Comparing processors across generations

Hi everyone,

I'm considering investing in a new laptop and am having trouble parsing the tech/marketing specs in order to get a good sense of how the hardware compares.

Old: (2010) Intel i5 520M 2.4 GHz
New: (2016) Intel m3 1.1 GHz ( https://www.apple.com/macbook/specs/)

The "old" is so many generations ago the new should be better, right? But what are the numbers I should be looking at? I want the newer hardware and the move to OS X. I want to know what to expect, though. My current system has 2x 4 GB RAM and a 1TB HDD. It runs fine apart from a junk battery and being quite heavy. A Macbook will have 8GB RAM and SSD most likely.

Usage: gaming is not a priority but I anticipate using this for coding and streaming video, etc. Would be curious about the gaming ability comparison, too. The old Thinkpad's integrated gfx actually hold up quite well; e.g, I can run Civ 5 on low settings and it's mostly fine.

Thanks in advance!

 

You're going to have a bad time doing anything near as demanding as video encoding on that system. Intel m3 CPUs are weaker than xxxxU CPUs which are in turn far weaker than the standard quad core xxxxHQ/HK CPUs, which are somewhat to slightly slower than standard desktop processors.

 

Probably the best set of mobile CPU benchmarks for comparison is at notebookcheck. In everyday usage the notebook with the m3 will be faster for several reasons including: (i) the CPU will run much faster under Turbo Boost mode for 15? seconds; an SSD will make the notebook feel much more responsive; the memory subsystem is faster and the newer graphics are faster.

I recently bought a Dell Latitude 7370 with the Core m5 6Y54 CPU (up to 2.7GHz with Turbo Boost) to replace a nearly 5 year notebook with a 17W i5-2467M CPU (up to 2.3GHz) and a 128GB SSD. The m5 6Y54 was significantly faster in wPrime 32M but only fractional faster in the much longer wPrime 1024M benchmark. However, the new notebook was around 50% faster than the old one according to the PCMark8 benchmarks.

John

 

See:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=778&cmp[]=2631

The single core responsiveness of the newer tech will be just under 12% faster, while the multicore performance will be just over 28% faster.

What you're mostly benefitting from is the power reduction from 35W TDP to 4.5W TDP (~778% reduction).

Don't consider a platform today that is limited (i.e. soldered RAM) to less than 16GB of RAM and buying a system today with less than 8GB of RAM is like buying your old tech (again) at today's prices all over again.

CPU+RAM=Work done (performance, or more properly; productivity). Maximize those to get the most long term platform - even for your light(er) workloads.

Your workloads (even if they don't change) will creep higher and higher with regards to performance needed on the system they are run on... - and even if they don't: the O/S and security updates will dictate a much higher performing system in a few short months/years.

I would suggest going for something much more powerful than what you are considering today (you are effectively side grading - not upgrading - from your original system; performance-wise) - if you want to keep using the system for much longer than 18 months or so...

If you know you will upgrade to a better/faster platform in less than 2 years... buy the system with as much RAM and storage capacity as possible today - to make it still usable/worth something to you or whoever you give/sell it to then (and get a correspondingly better price; if selling...).

Even for your workflow 'today'; I would recommend the most affordable i7 QC (non- 'U') CPU with at least 16GB of RAM or more and an SSD that was at the bare minimum in the 500GB range, but preferably at 1TB or higher (if you could upgrade the SSD yourself; even better). That is if you want to have the system usable for as long as possible over the course of ownership.

Good luck.

 

Gaming you'll have to stick with older or low GPU intensive games. No way will it handle any modern AAA game. Civ 5 should run fine though.

 

The Retina MacBook has no active cooling, so anything that's overly CPU intensive, especially a game like Civilization, will cause it to thermal throttle. Get a MacBook Pro if you want to play games of any sort that aren't 2D/pixelart.

 

Thanks everyone for the replies and especially all the CPU comparison resources! Yeah, I am starting to be a little resigned to this being closer to a "sidegrade" with an upgrade cycle closer to 3 years than 7.

