Slashdot Mirror
New MacBook Dual Core 2 Benchmarks
ApolloX writes "New Macbook Pro Benchmarks are now available. From the article:
'Like the iMac before it, Apple's MacBook Pro underwent an upgrade highlighted by a chip swap — the Core Duo processor that used to power Apple's pro laptop is gone, replaced by the next-generation Core 2 Duo. And as with our iMac benchmarks, these updated Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro models show a modest performance gain when compared to older systems running on Core Duo chips with the same clock speeds.'
As expected, the new 15-inch Intel Dual Core 2 (2.33Ghz/2GB RAM) is the new king of Apple portables, with results for the 17-inch model still pending."
What's with the headline? It's "MacBook Pro", not MacBook. They're separate products. And it's "Core 2 Duo". Would it have been that hard to identify the correct product being reviewed?
This
macbooks are too expensive for me to buy one, if they ever come down in price that would be great.But right now you can buy a pc with the same config cheaper.
You know you have too much free time when you enjoy reading about in how many seconds files get unzipped :|
I'm more interested in how hot these things run.. my old Core Duo MBP runs so hot I can't even use it on my lap, and the fan emits a really annoying loud, high-pitched whine. This computer is actually physically painful to use.
The performance gains are modest. But even with performance increase, there's a modest gain in cooling. I wonder if there are any gains in power consumption or increased battery life. Anyone know?
Faster chip brings faster performance!
Does Apple even give a crap about hardware quality anymore?
Apple laptops are starting to look like the fault ridden Xbox 360 - huge numbers of people constantly reporting a variety of hardware problems and a tiny hardcore Apple fanbase desperately trying to downplay the issues.
There was a time when Apple had pride in their hardware.
I was excited to see the headline. I look at the site and its just comparing several models to a baseline previous MacBook Pro. What is the point in that? I want to see real benchmarks like perhaps windows running on it vs a comparable "PC" laptop from say dell, toshiba or some other vendor. I'd also like to see a benchmark compared to desktop models like iMacs, Mac Pros, etc. To put it in perspective, maybe some benchmarks from G4/G5 models as well.
:)
I want to know how apple compares to other vendors now that apples to apples comparisons are more fair. You could argue driver support if the mac loses, but its not like dell ships great drivers for their modified chipsets either. I have an iBook now and it would be nice to know how PC operating systems run on this thing. I now have a good reason to want to run BSD on one of these
MidnightBSD: The BSD for Everyone
Who DOESN'T like a weenie roast?
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
What really sold me on the Apple Mac Mini was the OS. But given that Apples seem to cost more than equivalent PCs, if someone could get a legit version of OSX running on a PC, I'd be using a PC and OSX rather than splashing out the extra cash for an Apple.
Performance of 2.33 GHz model with 1 and 2 GB of RAM is almost same. why does doubling of RAM is not increasing the performance?.. but it sure does increase the price
15-inch MacBook Pro/2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo (2GB RAM) 226 1:10 0:57 2:07 0:51 0:58 72.9 2:22 15-inch MacBook Pro/2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo (1GB RAM) 222 1:11 0:57 2:07 0:51 0:58 72.1 2:39
Faster and cooler and less power is not the point.
The point is that core 2 is a 64-bit processor. Core 1 was only a 32-bit processor. That may not matter for Joe Web Surfer, but it represents a significant limit on the future of Core 1 machines.
(Core 2 also supports the nx bit, which is hardly a panacea, but has its place in an overall security strategy. Without it, memory tricks have to be used that end up costing performance. Usually not very much, but some.)
I'm getting tired of seeing all these bullshit, tomshardware-like Apple stories. Does anybody have an idea about what I can do to get Appledot stories all up out of my grill when I go to the main page? I've thought about going to, for example, politics.slashdot.org, games.slashdot.org, etc. individually, but I don't want to miss a story of value that is not in any one individual category. Any ideas? Anyone? Bueller?
