What you are missing is that battery life is huge for many users of the 13" MBP. Especially if Apple can deliver better performance in an app around faster machine. One common user that would see a huge upside to the new machines is the average student. There are certainly some students that need a powerful machine but what many need is portability.
...
Dave
Battery life and light weight portability is why i purchased and continue to purchase 13" models. You nailed it. Battery life is king.
once again apple manages to screw it up. Why doesn't the 13 inch come with options for a core i5 and i7? Still no composite output option. They should have offered both displayport and mini dvi (that allows composite via adapters). Also why is it so hard for them to offer 1366X 768 hd screens in the 16:9 aspect ration like most PCs today have? why do they hate small form computers? If the 13 inch is a pro why doesn't it get the same options as the other two sizes. I've been waiting 6 years to buy a notebook and every year it gets worse. I wish i had bough one 4 years ago. Who knew they would devolve. Where is the upgrade macbook air?
I wish they would offer an 11.1" 166X768 led backlight macbook pro with all the features. I want a small macbook, light and not an ipad.
once again apple manages to screw it up. Why doesn't the 13 inch come with options for a core i5 and i7? Still no composite output option. They should have offered both displayport and mini dvi (that allows composite via adapters). Also why is it so hard for them to offer 1366X 768 hd screens in the 16:9 aspect ration like most PCs today have? why do they hate small form computers? If the 13 inch is a pro why doesn't it get the same options as the other two sizes. I've been waiting 6 years to buy a notebook and every year it gets worse. I wish i had bough one 4 years ago. Who knew they would devolve. Where is the upgrade macbook air?
I wish they would offer an 11.1" 166X768 led backlight macbook pro with all the features. I want a small macbook, light and not an ipad.
You want an 11.1" notebook with i5 or i7 and output options that even Mac Pros don't have? Really? No wander you have waited for 6 years.
P.S. hd resolution on an 11.1 screen... don't you ever worry about your eyesight?
P.P.S I want an iPhone with 1 or 1.5Ghz chip, Ati discreet graphics with no less than 512mb of dedicated memory, and screen resolution well beyond hd
My 15" high res w/ 500GB 7200 RPM didn't ship yet?
I ordered it a few hours after announcement? I really hope I get it by this weekend for a conference.
Me too. I ordered the 15" 2.66Ghz, 1068x (anti-glare), 500GB 7200rpm and it has not shipped yet either. Mine with business discount (photographer) was $2388.24 ordered over the phone via Apple's business sales department.
Still holding out it will arrive Friday so I can edit the morning's photo shoot on it in the afternoon!
As an example why can't a 13" MBP have a high end core i5.
Its not out of the question that someone would want a very high end processor and GPU in a smaller form factor.
The 13" doesn't have an i5 because 2010 Intel chipsets require integrated INTEL graphics. If Apple puts an i5 in the 13," then it will need dedicated graphics. The 13" is designed for a single small fan. Hideous PC laptops like yours can afford 2 massive fans because they are thicker than a brick.
These are the facts and the limitations of physics.
I bought one today at the Michigan Avenue Apple Store in Chicago.....I am typing this post with t right now.....it is a sweet machine. So yes they are out there.
Not a big expert on hardware, so please explain to me if I got this all wrong :]
Edit: ok that was the 920 (desktop), not 620M (mobile) model... my bad... I see it now.. 2 cores.. meh.. Maybe someone can explain to me why this CPU is good? I thought all i7 was quad cores
Not a big expert on hardware, so please explain to me if I got this all wrong :]
Edit: ok that was the 920 (desktop), not 620M (mobile) model... my bad... I see it now.. 2 cores.. meh.. Maybe someone can explain to me why this CPU is good? I thought all i7 was quad cores
The number of cores has nothing to do with the Core-ix marketing name.
Furthermore, the number of cores is not an indictor of the how good the processor is. The architecture should be the first thing you look at. If you're getting a notebook and plan to use on battery power and/or on your lap you need to look for an efficient design.
The first mobile QUAD Core-i7s to hit the market came out in 2009. These were the Clarksfield microprocessors using a 45 nanometer design and run at a 45W or 55W TDP. They are too hot for any Mac notebook. Notebooks that use these processors have to be considerably thicker to deal with the power and ventilations needs. The exception to this is the 15" HP Envy, but it removed the optical drive to make space for this. Even after all that extra room was had the battery life was still pretty poor and the performance comparisons show very little gain for it.
The Arrandale Core-i7s are the first of the Core-i7s that are great for mass consumption in notebooks. They are built using a 32 nanometer design and are 18W, 25W and 35W. The next MacBook Air should be using an 18W Core-i7.
Also, as the link below shows the Arrandale Core-i7s are the first to include the IGP into the processor, thus removing the need for a Northbridge, bringing it from a 3 chip design to a 2 chip design. This improves power usage, speed and size.
I know it's Wikipedia, but it's usually a great place to start. From there you can find pretty much everything else you need to know.
Apologies if this has already been posted, but I have been searching high and low on the web for comparison benchmarks between the 2009/2010 MBP 13" to no avail. I bit the bullet and purchased the 2010 model (although, it was the most uninspired Apple purchase I have made in a while). The lack of a processor upgrade really dampened my enthusiasm, however, as I sold my 2009 model recently, I was left with little choice.
The tests below were run with identical RAM configurations (4 GB each) and each system was upgraded to 10.6.3 Snow Leopard. All other programs were killed during the Geekbench test.
As you can see, the 2010 registered about a 5% overall increase in performance as measured by the Geekbench score (3362 vs 3194). That's not really very impressive, but the increased battery life and better graphics processing will probably make the 2010 model snappier over all, but the 13" line remains in desperate need of a major processor upgrade. Personally, I think that it's indefensible that at least an i3 processor wasn't utilized.
Personally, I think that it's indefensible that at least an i3 processor wasn't utilized.
Check for performance of the Core-i3 over the comparable Penryn C2D. There are plenty of comparisons to desktop C2D Penryns to desktop Core-i3s. Soon enough we'll have comparisons to the mobile processors.
Then consider that for the same price point Apple would have had to have used the Intel HD IGP, not the Nvidia 320M which has better performance and, as I'm told, considerably better power efficiency.
What Apple did was the right move. Check out numbers 44 and 45...
The question isn't whether is was the right move for them and consumers, the question is what they do for the next update. I have to wonder if the optical drive, taking up 25% of the internal space, will get removed. This will allow many new things while potentially allowing the price point to remain the same.
Check for performance of the Core-i3 over the comparable Penryn C2D. There are plenty of comparisons to desktop C2D Penryns to desktop Core-i3s. Soon enough we'll have comparisons to the mobile processors.
Then consider that for the same price point Apple would have had to have used the Intel HD IGP, not the Nvidia 320M which has better performance and, as I'm told, considerably better power efficiency.
What Apple did was the right move. Check out numbers 44 and 45...
The question isn't whether is was the right move for them and consumers, the question is what they do for the next update. I have to wonder if the optical drive, taking up 25% of the internal space, will get removed. This will allow many new things while potentially allowing the price point to remain the same.
If what everybody says is correct, the new IGP in the 13" was created for this model. As far as I remember, Intel has now forbidden every other company to design chipsets for their new CPUs, so Apple and Nvidia probably had no other choice but to stick with the Core 2 processor.
Besides, I wonder how the 15 and 17" will handle 4 GB, since I read that the new memory controllers embedded with the iX CPU are 3-grouped (hence 3 or 6 GB).
I personally cannot afford the space of a 15" that will not fit in my backpack, and I don't like 15" and 17" with that extra space around the keyboard I find unaesthetic. I have an almost two years old MacBook, the late-2008 that came with the aluminum enclosure and is not labelled as Pro, and I see no reason why I would upgrade to the new 13" model. I have no need for extra GPU power, and who has developed OpenCL applications as yet? I'm going myself to dig into this, but my old model will be largely enough. Not before next year now.
Many people "in the know" are extremely disappointed with the lack of Core i5 in the 13 inch MBP. But the fact remains that Apple is a lifestyle choice as well as being the only option for Mac OS users. The 13 inches were extremely hard to get for the last weeks so this "selling out" stuff is just the filling of backorders and is just a tactic to suggest brisk sales at launch date. This little but relevant detail should be pointed out if you don't want to place this story horribly out of context.
Join us at: No crap2duo on the 13 inch Macbook Pro!
Can someone tell me since so many want the 13, especially creatives (musichoto), why Apple doesn't make this model more powerful? I still miss the express slot. Not sure I'll ever sell mine.
The number of cores has nothing to do with the Core-ix marketing name.
Furthermore, the number of cores is not an indictor of the how good the processor is. The architecture should be the first thing you look at. If you're getting a notebook and plan to use on battery power and/or on your lap you need to look for an efficient design.
