Apple's Redesigned MacBook and MacBook Pro: Thoroughly Reviewed
by Anand Lal Shimpi on October 22, 2008 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Mac
The New MacBook Pro
The new MacBook Pro looks larger than the older one thanks to its increased size in width and depth. The thickness of the system went down thanks to the mini DisplayPort output, cooler chipset and thinner aluminum chassis, which makes it feel better in your hands. Build quality is much improved from the previous generation, and just like the new MacBook, this thing feels like you're getting what you paid for.
The MacBook Pro (left) vs. the MacBook (right)
| New MacBook Pro 15" | 2008 Penryn MacBook Pro 15" | 2007 Merom MacBook Pro 15" | |
| Dimensions | H: 0.95" W: 14.35" D: 9.82" |
H: 1.0" W: 14.1" D: 9.6" |
H: 1.0" W: 14.1" D: 9.6" |
| Weight | 5.5 lbs | 5.4 lbs | 5.4 lbs |
| Screen Size/Resolution | 15.4" / 1440 x 900 (LED backlit) | 15.4" / 1440 x 900 (LED backlit) |
15.4" / 1440 x 900 (LED backlit) |
| CPU | Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz, 2.53GHz or 2.80GHz (45nm Penryn, 1066MHz FSB) | Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz - 2.6GHz (45nm Penryn, 800MHz FSB) | Intel Core 2 Duo 2.2GHz - 2.6GHz (65nm Merom, 800MHz FSB) |
| GPU | NVIDIA GeForce 9400M (mGPU) + GeForce 9600M GT dGPU (256MB or 512MB GDDR3) | NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT (256MB - 512MB) | NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT (128MB - 256MB) |
| Memory | 2GB - 4GB DDR3 1066 | 2GB - 4GB DDR2-667 | 2GB - 4GB DDR2-667 |
| HDD |
250GB - 320GB 2.5" 5400RPM SATA |
200 - 250GB 2.5" 5400RPM SATA 200GB 7200RPM SATA |
120 - 250GB 2.5" 5400RPM SATA 200GB 7200RPM SATA |
| Optical Drive | Integrated SuperDrive | Integrated SuperDrive | Integrated SuperDrive |
| Networking | 802.11a/b/g/n 10/100/1000 Ethernet |
802.11a/b/g/n 10/100/1000 Ethernet |
802.11a/b/g/n 10/100/1000 Ethernet |
| Built in iSight | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Inputs | 2 x USB 2.0 1 x FireWire 800 1 x ExpressCard/34 1 x Audio in 1 x Integrated mic |
2 x USB 2.0 1 x FireWire 400 1 x FireWire 800 1 x ExpressCard/34 1 x Audio in 1 x Integrated mic |
2 x USB 2.0 1 x FireWire 400 1 x FireWire 800 1 x ExpressCard/34 1 x Audio in 1 x Integrated mic |
| Outputs | 1 x Audio 1 x Mini DisplayPort |
1 x Audio 1 x dual-link DVI |
1 x Audio 1 x dual-link DVI |
| Battery | 50WHr | 60WHr | 60WHr |
| Price | $1999 | $1999 | $1999 |
With the MacBook Pro you get something that looks like a larger MacBook. Thanks to the 15.4" screen there's enough keyboard real estate to provide two external speakers responsible for a better sound than what you get from the base MacBook. Then there's the backlit keyboard, which you don't get with the MacBook. There's an ExpressCard/34 slot and a faster Core 2 CPU by default (2.4GHz vs. 2.0GHz in the MacBook). And finally you get the GeForce 9600M dGPU in addition to the GeForce 9400M, driving a higher quality, higher resolution 15.4" panel.
The MacBook Pro motherboard, note the two fans - one for the CPU and one for the GeForce 9600M
The differences between the MacBook and MacBook Pro actually haven't changed all that much; you get more ports, faster hardware and a better display. The difference here is that the $1299 MacBook is closer to the Pro than the old one ever was. I'd say the biggest reasons to move to the MacBook Pro are if you need the additional screen real estate, ExpressCard port or the GeForce 9600M. The majority of users will probably be well served by the new MacBook.
The MacBook Pro (left) vs. the MacBook (right)
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
66 Comments
View All Comments
joey2264 - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link
Uhm, Apple charges $150 to upgrade from 2 to 4 GB. A 2 GB 1066 DDR3 notebook dimm is about $60 on Newegg. What are you smoking??strikeback03 - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link
He didn't mention how many slots are populated in the standard configuration. If standard is a pair of 1GB sticks, then you need a pair of those $60 2GB sticks to get 4GB.joey2264 - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link
It doesn't matter. 2 GB of memory (2 Dimms) cost about $80, and 4 GB cost about $120, as stated in the article. But Apple is charging $150 to upgrade from one to the other, when it only costs $40 more.Thanks for correcting me, because Apple is raping their customers even more than I thought.
strikeback03 - Friday, October 24, 2008 - link
Might be true, but as you can't choose zero RAM as a shipping configuration, from the customer perspective (assuming 2 2GB sticks are needed) you either pay $120 to Newegg and do the work yourself or pay $150 to Apple.Also, I highly doubt Apple is paying Newegg prices for components, so even more profit. But RAM upgrades seem to always be something the manufacturers have raped customers on.
Brucmack - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link
It'd be nice to provide a couple of extra data points...- Macbook battery life on XP
- Lenovo battery life on XP & Linux
wolf550e - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link
Anand, please perform same test on Ubuntu 8.10 and tell us whether it's closer to OS X or Vista.R3MF - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link
but i live in hope of a response:Is this integrated nvidia chipset the same as was rumoured to work with the Via Nano CPU?
Kind regards
boe - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link
I'm curious to how XP would compare to Vista/ OS X.snouter - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link
No 1680x1050? When will Apple step up and offer this? This is even more egregious than the lack of an SSD option, although, an SSD could be added to the MBP later, and the screen is forever.The MBP should only offer the CPU models with 6MB cache. This would have been one more way to differentiate the MBP from the MB. Put the Pro in Pro dammit.
No matte option on the MBP? Please.
====
I upgraded my 2.16GHz Merom to a 2.4GHz Penryn, largely for the LED screen, but, now I've even more glad that I did.
If Apple does not add some flexibility to the 15" MBP build options, I'll be waiting for the 17" MBP. My workplace bought me one, and... 1920x1200 LED is pure love, though I could live happily with a 1680x1050 on my preferred form factor, the 15".
Apple has a knack of diminishing their gains with some weird regresions and non-moves. It's love hate for sure.
iwodo - Wednesday, October 22, 2008 - link
With much increased battery life, ( not that it uses that much less power, but you accomplish the same task in less time would means less power usage )I hope Intel hurry up with their controller chip.