It also gained dual-layer Superdrives and Firewire 800 back, and comes with more RAM standard and higher maximum RAM than the previous model, which is more than you can say for the iMac upgrade.
I do not know about the rest of you, but when I am looking at benchmarks I'm interested in how the computer performs in relation to the one that I have now and not to the previous almost similar model. Is it worth the cost to buy a new computer? Will I gain anything? Everyone already knows each new computer is slightly better than the last. The only one these number will mean anything too are people that recently bought a MacBook Pro and they are not likely to buy another one right now anyway.
Anybody know what sort of battery life to expect out of these machines? I love how my iBook gets over 5 hours of use from one battery charge, but I think the MacBook and MacBook Pro don't do that well. However, the Core 2 is supposed to be more efficient than the Core. So, perhaps the battery life on these new machines can impress me?
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
I picked up a 2.33 GHz MBP (US$2500) a couple of days ago and it meets my expectations. No problems with noise or heat issues, and the build quality and design is much better than the offerings back in 2002 when I bought an iBook 700 MHz G3 and a PB 800 MHz G4. The magnetic power connector by itself is a big improvement.
The included printed documentation is rather lacking for a notebook in this price range. Additionally, there in no recordable CD or DVD included. And as noted before, there is no modem either. For developers, both X Window and Xcode require additional installation steps.
For those who can accept a sligntly slower CPU and half the memory (128 MB vs 256 MB) graphics, a savings of US$500 can be had by getting the base model and using the cash to upgrade the main memory from 1 GB to 2 GB (or 3 GB).
This headline does more than suggest, it actually states, that the system under benchmark has two Core 2 processors. That would be a total of four processing cores spread over two chips, and quite a burden on the poor system's batteries.
WRONG! What it has is a Core 2 Duo dual-processor chip.
It's bad enough the the submitter can't properly write the headline. That the Slashdot editor let it through in this form deserves having him (or her) sent back to Remedial English, and not allowed near a keyboard until they pass it.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Someone asked about temperature. At its hottest I can still have it on my lap (wearing pants, dunno if it's cool enough to Quake nekkid or anytihng). Most of the time it runs cool. It's fast and snappy. It rules.
Most annoying part is that I had to recompile all the open source things I'd built for my previous ppc machine. Apparently the emulator doesn't work for command line things.
Start Running Better Polls
All Apple has to do is unbundle their hardware/software, price the MacBook at a comparable cost to the PC, and price OSX at the difference between the current cost and the hardware only cost. You'd still pay the same overall, yet get your hardware at Dell/HP/IBM prices. Would that make you happier?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
I've been following some debate on Macintouch about whether or not to consider this a 64-bit laptop. Apparently the processor is but the memory bus isn't. Or something.
What's the real deal as far as compatibility w/64-bit Leopard goes?
Macs are now like ANY OTHER SYSTEM. Benchmarking them is pointless.
I'm tired of this argument. If you want to pay more for a Mac, that's fine, but don't say you can't get a good PC for cheaper. It's just not true. The only Mac you can come close to arguing that with is the desktop Mac Pro, since they are workstation processors that Intel must be giving Apple a significant price break on. Just configured a thinkpad with better graphics, higher resolution display, wireless n integrated, $200 cheaper. And Thinkpads are not considered cheap notebooks. You can get it $2000 if you wait for a sale. Perhaps you think the little camera is worth over $200? ThinkPad Z61e 9450GBU $2,303.00 Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo T7600 (2.33GHz, 4MB L2, 667MHz FSB) (Standard) 1 Operating system: Microsoft Windows XP Professional 41U3118 1 Display type: 15.4 inch WUXGA TFT (1920x1200) (Standard) 1 Memory: 1GB PC2-5300 CL5 NP DDR2 SDRAM SODIMM 2 Graphics: 256MB ATI Mobility FireGL V5200 (Standard) 1 Ports: 3 USB 2.0, IEEE 1394, 3-1 digital media reader (SD/MMC/MS), S-Video out, External Display, External Microphone/Line-In, Headphone / Line out (Standard), Hard drive: 120GB 5400rpm SATA Hard Drive, Optical device: 8x Max DVD Recordable Ultrabay Enhanced Drive, Integrated communication: 56K V.92 Designed Modem (Standard), Integrated Ethernet: Integrated Gigabit Ethernet (Standard), Integrated WiFi wireless LAN: Wi-Fi wireless upgradable and Bluetooth (Standard), Integrated WiFi wireless LAN adapters: ThinkPad 11a/b/g/n Wi-Fi, Security: Client Security Solution and Integrated fingerprint reader (Standard)
That worked like gangbusters, and I also availed myself of the chance to filter out most of the other uninteresting garbage on the site. Seeing that piece of crap article marked the first time I ever felt inspired enough to customize my Slashdot preferences, and for whatever reason, I kept seeing the wrong preferences bar.
