![]() ![]() I've got a profile to keep "docked" fan speeds just a notch faster than default (the fan speed ramping up and down irritates me more than the absolute noise of the fan), and another profile for "lap use" to keep the machine at a comfortable temperature. I control heat and noise with SMC Fan Control. It's a $70 plastic mold whose only purpose is to hold your cables in place so you can easily/quickly "dock" a MBP.įor security concerns, I made an encrypted volume with OS X's disk utility and keep my frequently accessed sensitive stuff there. I don't want to come off like I'm giving a sales pitch, but after a long wait, I bought a Henge Dock for my MBP. Pandamonium - Thursday, Malink I own a 15" 2010 MBP and like the author(s) of "The Big Picture" section, I like using separate peripherals at home. ![]() There's no replacement for more cores on highly threaded workloads.Ĭomments Locked 198 Comments View All Comments ![]() Crank up the threads and you've got a different story entirely of course. There may even be a slight performance advantage for the 13-inch setup as it's able to turbo up to higher frequencies easier than the quad-core 15. I'm talking about things like web page load times and application launch/install times. In practice this means that for light workloads the upgraded 15 won't feel any faster than the 13 (or that the 13 will feel as fast as the 15 depending on how you look at it). You'll notice that the 2.7GHz DC chip has the same max single core turbo as the 2.3GHz QC chip from the upgraded 15-inch MacBook Pro. There's absolutely no funny business going on here, the dual-core 2.7 is allowed to hit its maximum frequencies. ![]() The highest I saw single core turbo hit was 3.4GHz, and dual core turbo was good for 3.2GHz. I verified turbo frequencies on the 2.7GHz 13-inch. The 2.7GHz Core i5 has AES-NI, a 4MB 元 cache and can turbo up as high as 3.4GHz. The 2.3GHz Core i5 lacks AES-NI, has a 3MB 元 cache and can only turbo up to 2.9GHz. The primary differences between these two parts are clock speed, 元 cache size and AES-NI support once again. In Intel speak it's the Core i5-2410M or the Core i7-2620M (it's no wonder Apple doesn't list model numbers for these things).Īpple 13-inch 2011 MacBook Pro CPU Comparison You get two options: a 2.3GHz or 2.7GHz dual-core Core i5 or Core i7. While the 15-inch MacBook Pro is quad-core only, the new 13 is strictly dual-core. I wonder if Apple got discounted pricing on Sandy Bridge as a result. Now does the 2010 Core 2 based 13-inch MacBook Pro make more sense? Keeping Intel's flagship CPU out of Apple's highest volume MacBook Pro had to hurt. When Nehalem hit, Apple had to pay the same price as everyone else for CPUs. Apple used to get a discount on Intel CPUs in exchange for exclusivity, that agreement expired with Nehalem. Internally I'm wondering if there was a small amount of corporate politics being played there. The presumed public reasoning was Apple didn't like Arrandale's GPU performance and needed a two chip solution to maintain the platform's size hence the NVIDIA GT 330M + Intel Core 2 Duo setup. Last year Apple opted against moving the 13-inch model to Arrandale and instead gave it a beefy GPU and a mildly evolved Core 2 Duo CPU. Apple's new 13-inch MacBook Pro received the biggest upgrade of the lot. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |