Apple lately update its entire argument of MacBook Pros with raw graphics ; the 15 - inch and 17 - column inch models also got young Intel Core i5 and Core i7 central processor . WhileMacworldreviews only the stock configurations of Apple ’s desktop and laptop computer offerings , we will from time to time tryout impost contour .
We were able to get our manus on two built - to - ordering laptop computer : a 15 - inch MacBook Pro with twice the standard RAM and a faster spinning hard cause ; and a 17 - inch exemplar with an optional i7 processor . We put them though their stride and found that these optional rise , not amazingly , improve overall performance . Whether they ’re worth the additional cost is debatable .
Let’s get specific
The high - end standard constellation 15 - column inch MacBook Pro ( ) cost $ 2199 and comes with a 2.66GHz Intel Core i7 central processor , 4 GB of RAM and a 500 GB hard drive . Our customized system supersede the two 2 GB , 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM sticks with two 4 GB sticks , at a cost of $ 400 . Next we replaced the 500 GB , 5400 rpm tough drive with a 7200 - revolutions per minute model of the same capacity , add another $ 50 to the Leontyne Price . And last , we replaced the standard 1440 - by-900 - picture element resolution glossy display with a anti - glare , high - resolution ( 1680 - by-1050 resolution ) screen , a $ 150 pick . The total for our customs duty arrangement is $ 2799 .
The $ 2299 17 - in MacBook Pro ( ) in its standard conformation features a 2.53GHz Core i5 processor , 4 GB of RAM and a 500 GB , 5400 - rpm toilsome drive . A 2.66GHz Core i7 is available as a $ 200 build - to - society option .
Result oriented
To see how the additional retentivity and quicker hard drive touched performance in our 15 - inch MacBook Pro , we used our overall scheme performance test suite , Speedmark 6 , on the standard configuration , the impost arrangement with the 7200 rev heavy drive and stock 4 GB RAM , and then again with the quicker hard drive and 8 GB of RAM .
The standard system received a Speedmark 6 grade of 161 . The farm animal organisation with the 7200 rpm hard drive raise received a score of 170 , about 6 pct faster , overall . As you ’d have a bun in the oven , there was petty or no difference in the central processor intensive , individual chore let in in Speedmark 6 ; for example , our CineBench CPU tests were indistinguishable . Not amazingly , our phonograph record tests show dramatic betterment , with the MacBook Pro with the 7200 - revolutions per minute hard drive duplicating a 1 GB folder 19 percent faster than the system with the 5400 - rev drive . Creating a compressed archive of a 2 GB folder took 8 percent less clip on the 7200 rpm private road , and unzip the archive was 11 percentage quicker . spell JPEGs into iPhoto was 19 percent faster on the MacBook Pro with the 7200 - rpm effort , while spell a camera archive into iMovie was 12 percent quicker and ripping a chapter from a videodisk using Handbrake was 10 percent faster .
The 15 - in MacBook Pro with the faster hard driving and 8 GB of RAM scored a 173 in Speedmark 6 , about 2 percentage quicker than the usance system with just the faster hard effort . Comparing the score of the individual psychometric test that make up Speedmark , there is little difference between the two custom systems , with most mental test being within 1 or 2 seconds of each other . The biggest difference was in the iPhoto import , which was 12 per centum faster with the additional RAM .
How we tested.Call of Duty score is in frames per second (higher is better). SpeedMark and MathematicaMark are performance scores (higher is better). All others are in minutes:seconds (lower is better). The Photoshop Suite test is a set of 14 scripted tasks using a 50MB file. Photoshop’s memory was set to 70 percent and History was set to Minimum. We recorded how long it took to render a scene with mulitprocessors in CinemaBench. We used Compressor to encode a MOV file to the application’s H.264 for video podcast setting.We timed the import and thumbnail/preview creation time for 150 photos. In iMovie, we imported a camera archive and exported it to iTunes for Mobile Devices setting. We converted 90 minutes of AAC audio files to MP3 using iTunes’ High Quality setting. We Unzipped a 2GB archive in the Finder. We ran WorldBench 6 multitasking test on a Parallels VM. We imported 150 JPEGs into iPhoto. We used HandBrake to rip a DVD chapter to the hard drive. We opened a 500-page Word document in Pages ’09.—Macworld Lab testing by James Galbraith and Chris Holt
Interestingly , the stock 15 - column inch MacBook Pro we quiz was a bit quicker than either custom form laptop in a few tests , finish 6 percentage faster than the 7200 rev exemplar in our Photoshop test cortege and 5 percent faster than our faster hard drive and more RAM poser . Compressor demonstrate our stock organisation to be about 2 percent quicker than the customs duty configurations .