The first mobile QUAD Core-i7s to hit the market came out in 2009. These were the Clarksfield microprocessors using a 45 nanometer design and run at a 45W or 55W TDP. They are too hot for any Mac notebook. Notebooks that use these processors have to be considerably thicker to deal with the power and ventilations needs. The exception to this is the 15" HP Envy, but it removed the optical drive to make space for this. Even after all that extra room was had the battery life was still pretty poor and the performance comparisons show very little gain for it.
The Arrandale Core-i7s are the first of the Core-i7s that are great for mass consumption in notebooks. They are built using a 32 nanometer design and are 18W, 25W and 35W. The next MacBook Air should be using an 18W Core-i7.
Also, as the link below shows the Arrandale Core-i7s are the first to include the IGP into the processor, thus removing the need for a Northbridge, bringing it from a 3 chip design to a 2 chip design. This improves power usage, speed and size.
I know it's Wikipedia, but it's usually a great place to start. From there you can find pretty much everything else you need to know.
Okay, thanks a lot for the information. I've heard from a friend that the HP Envy gets hotter and is more noisy than the MBP, which is also why I waited for MBP refresh instead of buying a HP Envy.
I don't understand your missing info for the Best Buy prices...
we always have the same price as Apple plus 99¢ because everything has the 99¢ price
and I had the 15" and 17" models available on launch day...we have not received the 13" models at my location...but we still have a few of the previous model 13" Macbook Pros
and we have sold a few of the 15" i7 models already...they are exquisite machines
the great thing is that only one model went up in price...the 2.43ghz 15" i5 model went up only $100 (and it has integrated ram on the graphics card that wasn?t there in the previous low end 15" Pro) the middle model stayed the same price and the i7 model went down $100 and the 17" went down $200...
that is where the real news is...the prices for the new processors...great they kept the prices fair
I hope the day will come when no PCs left on this planet )
I don't think ghats going to happen. First you have every player opening an app store. We don't know if The Courier is real but if it is it will appeal to some if not many but I think the new desktop OS from msft, will be more like their mobile system which is very different than the desktop. All speculation and the ipad looks to have a camera thus my suggesting rev 2 and while I'm a bit bummed no 4 core laptop, if Logic and third party plugins can see a fifty percent increase, that is awesome.
Comments
LOL
Could anyone tell me what the name of the Core i7 chip is? Or how many cores it has?
Thanks!
Give a man a fish... Teach a man to fish...
What you are missing is that battery life is huge for many users of the 13" MBP. Especially if Apple can deliver better performance in an app around faster machine. One common user that would see a huge upside to the new machines is the average student. There are certainly some students that need a powerful machine but what many need is portability.
...
Dave
Battery life and light weight portability is why i purchased and continue to purchase 13" models. You nailed it. Battery life is king.
I wish they would offer an 11.1" 166X768 led backlight macbook pro with all the features. I want a small macbook, light and not an ipad.
once again apple manages to screw it up. Why doesn't the 13 inch come with options for a core i5 and i7? Still no composite output option. They should have offered both displayport and mini dvi (that allows composite via adapters). Also why is it so hard for them to offer 1366X 768 hd screens in the 16:9 aspect ration like most PCs today have? why do they hate small form computers? If the 13 inch is a pro why doesn't it get the same options as the other two sizes. I've been waiting 6 years to buy a notebook and every year it gets worse. I wish i had bough one 4 years ago. Who knew they would devolve. Where is the upgrade macbook air?
I wish they would offer an 11.1" 166X768 led backlight macbook pro with all the features. I want a small macbook, light and not an ipad.
You want an 11.1" notebook with i5 or i7 and output options that even Mac Pros don't have? Really?
P.S. hd resolution on an 11.1 screen... don't you ever worry about your eyesight?
P.P.S I want an iPhone with 1 or 1.5Ghz chip, Ati discreet graphics with no less than 512mb of dedicated memory, and screen resolution well beyond hd
My 15" high res w/ 500GB 7200 RPM didn't ship yet?
I ordered it a few hours after announcement? I really hope I get it by this weekend for a conference.
Me too. I ordered the 15" 2.66Ghz, 1068x (anti-glare), 500GB 7200rpm and it has not shipped yet either. Mine with business discount (photographer) was $2388.24 ordered over the phone via Apple's business sales department.
Still holding out it will arrive Friday so I can edit the morning's photo shoot on it in the afternoon!