I'm posting as AC, because apparently if you have moderation points and are in fact also an asshole, then you abhor the idea of people actually receiving helpful information in the Slashdot forums. And if you are an asshole and DON'T have mod points, then you just can't control yourself and can't pass on the chance to mock others by posting chiding comments. (Hi DDLKermit007!!! "Your" the best!!11! )
Hey, thanks again.
-BeeBeard
I just got my 2.33 GHz MacBook Pro, no problems whatsoever. The fans are quiet, but very efficient, I guess. I've watched a few movies while crunching some numbers in the background, giving the processor a run for its money, and the bottom has never reached the point where I had to move the computer off of my lap.
They allow you to install a 1gb and a 2gb stick, but why can't you install 2x 2gb for 4gb???
2.33GHz, 2GB RAM, 160GB HDD. It's scary fast, even in Aperture. After reading horror stories on the web I thought it'd run ridiculously hot. Not so, my friends. The bottom does get hot when you do something hardcore (LiveType realtime rendering or a hardcore Aperture session), but not as hot as to be unbearable. Overall, I'm very pleased with my purchase, and this is hands down the best laptop I've ever used.
:0)
My son is very pleased, too - he can't get enough of Photo Booth.
Macs only have one mouse button, a PC would have two or more. MacOS X doesn't run (legally) on any machine but a Mac. So there! *stomps off to his room*
There are two button mice for Macs, even Apple's Mighty Mouse is a two button mouse. As there aren't buttons on top it doesn't seem to be a two button mouse but it is. And I've got a two button mouse for my almost 10 year old Mac.
FalconShould there be a Law?
What really sold me on the Apple Mac Mini was the OS. But given that Apples seem to cost more than equivalent PCs, if someone could get a legit version of OSX running on a PC, I'd be using a PC and OSX rather than splashing out the extra cash for an Apple.
Ah but would Mac OSX run as good on non Apple hardware? I don't think so, because Apple makes OSX to run only on Mac computers they are able to it just work. If Apple were to make the OS so it would run on any pc then they'd have to test it on a bunch of hardware, that or it wouldn't just work which would give Apple a black eye. Also if they did then they'd run into direct competition with Microsoft possibly causing more trouble for Apple.
FalconShould there be a Law?
How do the Sony Core 2 Duo laptops (SZ/FE/AR) compare to the MacBook Pro? I'm interested in heat/weight/battery life mostly. I know they will both perform well enough. This is going to be a laptop for a non-power user, so comfort/quality is the top priority.
All Apple has to do is unbundle their hardware/software, price the MacBook at a comparable cost to the PC, and price OSX at the difference between the current cost and the hardware only cost. You'd still pay the same overall, yet get your hardware at Dell/HP/IBM prices. Would that make you happier?
Nope! What many forget or don't realize is that Apple is as much a hardware as a software company. Apple as already found out that they loose more money by allowing Mac clones than they make in licensing fees for the Mac OS.
