Mid-2010 MacBook Pro vs New ones.

Please keep this to facts.

I have a i5 2.4Ghz nVidia GT330M 256Mb video (8Gb Samsung DDRIII 1333Mhz ram installed running at 1067Mhz)

what would the performance increase be if I were to get a new 15" MBP with and i7 and 1Gb ATI 6750 graphics cards? I have been reading mixed reviews on the graphics should I just hold out until 2012 release?

 

CPU performance will definitely better. That is a no-brainer. Graphics performance will see a boost as well but I don't think it is worth it seeing you have a great MBP 15" right now.

 

Actually, the graphics boost is bigger than the CPU boost in most cases. We're looking at possibly +20-50% here (depending on the game). Still, I don't think it's worth the price.

 

Yes the graphics is a boost but that is because he is moving from the base 15" to the upper level 15". If you compare base to base, the increase is fairly minimal if you ask me.

Same with going from the old higher end 15" to this new high end 15". The performance seems minimally increased.

 

Hmm the new 13" claim 7 hr battery life vs 10 hrs on the older models. Newer processor with integrated intel graphics = less battery?

 

I think Apple used the new stricter and harsher method of testing battery life they used on the MBA with these new MBPs.

That is why you see a decrease. It is more real world based.

 

But he asked for his to be compared to the upper level. And either way, the 330M is faster than the 6490M.

What people are saying is that Apple has started testing battery life differently to give more accurate results. In other words, when Apple says 7 hours, they mean 7 hours, not the "up to" BS which requires ridiculous measures to achieve. It might actually be a bit more than 7 hours.

 

No. Sandy Bridge is definitely more power efficient than Arrandale -- look at the 15-hour claims for ThinkPads and EliteBooks in the News forum. Either Apple revised their standard for what constitutes battery life (e.g. watching a movie yields a different result than browsing the web) or they skimped on the battery. We just have to figure out which one (wait for an independent review which uses the same tests for both machines).

I believe the mixed reviews on the graphics come from the fact that the $1800 model comes with a Radeon 6490M which is either worse or just about even to the GeForce 330M in the previous generation. The 6750M is a fairly large improvement on the latter, but it seems to only be available with the $2200 configuration.

 

So really just apple lied about 10 hrs on the previous models.

 

Nah. They just used a different method of testing. The 10 hours was achieved using less stressful operations while the 7 hours is under the more stressed conditions.

 

they have to test it and put out a number. they can change their methodology as long as they try to make it fair. hard to say anything until we get some benchmark numbers on battery life.

base-to-base comparisons aren't what the OP is looking for. he wants to know the difference in performance between the 2 machines he specified. the $2200 macbook pro is a lot faster in both graphics and processor performance.

 

I see that the base MB is 7 hours (not upgraded/still using the old config). Is that number down from what was published prior to today?

 

*looks near bottom of buy page*

 

So, Apple didn't lie,... their old test did.
Sounds like Clinton-esque reasoning. LOL

 

They didn't lie, and the test wasn't wrong. It wasn't realistic to most users so the test was a bit flawed, so the changed their methods. Why do people wanna give crap over this when it's one of the best things they've done in years.

 

The tests did not lie. Computing changed over time. Their first testing method was based off info that people did simpler and less taxing tasks on the computers.

Over time, people use computers differently and tax the CPU and hard drives more now.

 

If anything I'm glad I have the 2010 13 inch model over the 2011. Yes the processor for the 2011 model is faster, but the video card is lacking.

Here's my reasoning for the video card lacking: with the 320m, I can OC it from 450/950 to 630/1330 for a decent boost in gaming graphics. I doubt that you'll be able to do an OC on the SB HD 3000.

but thats just my 2 cents.

 

I'm not upset at all, nor do I want to give grief to anyone.
It was obvious from day one that their test was flawed, and it has been pointed out many times, ad infinitem. Apple stuck to their guns with that old information way too long. I indeed hope that their new figures are more "real world". Perhaps the observations of many were influential in the decisive revision. I imagine that we all steadfastly agreed with them all the time, their would be no reason to innovate.

 

Same here. I kind of feel bad for the folks who hoped and waited.

 

how much do you guys think I can pull for my 2010 i7 + 8GB ram and a regular HDD?

 

Here's how they tested this time.

 

Wait until 2012. This is just an incremental upgrade. No reason to get a new laptop that looks just like your old laptop because it has a different processor. Just wait until everything changes about MBPs next year.

 

^ I agree. For me, it just depends on how much I can get for my 2010 now...vs how much I'd get for it this time next year.

Right now, I figure upgrading to the latest 17" would cost me about $500 (assuming I can get ~$2000 today for my current laptop). So the question is how much more comes off the value of my current laptop in February of 2012? If my laptop is only worth $1500 by then, it makes sense to upgrade now AND upgrade then. I'd lose no money in that scenario (maybe $100)...and I'd get to enjoy a faster and more powerful computer for the next year.

And to that point, I think it makes sense for me to upgrade. But only if it's a fair assumption that the laptop will be worth only $1500 by this time next year.

 

I forgot to mention I have barely just bought my MacBook Pro and only three weeks to four weeks old.

 

While getting core-i5 and core-i7 chips in the mbp13 is a welcome plus, the gpu is a draw back.

 

Actually, the CPU and GPU performance has improved across the board
See this article for details ... MacBook Pro early 2011 benchmarks confirm huge performance leap – SlashGear

 

wow, that's a lot of improvement (CPU)

 

thats Geekbench... it tests CPU and memory only... so yes its going to be a lot better.

We need some GPU benchmarks done.