Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Computers & Peripherals => Topic started by: pflower on March 01, 2011, 08:35:08 am

Title: New Macbooks
Post by: pflower on March 01, 2011, 08:35:08 am
My old macbook pro has died and I have been looking at the new ones.

The 15 inch versions come in two flavours - 2.0 GHZ with a Radeon HD 6490M with 256MB GDDRS and a 2.2 GHZ with a Radeon 6750M with 1GB GDDRS.  The difference is £300 (the 2.2GHZ also has a 750GB disk as opposed to a 500GB).  The disk size is irrelevant to me since I only use it for work in progress and then finalise on desktops and back up to external disks.

Having said that anyone got any thoughts as to the likely performance improvements of the 2.2GHZ model?  I do mostly Lightroom processing, a little light Photoshop and very very light FCP on the laptop - haven't really been too concerned about the performance of my old macbook.

Any thoughts?

Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: mediumcool on March 07, 2011, 09:42:10 am
Should change your title to add “Pro”. No MacBooks have been released lately.

People are saying that these are viable desktop replacements, particularly with Thunderbolt.

Bare Feats (http://www.barefeats.com/mbpp34.html)  Macworld (http://www.macworld.com/article/157893/2011/02/2011macbookpro_benchmarks.html)
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: mediumcool on March 07, 2011, 09:50:03 am
And there’s always Capture One (http://macperformanceguide.com/Reviews-MacBookProFeb2011-c1pro.html).
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: JBerardi on March 07, 2011, 11:27:39 am
For £300, get the cheaper one and put a high-quality SSD in there. You'll see way more benefit from that than you will the extra graphics muscle.
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 07, 2011, 02:07:58 pm
And there’s always Capture One (http://macperformanceguide.com/Reviews-MacBookProFeb2011-c1pro.html).

I ran my own C1 tests yesterday.

The 15.4 2.2 macbook pro compared to my windows 7 desktop I7Quad 3.2 with 24 gigs of ram.  The desktop runs an ssd so I worked off of and saved to a 1tb hard drive on the windows machine.

Process 100 1DsmkIII raws to 16 bit tiffs.

Desktop 374 seconds
Macbook 520 seconds.

Old desktop, w7 core2duo, 8gb ram 1276 seconds.


I think 8mb of ram inthe macbook will help.....
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: mediumcool on March 07, 2011, 10:37:08 pm
I ran my own C1 tests yesterday.

The 15.4 2.2 macbook pro compared to my windows 7 desktop I7Quad 3.2 with 24 gigs of ram.  The desktop runs an ssd so I worked off of and saved to a 1tb hard drive on the windows machine.

Process 100 1DsmkIII raws to 16 bit tiffs.

Desktop 374 seconds
Macbook 520 seconds.

So that’s with 4GB in the MBP? Can you advise how much RAM the PC is using in this sort of scenario? I have a 3.06Ghz iMac and a 2.4 13" MBP, and find the spinning gear while waiting for previews in C1 a bit annoying. I haven’t been able to find anything on what C1 likes the most, RAM, CPU, GPU, or fast disk access. Have 8GB RAM on the iMac, and 4GB (soon to go to 8GB) on the MBP. Thinking about an SSD for the MBP.

Old desktop, w7 core2duo, 8gb ram 1276 seconds.

Certainly a massive difference!


I think 8mb of ram inthe macbook will help.....

It could be useful to be able to use more than 8GB in the laptop, if that were possible. I won’t be upgrading for at least 12 months, so any optimisation that I can do in the interim will be very nice to have.

Any more info about your experiences would be appreciated. Oh, and BTW congrats Craig on getting the MBP after your recent experience (sounds like a dodgy logic board to me).  :)
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 07, 2011, 11:21:35 pm
Can you advise how much RAM the PC is using in this sort of scenario?

The pc desktop only uses about 4.5 gigs of ram to running the C1 test.  CPU is mostly maxed out.


Here is another data point.  I picked up the low end 13 inch macbook pro for a backup and screw around computer today.  The 100 raw c1 batch test took 785 seconds
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: mediumcool on March 08, 2011, 12:15:26 am
The pc desktop only uses about 4.5 gigs of ram to running the C1 test.  CPU is mostly maxed out.

I’ll test out some stuff from my Aptus 22 when I’ve loaded C1 v6 on the iMac (with Activity Monitor). I do know that C1 is very threaded; wonder if the newer CPUs handle threads more efficiently.

