New MacBook Pro's
Apple announced the refresh for the MacBook Pro line of notebooks on Thursday. While outwardly similar to the previous line of computers, there have been a great number of changes. First up, the 13-inch models used to spot the older Core 2 Duo processors, while the 15-inch and 17-inch models used dual-core i5 and i7 chips. With the revision, the 13-inch models either use dual-core i5 or i7 chips, while the 15 and 17-inch models use quad-core i7 chips (all second generation Core i technology Sandy Bridge chips). What this means is that the higher end 13-inch MacBook Pro is effectively as powerful as last year's most powerful machine. GeekBench scores for the 17-inch MacBook Pro shows about an 80% increase in benchmark scores! What we need to note is that the new quad-core chips are 45W TDP chips, compared with 35W in all previous models. This has led to complaints on the fall in battery life. Apple claims a change in testing protocols. Truth is, the battery has not changed, so it depend on the changes in power consumption by the graphics and main processor chips. I am also not sure if the new 15 and 17-inch models also run hotter than the previous dual-core models.
On the graphics front, the 13-inch models now use Intel's own graphics engine, while the 15-inch and 17-inch models can swop between the Intel graphics or AMD (formerly ATI) graphics cards. Those who remember, Apple has been using NVIDIA for graphics cards since June 2007. The last time they used ATI graphics cards was in October 2006, when the Core 2 Duo chips first replaced Core 2 chips in MacBook Pro's. Interestingly, the graphics RAM on the AMD cards for the 15-inch machines stays at 256 MB, whereas the 17-inch notebook now carries a graphic card with 1 GB of graphics RAM. Screen resolution and sizes have not changed since last year. According to Apple, these cards are up to three times as fast as their predecessors.
The other major difference is the unveiling of Intel LightSpeed or Thunderbolt port, which promises even faster throughput than USB 3.0. It is still early days for the technology, since there are no peripherals that currently capitalize on this I/O protocol. RAID manufacturers are supposed to be developing a product. However, since it is an Intel technology, I see no reason why it should fail to take off, considering the stranglehold of Intel chips on the PC market.
So, I guess the biggest jump is in processor power. Graphics, other than a basic swop of manufacturer has not changed all that much (of course, the 13-inch models now use Intel graphics, rather than NVIDIA GeForce 320M cards), and the introduction of Thunderbolt is news-worthy, but currently has little practical use. Is it worth the upgrade? Yes, I guess is you use can make use of the processing power and multiple cores. Else, perhaps it is worth hanging on till the subsequent generation, or when Thunderbolt products become more commonplace.
On the graphics front, the 13-inch models now use Intel's own graphics engine, while the 15-inch and 17-inch models can swop between the Intel graphics or AMD (formerly ATI) graphics cards. Those who remember, Apple has been using NVIDIA for graphics cards since June 2007. The last time they used ATI graphics cards was in October 2006, when the Core 2 Duo chips first replaced Core 2 chips in MacBook Pro's. Interestingly, the graphics RAM on the AMD cards for the 15-inch machines stays at 256 MB, whereas the 17-inch notebook now carries a graphic card with 1 GB of graphics RAM. Screen resolution and sizes have not changed since last year. According to Apple, these cards are up to three times as fast as their predecessors.
The other major difference is the unveiling of Intel LightSpeed or Thunderbolt port, which promises even faster throughput than USB 3.0. It is still early days for the technology, since there are no peripherals that currently capitalize on this I/O protocol. RAID manufacturers are supposed to be developing a product. However, since it is an Intel technology, I see no reason why it should fail to take off, considering the stranglehold of Intel chips on the PC market.
So, I guess the biggest jump is in processor power. Graphics, other than a basic swop of manufacturer has not changed all that much (of course, the 13-inch models now use Intel graphics, rather than NVIDIA GeForce 320M cards), and the introduction of Thunderbolt is news-worthy, but currently has little practical use. Is it worth the upgrade? Yes, I guess is you use can make use of the processing power and multiple cores. Else, perhaps it is worth hanging on till the subsequent generation, or when Thunderbolt products become more commonplace.