It seems difficult to optimize both for performance and mobility at once. While I'm glad my ~$1500 Thinkpad is still going strong after 7 years, its form factor has felt awfully dated since at least 2014. It's making me wonder how much I should future-proof my next laptop purchase. If it turns out I'll need big, bad specs occasionally, I think I should just maintain a desktop.

I kind of want to see how improved the 2017 Macbook will be. OTOH, a 2016 low-end Macbook Pro is a ~$1300 3.0lb option, so a relatively similar price with the sacrifice of one extra pound and higher power consumption. I kinda dig the lack of fan in the Macbook; one less physical component to worry about aging.

Want to make a purchase before grad school this fall and this is where my current thinking is. I guess my priority is for it to be pleasant to bring to labs, class, and coffee shops for the next 2 years without losing functionality vs what I have now. It's just a little hard to figure how smartly I'm choosing these priorities.

 

With the 8GB RAM limitation on the MacBook, the (maxed out) Surface Pro 4 is looking very appealing to me for your requirements.

Yeah; about $1K more... but you will also get:

See:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2631&cmp[]=2654

A ~60% multithread performance improvement, an ~53% single core (responsiveness...) improvement, double the RAM and double the storage capacity too.

See:
https://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msusa/en_US/pdp/Surface-Pro-4/productID.5072641000/config.true


Along with the capability to actually make notes, sketches etc. with the latest (best) Surface Pen too.

If you really want portability, power and productivity in one package (equally), then the Surface Pro is impossible to beat.

The above will easily be usable 'closer' to 7 years than 3 years... and for just ~$1K more... much more powerful and economical per year than apple's offerings too (even if you want to wait for the 2017 models).

The only question is; does your budget go up that high?

 

That's a good question and I don't have a straightforward answer I'd prefer the upfront to be lower than that, but we also get into projecting lifetime. "Spend more now but have something that you won't hate after two years" is certainly a compelling argument.

I really want to go with Mac OS, though. Which I realize is a problematic tradeoff in the economical discussion. My reasoning is I've got a Windows/Linux box already that I can continue to use, and Macs appear to be common enough in industry that I'll want to know my way around them.

I think I'm going to go with a 2016 MBP (Apple refurb ~$1.5k) for now to see if the near-2lb drop in weight is really a difference-maker. If not, I'll probably hold out for the 2017 Macbook. Both options will get dusted in a spec contest, but from what I've gathered so far they'll be at least adequate in a 3-year window for a guy who doesn't do video editing or (modern) gaming. I'm also counting on nice resale value at the end of that window if I want to make a switch. In any case, this is an experiment and I'll let you know how it works out

 

Refurbished is the way to go on a MacBook, especially since Apple covers them with the same warranty as a new one. You can also extend it with AppleCare, which I would recommend buying and doing so from someplace like B&H Photo/Video. This link is for the 13-inch model - you can find it for the 15 easily enough. You can buy it at any time during the 1-year warranty period, and it will be retroactive to your date of purchase. It's cheaper than getting it through Apple and you'll save on sales tax unless you live in New York or New Jersey.

One possible option for the future, if you think you may want to get a desktop, is an external graphics card. This company is creating one with the MacBook Pro in mind. NVIDIA recently released a beta driver for its GeForce 10-series cards for OS X, and the box should work flawlessly in Windows should you decide to make a Boot Camp installation.

 

am72,

Give it a try and good luck!

Around here though; apple has greatly let down desktop/mobile workers and has very little appeal to anyone that needs to make $$$$$$$ with their system; in other words, I don't think that 'knowing your way around them' is as important as you may think.

(Of course; without knowing your actual industry; the above is a general 'note', to take into consideration or not).

I don't know if refurbished is as good on a Surface Pro 4 with the highest spec's that would make it worthwhile? But it is also a consideration once 'refurbished' is an option at all.

My bottom line for you? Always buy as much HORSEPOWER as you can (CPU+RAM) afford - if the highest productivity for the longest time at the least cost is your objective.

Take care.