Here is another data point.  I picked up the low end 13 inch macbook pro for a backup and screw around computer today.  The 100 raw c1 batch test took 785 seconds

Much slower than its big brother. I reckon this machine is ‘one step forward, one step back’ in that the CPU is much better, but the video is a bit uurrrgghhh! Seems less able than the GeForce 320M on my 2010 model. Wonder if it’s Apple/Intel politics or simply that the Intel design freezes out alternative video (I suspect the latter). But I like the size for portability.

I will probably get a 15 or 17 to replace my desktop maybe late this year, and suffer with what I have until then. Thanks again for your input.
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: RobSaecker on March 08, 2011, 01:53:35 pm
Much slower than its big brother. I reckon this machine is ‘one step forward, one step back’ in that the CPU is much better, but the video is a bit uurrrgghhh! Seems less able than the GeForce 320M on my 2010 model. Wonder if it’s Apple/Intel politics or simply that the Intel design freezes out alternative video (I suspect the latter).

It's the latter. nVidia sued Intel over Intel's decision to cut them out of the chipset business. I think it's been settled by an Intel payout, though I could be wrong.
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: mediumcool on March 08, 2011, 06:19:37 pm
It's the latter. nVidia sued Intel over Intel's decision to cut them out of the chipset business. I think it's been settled by an Intel payout, though I could be wrong.

Sounds like Intel. They were absolutely flabbergasted/put out for years that Apple went with Moto for their CPUs. How very dare they (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hfZqbZtT6E)!
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: mediumcool on March 09, 2011, 07:04:18 pm
Story (http://t-gaap.com/2011/3/9/macbook-graphics-face-off-intel-hd-graphics-3000-vs-nVidia-geforce-320m) about integrated graphics in MBP 13s. Disappointing, particularly OpenCL support.
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 10, 2011, 11:39:34 pm
Story (http://t-gaap.com/2011/3/9/macbook-graphics-face-off-intel-hd-graphics-3000-vs-nVidia-geforce-320m) about integrated graphics in MBP 13s. Disappointing, particularly OpenCL support.

I did some production work today on the 13. Process, multi layer and retouch 16 bit 1DsmkIII files.  Ran it into my NEC 2690, with open GL on.  While it was not speed demon (and I switched to my w7 workstation as I had a deadline) it was workable and the screen redraws were fine.  I'll process some production files form tomorrows shoot on the i& quad 15" this weekend and see how it fares.
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: mediumcool on March 11, 2011, 01:20:04 am
Thanks for your continued input, Craig—it is much appreciated!

I will set up a test this weekend to run on the MBP13 and the iMac, and will run it again when I get around to installing the 8GB in the MBP.
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: kaelaria on March 11, 2011, 01:36:55 am
Is this a standard benchmark test from somewhere?
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: mediumcool on March 11, 2011, 11:14:41 am
This is the sort of test (http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/8) I’ve been waiting for; pity about the emphasis on gaming when one uses computers for work! The link is to the graphic performance page, but it’s easy enough to go backwards and forwards to other pages.

And Anandtech does do a good job, except for the annoying possessive *it's* deployed all over the place. And as a rant against “nice” Americanese, can we consider using the absolutely appropriate word *problem* rather than the anodyne and sanitised *issues*? So entrenched.  >:(

Feel much better!
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: mediumcool on March 11, 2011, 11:23:44 am
Bloody TN panels (http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/10)!
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: Steve Weldon on March 11, 2011, 01:37:00 pm
I ran my own C1 tests yesterday.

The 15.4 2.2 macbook pro compared to my windows 7 desktop I7Quad 3.2 with 24 gigs of ram.  The desktop runs an ssd so I worked off of and saved to a 1tb hard drive on the windows machine.

Process 100 1DsmkIII raws to 16 bit tiffs.

Desktop 374 seconds


This was interesting.  Usually I can't get anywhere near the times people get on these types of tests, I'm usually significantly on one side or the other.  My system is very close to yours though, so I decided to try it:

Win7 x64 Ultimate, i7-950 3.2, 12gigs of 2333, SSD for my system, 2tb WD B where the files were located, another 2tb WD black where the output files were deposited.  I didn't reboot, was watching my slingbox, browser up with 8 tabs, Outlook, and LR open.. I brought up C1pro 6.1.0, selected 100 1ds3 raw files, and set output to 300dpi tiffs with ProPhoto..  

370 seconds exactly.   I used my Android stop watch function.. :)

So.. pretty close.

