Done for 2009: The Holiday MacBook Pro Roundup
by Anand Lal Shimpi on November 10, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Mac
Swap the Pro Out for Some Flavor
The 17-inch MacBook Pro is a workhorse. You get FireWire 800, an ExpressCard/34 slot and discrete graphics if you choose to use it. Apple figures someone who wants such a big machine will probably have some fast external storage to connect to it, some peripherals to slide in it, and some GPU intensive applications to run.
From left to right: 13-inch, 15-inch and 17-inch MacBook Pro
The 13-inch and 15-inch are much more consumer focused, despite their Pro branding. You lose the features mentioned above (although the 9600M is optional on the 15-inch), but gain a built in SD card reader. With most professional DSLRs using Compact Flash, the SD card reader seems to imply that Apple's entry level Pro users are shooting with point-and-shoot cameras instead.
13-inch MacBook Pro
15-inch MacBook Pro
Mini DisplayPort is still standard, and you still don't get any adapters in the box. The number of USB ports is cut down to two and processor speeds drop accordingly.
The 13-inch MacBook Pro. Compact but with a great keyboard.
The 13-inch MacBook Pro comes with a 2.26GHz Core 2 Duo by default. Still a 45nm chip, it only has 3MB of L2 cache to share between the cores. The base 13-inch model only comes with 2GB of memory, Apple's biggest fault, presumably to maintain profit margins even at the lowest end of the spectrum.
Moving to the $1499 version you can get the 2.53GHz Core 2 Duo, keeping the 3MB L2 cache. 4GB is also standard with the more expensive 13-inch model.
Hard drive speed remains at 5400RPM across all MacBook Pros, which is fine because if you really want speed you want an SSD anyway.
The 15-inch MacBook Pro. Same keyboard, more screen.
The 15-inch picks up where the 13-inch leaves off. You can get a 2.53GHz, 2.66GHz, 2.80GHz or 3.06GHz chip - the latter is only available in built-to-order configurations. It's the most flexible of all of the options, but its default configuration isn't bad at all. 4GB of RAM is standard on the 15-inch.
| Apple's 2009 Lineup | 13-inch MacBook Pro | 15-inch MacBook Pro | 17-inch MacBook Pro |
| CPU | Intel Core 2 Duo 2.26GHz | Intel Core 2 Duo 2.53GHz | Intel Core 2 Duo 2.8GHz |
| Memory | 2GB DDR3-1066 | 4GB DDR3-1066 | 4GB DDR3-1066 |
| HDD | 160GB 5400RPM | 250GB 5400RPM | 500GB 5400RPM |
| Video | NVIDIA GeForce 9400M (integrated) | NVIDIA GeForce 9400M (integrated) | NVIDIA GeForce 9400M (integrated) + NVIDIA GeForce 9600M 512MB (discrete) |
| Optical Drive | 8X Slot Load DL DVD +/-R | 8X Slot Load DL DVD +/-R | 8X Slot Load DL DVD +/-R |
| Screen Resolution | 1280 x 800 | 1440 x 900 | 1920 x 1200 |
| USB | 2 | 2 | 3 |
| SD Card Reader | Yes | Yes | No |
| FireWire 800 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| ExpressCard/34 | No | No | Yes |
| Battery | 60Whr | 73Whr | 95Whr |
| Dimensions (W x D x H) | 12.78" x 8.94" x 0.95" | 14.35" x 9.82" x 0.95" | 15.47" x 10.51" x 0.98" |
| Weight | 4.5 lbs | 5.5 lbs | 6.6 lbs |
| Price | $1199 | $1699 | $2499 |
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
115 Comments
View All Comments
nangryo - Saturday, November 14, 2009 - link
Do you realize the PC hardware you mention to replace MAC product is equivalent in price or even worse, more expensive (Adamo, AlienWare) please stop trolling. If you don't like it, don't read it. No one force you to come here and whine like a crybaby.
tuskers - Tuesday, November 17, 2009 - link
I love your argument-- "you bring up competition in a similar price range, so you must be a troll." You're using the traditional PC-versus-Mac argument of "PCs cost less!", except with even less basis.I want to read a fair comparison of Mac versus the competition, not a slaughter of value-designed PCs. Mac very well might be the best out there-- I think it's pretty well conceded that Macs win on battery life, and OS X certainly has those that swear by it. And I'm absolutely fine with those sections of the article.
This simply isn't an Apples-to-apples comparison. I'm not saying the other companies' brands are better-- what I'm saying is, Apple produces products with a specific type of user in mind-- one at the mid-to-upper performance range (in terms of hardware), with as much dedication to form-factor as it has to functionality. Yes, I expect other companies to ask
If I go shopping for a luxury car, I don't compare Lexus to Honda and Chevy, I compare Lexus to Acura and Cadillac. Similarly, I don't compare $1100 computers with $2500 computers. But you don't even need to escalate past $1000 to find the MSI X600 or GX720. Adamos cost more than 13" Macbooks, but they also ship standard with SSDs, higher screen resolution, and slimmer chassis (although with disadvantages as well). The Envy ships with more horsepower in a similar form-factor for slightly more money (much less than some of the disparities in the article).
These are the compare/contrast elements that make for interesting decisions, rather than a "look at the shiny Macs!" article.
I'll take back the implication that this might have been a "sponsored" article, but it's simply the first thought I had after I read it.
The0ne - Thursday, November 12, 2009 - link
As I said earlier it seems Anand is all "giddy" because he got a new toy to play with. That excitement alone causes all sorts of things :D fun things in most cases hahahaI can't help but agree with your comments. After reading others comments I'm not only shock at Anand but at some users supporting the $2500 MacBook to no end. If I had the money or my company allows the spending I would like to have one, of course. But it's really not practical at all when you have so many other choices in the market.
blufire - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
Just released.. may address the excessive battery drain for 64-bit Safari with 32-bit Flash.citan x - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
Why does it feel that there is too much Mac pro coverage? Most of the info on here has already been available. Why a full blown article on them now?Also, why wasn't the new Asus UL80 that was just reviewed compared here. What I would like to know is how the Asus UL80 compares to the 13" Mac when both have an SSD.
The 17" Macbook Pro is nice, but just too expensive.
mitaiwan82 - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
Good article, but the product shots are a bit overexposed for my taste. The MBPs almost blend into the white background of the site.blufire - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
The image of the 15" MBP on page 3 appears to be a 17".Thanks for the article!
JimmiG - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
I hate it how Apple doesn't use the extra space of the 15" and 17" models to put in a better keyboard and a numpad. My 15" HP Probook comes with big, nicely spaced keys that use all the available space, and they even managed to cram in a numpad without making things look cramped or crowded.The 17" Macbook looks absolutely ridiculous with that *huge* emptiness around the tiny keyboard. I see they no longer include a numpad on the keyboard that comes with the iMac, either. I guess it's to show the world that Macs are "fun", while PCs are only used for Excel and stuff...but still, some of use need to be boring from time to time, and then a numpad is a must.
MrPete123 - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
Anand, I heard there were unofficial ways of running MacOS X on standard PCs... would it be possible to do this and do battery tests to see how it handles it? I'm really interested to know what Apple's doing to make their OS so power efficient.Maybe it disallows C-states or something in their BIOS for non-OSX operating systems?
nangryo - Saturday, November 14, 2009 - link
Not, it's not possible, at least in a formal/official benchmark / reporting. Because it would face legal problem etc etc.He may do it unofficially though.