This is lower than the 330M in the old model.
Why doesn't Apple give us graphs comparing the 6490 to the 330M?
Why doesn't Apple give us graphs comparing the HD 3000 with the 320M?
Because they are both downgrades. The only upgrade is the 330M to the 6750 at the $2200 price.
EDIT: I am aware these are all thanks to the CPU. But that's kind of my point.
Your point is that the latest CPUs in the entry models are double the speed of 2.5 year old Core 2 Duos and the graphics chips are only slightly slower than last year's models.
You can look at it two ways. The way I look at it is that Apple has held back CPU upgrades that other manufacturers were using in 13" models so now they look great and they downgraded the graphics.
The whole idea with buying a new machine is that it is better than the old one, not worse in important areas like graphics.
Please. That's almost like those people that say Mac Pros are the greatest rip off in history without even knowing about the server parts.
The server parts in the entry MP don't cost a great deal more than the desktop parts. Apple used to sell the Mac Pro $500 cheaper when the parts cost the same.
Bottom line: Sweet for me, the latest MBPs can kiss my a**
I still love Apple though, don't doubt me on that. It's just that the Mac division has not been making the best choices IMO these past few years. But that leaves opportunities for the more discerning customer to capitalise on price drops on previous models, etc.
My dad is getting my Macbook Alu 2ghz and my mum his MacBook white (non unibody). My mum's iBook G4 just died a day before the announcements, can you believe it.
BTW The illuminated keyboard is the BOMB. Can't go back to anything (eg. Air?) without it!
I'm loving the MBP 13" colours compared to the much-maligned (and rightly so) MacBook screen. Though there is a bit of backlight "bleed" on the bottom edge. But overall the colours seem a bit desaturated, but really vivid "where it is supposed to be". Eg. a rose might not look as "red" overall compared with the previous MacBook but the "right" parts of the rose is really nice and deep red. That is, there seems to be better colour accuracy. I haven't even done any calibration yet. Not sure if I want to.
It just feels right having an Nvidia GPU (my nickname notwithstanding) inside that I know can handle the tasks thrown at it in the next few years).
Why doesn't Apple give us graphs comparing the 6490 to the 330M?
Why doesn't Apple give us graphs comparing the HD 3000 with the 320M?
Because they are both downgrades. The only upgrade is the 330M to the 6750 at the $2200 price.
The Intel BundleGate RubbishGPU I knew, but I suspected as much about the 6490. Thanks for confirming it.