FalconShould there be a Law?
there in no recordable CD or DVD included.
If you mean no media how many manufacturers include media? As for whether the drives are recordable according the MBP page it has a 6x double-layer-burning SuperDrive so it does record. If it doesn't record then Apple is guilty of false advertizing.
FalconShould there be a Law?
This is a rare instance where that statement is neither troll nor ignorance. We're talking about laptops, so the fact that the trackpad has only one button is a real difference between a MacBook Pro and a similar PC laptop. Sure, you can plug in a two button mouse. But if you're buying hardware to run a non-OS X operating system, then the lack of a built-in second button would be considered a serious defect.
FW800 - What devices do you have that use FW800 and are actually faster because of it? I know I have none. Quick, make something up.
DSRL? External HD? Scanner?
The software is your choice. I find nothing on iLife compelling.
Agreed about iLife. Afterall that's what you get a computer for, the run the software you want to use. Once you know what software you want or need then you pick the OS and hardware.
So after addressing the above, you're saying that you would pay $200 to have a significantly lower resolution screen, a significantly less powerful graphics card all for FW800 (over FW400), the MagSafe, the iSight camera, and ambient lighting sensors? That's fine, but I really find it difficult to argue that this is a wash from a cost-analysis standpoint.
I plan on getting a MBP in a week or two, switching from Windows because of Windows, as well as hardware problems. The most stable Windows I've used is NT4, I've never had my NT4 box crash on me. However I have had other Windows that I've owned as well as that I've used elsewhere crash. The first tyme I used XP it froze before it even finished booting, and it was on a brand new Dell. The PC I'm using now is an HP and I had to have the hd and the motherboard replaced before it was a year old. Prior to the HP I had a PC by Gateway and the same thing happened with it. However I have also bought two Macs that were used when I got them and they both lasted me several years before I had any hardware or software problems. Another factor in switching though is MS's policies requiring Activation and WGA as well as Windows phoning home starting with XP. For me that's more than enough reason to switch to Macs.
FalconShould there be a Law?
"even people i know that run out an buy Rev A products seem to do fine."
Well, you don't know me, but I've had trouble with a Rev. A iMac; Apple didn't provide enough cooling for the FBT on the analog board. As a result, the built-in monitor is now useless, and the computer won't power up if you still have it connected to the dead monitor. (It didn't even "sad Mac." It had us thinking there was a power supply problem for a while.)
I opened up the case and plugged in a monitor from a Performa PPC, and that works fine except that when the computer goes to sleep automatically, the monitor stays on and just displays black. Interestingly, if you explicitly tell the iMac to go to sleep, the monitor sleeps correctly.
Good description of the problem and how to fix it:
http://www.macopz.com/columns/imacrepair/
I like Apple (for the most part), but I'm never going to buy Rev. A again.
--
This is not a signature.
This is not a signature.
You're right, I meant DSLR, for some reason I frequently make that mistake. I don't know why, though I'm not a pro I am a photographer. Actually I am hoping to get into photography professionally. But I need to work on my composition, and because it's been way too long since I've worked in a darkroom I'll probably have to take some darkroom classes. I loved it when I worked in darkrooms, but I also want to do digital photography as well as try medium format, say get a 645 camera.
Regarding your crashes, I've actually had to replace more Mac's than PC's. I've had one Mac HDD crash and one motherboard fry. I've had only a motherboard go bad on a PC.
My first Mac I got in 1992, it was a SE 30 I got used. It lasted until 2000 when the floppy died. The second Mac I got is a Power Mac 7300/200 I got a few months later also used. When I tried to boot it up early this year it wouldn't, I don't know why. I checked if it was getting power and such but couldn't do much more and it wasn't worth it to have it repaired. I however have had two motherboards, three hdds, and some ram from pcs die. The two motherboards and two of the three hdds died before they were a year old. I bought three PCs brand new and another one that was remanufactured and I've had hardware problems with three of them. The one PC I didn't have hardware problems with is a DEC Alpha running Windows NT4, but because it's an Alpha I haven't been able to get much software installed on it so I haven't used it much.