Even with the ascent , our custom 15 - inch MacBook Pro , with its dual - core nomadic version of the Intel Core i7 central processing unit , ran well behind the 27 - inch iMac ( ) with a quad - magnetic core desktop interlingual rendition of the Core i5 . Speedmark 6 showed the iMac to be 22 percent quicker overall than the built - to - order MacBook Pro . The i5 iMac was tip in 12 of the individual tasks that make up Speedmark 6 , with biggest gains in trial that take advantage of four processing cores , like MathematicMark 7 , Cinebench and Compressor . The customs duty MacBook Pro was 9 percent faster in our iMovie import , 3 percent quicker in are Zip archive examination and a second or two quicker in Pages and iTunes .
We also ran Speedmark on the custom 17 - inch MacBook Pro with the 2.66GHz i7 upgrade . In those tests , we encounter the 17 - inch i7 model to be a small more than 5 percent faster overall than the stock 17 - inch model with the 2.53GHz Core i5 processor . The grownup performance improvements were in central processor - intensive tasks like Cinebench with a 10 percent faster time , MathematicaMark with 11 percent better performance , and Compressor , finishing the chore 7 percent faster . There was only one Speedmark point separating the 15 - inch 2.66GHz Core i7 MacBook Pro and our build to order 17 - inch theoretical account with the monovular processor .
compare these three upgrades , the 7200 - rpm drive upgrade seems like the in effect lot , offering good performance while adding only $ 50 to the overall price . The Core i7 adds about 9 percent to the overall purchase Mary Leontyne Price , while offering only a 5 percent overall carrying out increase . If you are a professional using processor - intensive applications on a regular basis , the raise might well be worth the extra cash . The $ 400 for extra read/write memory did n’t show as big of a public presentation benefit , about 2 percent overall , while append about 18 percent to the purchase price .
BTO MacBook Pros
Best solution inbold . computer address system initalics .
How we tested . Call of Duty score is in frames per second ( high is better ) . SpeedMark and MathematicaMark are performance score ( gamy is better ) . All others are in minutes : seconds ( humble is better ) . The Photoshop Suite test is a set of 14 scripted tasks using a 50 MB single file . Photoshop ’s memory was arrange to 70 percent and History was set to Minimum . We read how long it took to render a fit with mulitprocessors in CinemaBench . We used Compressor to encode a MOV file to the program ’s H.264 for video podcast setting . We timed the importation and thumbnail / prevue creation time for 150 photo . In iMovie , we imported a camera archive and export it to iTunes for Mobile Devices setting . We converted 90 mo of AAC audio data file to MP3 using iTunes ’ High Quality setting . We Unzipped a 2 GB archive in the Finder . We run WorldBench 6 multitasking trial on a Parallels VM . We imported 150 JPEGs into iPhoto . We used HandBrake to rip a DVD chapter to the hard drive . We opened a 500 - page Word papers in Pages ’ 09.—Macworld Lab examination by James Galbraith and Chris Holt
Mirror, mirror
Apple offers an optional anti - glare sieve for the i5 and i7 - column inch MacBook Pros , though it ’s only available in combination with a high - resolution display on the 15 - inch manakin for $ 150 ( a high - resolution glossy version is useable for $ 100 ) . A lusterlessness version of the 17 - inch showing with the same stock resolution is available for $ 50 .
Comparing the 15 - in model ’s standard 1440 - by-900 glossy showing with the available anti - glare , high - resolution screen with a firmness of 1680 - by-1050 , the difference are promptly apparent . What come upon me first is the lack of the mordant border that surrounds the glossy screens . Instead , the screen has an aluminum border , making it await more like a pre - unibody MacBook Pro . Secondly , you do n’t see your reflection or glare when looking at the anti - glare projection screen , though coloration are more muted and blacks do n’t appear as racy as on the standard glossy screen . Lastly , the resolution — having more pixels per inch allows you to fit more documents , windows and pallette onscreen . Opening an Excel spreadsheet , I found that I could view 10 more rows on the mellow - resolution blind . I could also check more of a large image in Photoshop .
If you opt an anti - glare in high spirits resolution screen , the laptop comes with an aluminum delimitation ( left ) .
The downside is that everything is smaller , including menu text edition and icons , which can be harder to interpret . I choose what I ca n’t have — a 15 - inch , standard resolution , anti - glare exhibit . The proper screen for you look on how you plan on using your MacBook Pro and your sensitiveness to reflection and glare .
Check back before long for outcome from Apple ’s lately announced new 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo MacBook .
[ James Galbraith is Macworld ’s lab director . ]
