MacPrices.net

Latest Refreshes Alter MacBook And MacBook Pro Value Equation More Than You Might Think

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

by Charles W. Moore

Last fall I wrote that for me, choosing between a 13” MacBook Pro and the then just-introduced white unibody MacBook was still a no-brainer. At least unless you were on a really constrained budget and finding it hard to scrape up that extra 200 bucks. The 13” Pro model with its FireWire port, SD Card slot, backlit keyboard, and especially that sublime true unibody aluminum enclosure, offered substantially enhanced value for its 20 percent higher price. And the then $1,699 base 15” MacBook Pro deserved careful consideration as well for its roomier 1440x900 resolution display, although otherwise it was pretty much identical to the contemporaneous $1,499 high-end 13-incher.

However, with the release of an updated MacBook Pro family last month with the 15” and 17” models, but not the 13-incher, getting Intel Core “i” power, followed by last week’s MacBook refresh, the relative value equation has shifted substantially, making especially the decision between opting for the cheaper MacBook or its $200 more expensive fraternal sibling a greater conundrum.

Ad: Compare MacBook prices at MacPrices.net. Price trackers updated daily. The new 13" 2.4GHz White MacBook is in stock today for $924.99 - $75 off MSRP.

The MacBook’s Stealth Update Alters The Landscape

To recap briefly, in April the base 13” MacBook Pro got a modest speed bump, sticking with a Core 2 Duo CPU clocked at 2.4 GHz, but substituting the Nvidia 48-core GeForce 320M integrated graphics chipset for the 16-core GeForce 9400M chipset of the preceding 13” Pro model. Then on May 18, Apple quietly released a refreshed MacBook with substantial enough enhancements that it would have warranted a more flamboyant unveiling, speed bumped from 2.26 GHz Core 2 Duo with 3MB on-chip shared L2 cache and a GeForce 9400M chipset to an identical CPU/graphics configuration as the base 13” MBP. The other big news was Apple enhancing the MacBook’s claimed battery runtime rating from 7 hours to 10 hours, thanks to a modest increase in battery capacity from 60 wH to 63.5 wH, but mainly to the superior power management efficiency of that GeForce 320M chipset.

Some critics panned Apple’s decision to stay with a Core 2 Duo CPU and Nvidia graphics on the 13” MacBook Pro as opposed to using the newer Core “i” technology -- perhaps lower-powered i3 chips instead of the i5 and i7 used in the 15” and 17” models. However, because Intel has chosen not to license Nvidia to produce chipsets for Core “i” CPUs, that would’ve meant going with Intel’s own less powerful IGPU instead of Nvidia’s new state-or-the-art 48-core GeForce 320M IGPU which represents a substantial advance over even the already impressive GeForce 9400M chipset it replaces.

CNET's Brooke Crothers reported last week that according to Jon Peddie of Jon Peddie Research, which tracks the graphics chip market, the 320M provides at least two times the benchmark performance with the 320M over the 9400M and better performance than the Intel IGPUs in the new Core i5 and Core i7 processors. Laptopmag.com testing revealed that the 320M in the revised 13-inch Pro beats the previous 9400M-equipped model “in every way,” its score of 4,754 in the 3DMark06 benchmark more than double that of the preceding MacBook Pro (2,174).” Crothers also notes that the new 13-inch MacBook Pro is also logging better benchmark results than theoretically faster Intel Core i3 systems.

The 15” and 17” MBPs of course have a second discrete graphics processing unit with its own, dedicated video RAM, but this involves substantially higher manufacturing costs, and results in both increased heat generation and diminished battery runtime when the discrete GPU is operating, while performance under the Intel IGPU suffers by comparison with the GeForce 320M. Consequently, this writer at least is amply convinced that Apple made the right judgment by going with a Core 2 Duo/GeForce 320M combo in the 13-inch models.

The new MacBooks also can now connect to an external display, projection device, or TV via DVI, HDMI (audio and video) or VGA connectors with the appropriate Mini DisplayPort adapter (Apple says make sure to use a VESA-compliant adapter for full HDMI capabilities) and a MacBook Air style MagSafe power adapter connector that points streamlines the adapter cord backward to hug the case rather than sticking out at a 90° angle from the computer body. The MacBook’s SuperDrive optical drive is now double-layer.

2005 Deja Vu

This new dynamic reminds me a bit of mid-2005 when Apple did a final refresh of the lame-duck iBooks to weather the run-up to the coming January 2006 MacIntel unveilings, layering on a bunch of theretofore PowerBook-only features. In some aspects the upgraded iBooks even outshone the more expensive 12” PowerBook -- for example with 25 percent higher maximum memory support. I hasten to add that I think both the current MacBook and MacBook Pro models will be around for a good long time yet, but there is a parallel in that choosing between “consumer” and “Pro” models is more of a a head-scratcher than is usually the case.

The 13” MacBook Pro is still distinguished from the MacBook obviously by its aluminum unibody enclosure as well as its FireWire port, SD Card slot, and backlit keyboard -- none of which are available on the MacBook, and its 4GB of standard RAM, as opposed to 2 GB for the MacBook. However, in performance functionality the only feature the Pro model offers that can’t be replicated with the MacBook (eg: with a USB SD CArd reader and RAM upgrade) is FireWire. Note that while Apple’s published spec. for the MacBook cites a maximum 4GB of RAM, both models will actually support up to 8GB total system memory, with upgrade kits available for either from third-party suppliers like Other World Computing.

Personally, I think I’d still be inclined to go with the Pro. Bringing the MacBook up to 4 GB RAM parity alone will cancel about half the price spread, and based on experience with my aluminum unibody MacBook, I wouldn’t want to get along with less than 4 GB of memory aboard. I’m a FireWire fan, and I love the looks, efficient heat dissipation, and noise silencing characteristics of the aluminum unibody case, all of which I have with the late 2008 model 2.0 GHz aluminum MacBook. On the other hand, after 14 months of production on the MacBook has proved that I can get along without FireWire, although it’s sometimes inconvenient, so that’s not a deal-breaker.

15” MacBook Pro Now Out Of Budget Buyer’s Range

One other change in the relative value equation from seven months ago is that with an upgrade to Core i5 power, and restoration of the tandem integrated graphics/discrete graphics processor feature to the base 2.4 GHz 15” MacBook Pro have resulted in a $100 price hike for that model (from $1,699 to $1,799). I doubt that many would argue that the hundred bucks worth of extra value is not amply there, although one should carefully consider based on the sort of things they mostly will be doing with the computer whether the relative advantages of the faster GeForce 320M graphics we noted above don’t outweigh the raw power advantage of the 15-incher’s Core “i” CPUs.

In any case, the base 15-incher is now 800 bucks more expensive than the upgraded MacBook, If you don’t absolutely need the larger screen and extra power, spending not far off twice as much is hard to justify on rational criteria, especially if you value long battery runtime and the lower-temperature, lower fan noise characteristics of the Core 2 Duo/GeForce 320M combo in the 13 inch models.

What do you think? MacBook, 13” MacBook Pro, or that i5 15” unit?

CM