Your experiences with Macs vs PCs are opposite to mine.
The Mac is basically using the same hardware so failure rates are likely the same. Sounds like you had a run of bad luck. I typically don't use major vendors but assemble the hardware myself.
This is true now but it's not true for the old Macs like my SE30. As for the PC systems I got, two were from Gateway, one from HP, and the Alpha is from Microway. While I've added and replaced parts myself like hdds, ram, and video cards I haven't build one totally from parts. I started to, I had most of the pieces assembled, er bought, when I lost them. However now unless you want a custom built system it's cheaper to buy a compleat system.
The activation thing doesn't bother me.
It bothers me, the only thing that should be needed is a product key or serial number to activate any software, whether an OS or not.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I upgraded from the ORIGINAL G4 Titanium from 5 years ago. So ya, it's pretty nice. But to be perfectly honest, the "benchmarks" comparing my 5yr old powerbook to this new macbook pro would place the new one as being ~500-1000% faster. So... what I'm trying to say is that I don't really notice anything being that much faster :) It's nice to have the latest and greatest, but I probably wouldn't have upgraded if my old one hadn't pretty much died.
I won't bother to explain my circumstances in great detail, but they involve coming back from a lousy Irish pub Saturday and then fooling around on my computer for an hour or two with all the useful effects of alcohol in place, such as loss of memory and impaired judgment. Beer goggled, I got busy with an ugly girl who talks too much last night, and that girl was Slashdot and its myriad posters too cowardly to support their statements with an actual login.
:) Obviously you can't make the same claim, or you would have posted using your login name. Later, coward.
That's all you really need to know. Actually, that's more than you need to know. I've told you this because there seems to be a void in your mind representing the puzzlement and incredulity correspondent with the lack of understanding of my circumstances. Speaking of "lack": You lack any power in this situation, so keep in mind that I'm explaining this to you out of courtesy, and not because you, who lack even the respect to identify yourself, matter in the least.
As far as reading my comment history goes, I welcome it. I stand by everything I've ever written
Just because yours was OK doesn't mean every single one was.
I fix them for a living though, so I am not just blowing wind, I see all the machines that customers are unhappy with. Today I installed a program today that allows manual control of the "minimum speed" of the fans in my pro and I have to say apple seems to have picked a very good speed for the fans. I tested them with various processor and graphics loads, and the fans only spooled up when the laptop's temperature started to get up there. Right now it shows 132F, relatively idle, and at least in this room it appears to be dead silent. If I max the fans right now it drops to 118F but it sounds like a jet.
At least with the current technologies, I would propose "quiet, small, cool, fast, pick three." I don't want to compromise on small or fast, and I think Apple is giving us a flexible tradeoff between the two that remain: cool and quiet.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Anyone know how these compare? I want to purchase something to replace my G4 Powerbook soon, and am being seduced by the smaller size on the Macbook..
..don't panic
Entirely different situation. When one more clone company starts up, the hardware manufacturing is compromised, but the marketplace doesn't increase in size at all.
When (if, of course) you open your OS to the other 95% of machines already out there, your hardware manufacturing (which is relatively low margin, remember) becomes irrelevant to your software manufacturing, which now has a potential marketplace that has expanded by a factor of twenty or so, where your software margins can approach 100% (download the OS, it is literally "pennies to ship", and the more you ship, the less per unit it costs you.)
Apple certainly has the right to make the choice to not do this, but they cannot force remaining a closed hardware/software company to make more economic sense as compared to just going to an OS company a'la MS; it doesn't, and it never will.
Yes, they'd have some more work to do in terms of drivers — video and network cards in particular — but they've already done a fabulous job on printers, firewire, and USB devices, so I'd say that really, a great deal of the ground they need to cover is already done. And they'd have all that extra money to do it with, so... :-)
MS isn't selling to 20x the number of computers because its a better OS. It isn't, period. They sell because people are sensitive to the price point. OSX is better, and even spending more for the machine actually makes economic sense if you are a heavy computer user. But still, windows outsells OSX. It's all about the price point with your average consumer, and as long as Apple continues to make all its own hardware, that price point is going to remain well above the potential floor, and sales will remain comparatively low.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
MS isn't selling to 20x the number of computers because its a better OS. It isn't, period. They sell because people are sensitive to the price point. OSX is better, and even spending more for the machine actually makes economic sense if you are a heavy computer user. But still, windows outsells OSX. It's all about the price point with your average consumer, and as long as Apple continues to make all its own hardware, that price point is going to remain well above the potential floor, and sales will remain comparatively low.
Are you suggesting Apple become a software company? Or continue building computers and release OSX for generic PCs? While I'd like to see the second, if Apple does release OSX for any pc then they'd run right into Microsoft. One of the most widely used apps is MS Office, there's versions for both PCs and Macs, but MS could pull the rug out from under the Mac version. If so while current Mac users may stay with Macs I don't think many people would risk switching and lose Office. Now if Apple were to use Intel's virtual tech to run both Windows and OSX at the same tyme on the same box, then maybe it wouldn't matter so much as people could use both OSes at the same tyme. Now that's assuming Intel's tech is ready but I don't think it is yet. If so then maybe Apple could work with Intel to get it working.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I forgot that it wasn't just the Rev. A, and you're right, it worked for a long time without problems.
I didn't mean to blame Apple, I was just saying that you're probably better off not buying Rev. A from anyone, though I now realize that's contradictory. Ah, forget it and just make sure you get AppleCare.
(Well that made me feel a little stupid.)
--
This is not a signature.
This is not a signature.
i realize that's a debatable topic maybe? obviously you had the first CRT iMac, and that's a real Rev A. in a sense isn't the first slot loading CRT iMac (Rev D or whatever it was) subject to some of the issues a Rev A has?
i got the first Core 2 Duo iMac a few weeks after it came out, though it would hardly be considered a Rev A since that case originated with a G5 iMac. it has been tweaked (iSight camera included, innards shuffled) since the G5 version, they have replaced the optical drives, redone the layout a bit. while i share the hesitation of buying a Rev A machine.... buying this machine made me ponder what really counts as a Rev A?
the Mac Pro tower looks the same as the G5 towers, but the insides have been totally redone. they were redone a few times with the G5 chips as well, so any revision to the machine made changes.
just a guess, but personally i think the laptops are where the real Rev A issues can come out? real world use may reveal issues with a hinge assembly or some durability that doesn't hold up. as for desktops, i would think it is more an issue of quality control on the components, and those can change with every revision. i am sure there are exceptions, but in general a desktop machine is pretty basic. i suppose Apple could completely screw up a desktop machine, like if the G4 iMac (the sunflower looking one) had an arm that just flopped over after a few months, but that's the risk of thinking outside the box. i can only assume those CRT iMacs were tested extensively without fans, and seeing how most of them held up fine, i am going to blame quality control. the G4 cube lacked a fan, but had an external display and power supply, so that was a relative cakewalk. it is interesting that the eMac had a fan. i wondered if it was a response to the FBT issues, or something else in the components they knew would heat up. one issue i saw with iMacs in cluttered settings was people putting crap on top of the machine (blocking the vents on top). i can't imagine that was good for it.
We've got a //GS (mid '80s) and a Performa 6300CD (mid '90s?) that still run fine (other than being out of date). (Though the //GS is old enough that I might not remember if it had a problem.) I guess I just got used to machines lasting practically forever, and started expecting that in all of them. So yeah, it's debatable how long we should expect them to last.
This is not a signature.
The Core 2 Duo Macbooks are out since last week, yet there is still no slashdot headline? What gives? And yes, I tried submitting one and it got rejected.