[I]Give a man a fish...
Teach a man to fish...[INDENT]1) Look up the chip ...
Nice post!
As an example why can't a 13" MBP have a high end core i5.
Its not out of the question that someone would want a very high end processor and GPU in a smaller form factor.
The 13" doesn't have an i5 because 2010 Intel chipsets require integrated INTEL graphics. If Apple puts an i5 in the 13," then it will need dedicated graphics. The 13" is designed for a single small fan. Hideous PC laptops like yours can afford 2 massive fans because they are thicker than a brick.
These are the facts and the limitations of physics.
You're 'stunned' because others don't follow your purchase preferences/habits? Yikes, talk about arrogance.
I am STUNNED that a 1066MHz Core 2 Duo Penryn CPU was available "2 years" ago, according to him.
Give a man a fish... Teach a man to fish...
2 cores? According to Intel's price list:
i7-920 (8M L3 cache, 4 cores, 8 Threads, 2.66 GHz, 4.80 GT/sec Intel QPI 45nm)
Not a big expert on hardware, so please explain to me if I got this all wrong :]
Edit: ok that was the 920 (desktop), not 620M (mobile) model... my bad... I see it now.. 2 cores.. meh.. Maybe someone can explain to me why this CPU is good? I thought all i7 was quad cores
2 cores? According to Intel's price list:
i7-920 (8M L3 cache, 4 cores, 8 Threads, 2.66 GHz, 4.80 GT/sec Intel QPI 45nm)
Not a big expert on hardware, so please explain to me if I got this all wrong :]
Edit: ok that was the 920 (desktop), not 620M (mobile) model... my bad... I see it now.. 2 cores.. meh.. Maybe someone can explain to me why this CPU is good? I thought all i7 was quad cores
The number of cores has nothing to do with the Core-ix marketing name.
Furthermore, the number of cores is not an indictor of the how good the processor is. The architecture should be the first thing you look at. If you're getting a notebook and plan to use on battery power and/or on your lap you need to look for an efficient design.
The first mobile QUAD Core-i7s to hit the market came out in 2009. These were the Clarksfield microprocessors using a 45 nanometer design and run at a 45W or 55W TDP. They are too hot for any Mac notebook. Notebooks that use these processors have to be considerably thicker to deal with the power and ventilations needs. The exception to this is the 15" HP Envy, but it removed the optical drive to make space for this. Even after all that extra room was had the battery life was still pretty poor and the performance comparisons show very little gain for it.
The Arrandale Core-i7s are the first of the Core-i7s that are great for mass consumption in notebooks. They are built using a 32 nanometer design and are 18W, 25W and 35W. The next MacBook Air should be using an 18W Core-i7.
Also, as the link below shows the Arrandale Core-i7s are the first to include the IGP into the processor, thus removing the need for a Northbridge, bringing it from a 3 chip design to a 2 chip design. This improves power usage, speed and size.
I know it's Wikipedia, but it's usually a great place to start. From there you can find pretty much everything else you need to know.
Apologies if this has already been posted, but I have been searching high and low on the web for comparison benchmarks between the 2009/2010 MBP 13" to no avail. I bit the bullet and purchased the 2010 model (although, it was the most uninspired Apple purchase I have made in a while). The lack of a processor upgrade really dampened my enthusiasm, however, as I sold my 2009 model recently, I was left with little choice.
The tests below were run with identical RAM configurations (4 GB each) and each system was upgraded to 10.6.3 Snow Leopard. All other programs were killed during the Geekbench test.
As you can see, the 2010 registered about a 5% overall increase in performance as measured by the Geekbench score (3362 vs 3194). That's not really very impressive, but the increased battery life and better graphics processing will probably make the 2010 model snappier over all, but the 13" line remains in desperate need of a major processor upgrade. Personally, I think that it's indefensible that at least an i3 processor wasn't utilized.
Thoughts?
2009 13" MBP Geekbench Score:
http://att.macrumors.com/attachment....7&d=1271310047
2010 13" MBP Geekbench Score
http://att.macrumors.com/attachment....8&d=1271310047
Personally, I think that it's indefensible that at least an i3 processor wasn't utilized.
Check for performance of the Core-i3 over the comparable Penryn C2D. There are plenty of comparisons to desktop C2D Penryns to desktop Core-i3s. Soon enough we'll have comparisons to the mobile processors.
Then consider that for the same price point Apple would have had to have used the Intel HD IGP, not the Nvidia 320M which has better performance and, as I'm told, considerably better power efficiency.
What Apple did was the right move. Check out numbers 44 and 45...The question isn't whether is was the right move for them and consumers, the question is what they do for the next update. I have to wonder if the optical drive, taking up 25% of the internal space, will get removed. This will allow many new things while potentially allowing the price point to remain the same.
Check for performance of the Core-i3 over the comparable Penryn C2D. There are plenty of comparisons to desktop C2D Penryns to desktop Core-i3s. Soon enough we'll have comparisons to the mobile processors.
Then consider that for the same price point Apple would have had to have used the Intel HD IGP, not the Nvidia 320M which has better performance and, as I'm told, considerably better power efficiency.
What Apple did was the right move. Check out numbers 44 and 45...The question isn't whether is was the right move for them and consumers, the question is what they do for the next update. I have to wonder if the optical drive, taking up 25% of the internal space, will get removed. This will allow many new things while potentially allowing the price point to remain the same.
If what everybody says is correct, the new IGP in the 13" was created for this model. As far as I remember, Intel has now forbidden every other company to design chipsets for their new CPUs, so Apple and Nvidia probably had no other choice but to stick with the Core 2 processor.
Besides, I wonder how the 15 and 17" will handle 4 GB, since I read that the new memory controllers embedded with the iX CPU are 3-grouped (hence 3 or 6 GB).
I personally cannot afford the space of a 15" that will not fit in my backpack, and I don't like 15" and 17" with that extra space around the keyboard I find unaesthetic. I have an almost two years old MacBook, the late-2008 that came with the aluminum enclosure and is not labelled as Pro, and I see no reason why I would upgrade to the new 13" model. I have no need for extra GPU power, and who has developed OpenCL applications as yet? I'm going myself to dig into this, but my old model will be largely enough. Not before next year now.
Join us at: No crap2duo on the 13 inch Macbook Pro!
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=114132048604514
Next stop: an underpowered Core i3 MBP 13 inch in June.
The number of cores has nothing to do with the Core-ix marketing name.
Furthermore, the number of cores is not an indictor of the how good the processor is. The architecture should be the first thing you look at. If you're getting a notebook and plan to use on battery power and/or on your lap you need to look for an efficient design.
The first mobile QUAD Core-i7s to hit the market came out in 2009. These were the Clarksfield microprocessors using a 45 nanometer design and run at a 45W or 55W TDP. They are too hot for any Mac notebook. Notebooks that use these processors have to be considerably thicker to deal with the power and ventilations needs. The exception to this is the 15" HP Envy, but it removed the optical drive to make space for this. Even after all that extra room was had the battery life was still pretty poor and the performance comparisons show very little gain for it.
The Arrandale Core-i7s are the first of the Core-i7s that are great for mass consumption in notebooks. They are built using a 32 nanometer design and are 18W, 25W and 35W. The next MacBook Air should be using an 18W Core-i7.
Also, as the link below shows the Arrandale Core-i7s are the first to include the IGP into the processor, thus removing the need for a Northbridge, bringing it from a 3 chip design to a 2 chip design. This improves power usage, speed and size.
I know it's Wikipedia, but it's usually a great place to start. From there you can find pretty much everything else you need to know.
Okay, thanks a lot for the information. I've heard from a friend that the HP Envy gets hotter and is more noisy than the MBP, which is also why I waited for MBP refresh instead of buying a HP Envy.
we always have the same price as Apple plus 99¢ because everything has the 99¢ price
and I had the 15" and 17" models available on launch day...we have not received the 13" models at my location...but we still have a few of the previous model 13" Macbook Pros
and we have sold a few of the 15" i7 models already...they are exquisite machines
the great thing is that only one model went up in price...the 2.43ghz 15" i5 model went up only $100 (and it has integrated ram on the graphics card that wasn?t there in the previous low end 15" Pro) the middle model stayed the same price and the i7 model went down $100 and the 17" went down $200...
that is where the real news is...the prices for the new processors...great they kept the prices fair
I don't think ghats going to happen. First you have every player opening an app store. We don't know if The Courier is real but if it is it will appeal to some if not many but I think the new desktop OS from msft, will be more like their mobile system which is very different than the desktop. All speculation and the ipad looks to have a camera thus my suggesting rev 2 and while I'm a bit bummed no 4 core laptop, if Logic and third party plugins can see a fifty percent increase, that is awesome.