Edited to add:  I ran this test on my x201s Lenovo (http://www.bangkokimages.com/Articles/Equipment/entryid/606/Lenovo-x201s-Thinkpad-Review.aspx), i7, 8g's RAM, SSD, 12.1" with Intel HD graphics.  This time I did reboot, the first time I tried it I forgot it had installed the Microsoft updates and I didn't reboot it yet.. and it was taking forever.  Much better after rebooting.  

920 seconds.    Not bad for a 2.4 pound machine.

The only variation was I used 100 5d2 raws to 16 bit tiffs.. because I already had them on the machine.

It looks like Sandy Bridge brings some significant performance increases.  Based on your Sandy Bridge i5 performance I'd guess and your Sandy Bridge i7 performance.. I'd guess a Sandy Bridge in the same machine otherwise would (considering the weak Intel HD graphics) would fall somewhere between the two.. for about a 40% performance increase just for Sandy Bridge.

Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 11, 2011, 07:20:21 pm
Is this a standard benchmark test from somewhere?

Na, I just saw someone else had used something similar and it sounded like a good idea.  Just wanted to see what was what.
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: mediumcool on March 11, 2011, 08:43:50 pm
The big downer for me at the moment is still the anaemic 3000 Intel integrated graphics on the 13.
Ivy Bridge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Bridge#Ivy_Bridge) looks worth waiting for, particularly for OpenCL and DirectX support.
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 11, 2011, 10:03:48 pm
The big downer for me at the moment is still the anaemic 3000 Intel integrated graphics on the 13.
Ivy Bridge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Bridge#Ivy_Bridge) looks worth waiting for, particularly for OpenCL and DirectX support.


There will always be something bigger, better, faster...sooner or later you gotta jump in.  If you play the waiting game you may wait forever.

I guess if you really need those attributes then the wait might be justified.

I don't game, or do video (not that I would even consider the 13 for a video edit station) so killer graphics are not such a big deal for me and the 13 MBP.  YMMV

It worked great on location today as a tether station, faster then the 2009 Toshiba that is the usual location workhorse.  That said since many of my locations are dirty factories the Toshiba and the HP I use for backup will continue to be the workhorses.

The 13 mbp will be my 'recreational' computer, the 15 mbp is technically my wife's for garage band usage.  I suspect as time goes along they will both creep into the location workflow, once he newness wears off.

At least for me a big part of doing the mac thing was simply doing something different.  Quite frankly I'm not seeing a big difference between platforms right now. Subtle OS differences mostly.  Time will tell for sure, but I'm using OSX daily now, for better or worse.

Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: mediumcool on March 11, 2011, 11:02:54 pm
At least for me a big part of doing the mac thing was simply doing something different.  Quite frankly I'm not seeing a big difference between platforms right now. Subtle OS differences mostly.  Time will tell for sure, but I'm using OSX daily now, for better or worse.

Apple maintained some years back that, with the improvements in Windows that working in one app was roughly equivalent on both platforms, but working with multiple apps was still superior on OSX. I don’t wish to start a flame war, but it will be interesting to get your opinion on this and general interface differences/commonalities after spending some time using OSX. Particularly interesting as you will be continuing to use Windows.

I really like OSX’s very sturdy drag-and-drop for one thing (in some of my work, I use 3–4 apps concurrently and need to move data back and forward). I have read that the Windows clipboard is not as reliable, and found this to be so when I was teaching. I also use an app called Jumpcut (http://jumpcut.sourceforge.net/) to allow for multiple clipboard items.

I used Windows when teaching multimedia at a technical college some years back—I couldn’t get the hang of it at first, and felt very closed-in until I realised that every app ran in its own window, quite different from the Mac approach of each app having the menu bar to itself when it is in the foreground, with all others waiting behind (or hidden) until needed. I suspect that a lot of Windows users trying a Mac may feel as if it’s too wide open at first, accidentally clicking through to the desktop for instance (there are fixes for this, as there are for so many system features and settings).

Having said that, there of course are utilities available for both platforms that allows customisation and addition of features; for instance, I use Cinch (http://www.macstories.net/reviews/cinch-review/), a Mac shareware app that emulates some Windows 7 window sizing features—I use it only in Safari and Finder though.

It’s great that we have competition and differentiation; if there was no Apple we might be using DOS 15! If we had no MS, Macs would be very expensive but very nice looking, and NextStep/OSX might never had happened.  ;D
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: Thomas Krüger on March 12, 2011, 03:20:58 am
Interesting thread. Looking for a small (windows-)notebook I considered the MBP 13" because of the display quality. There are also some good notebooks from Lenovo and Fujitsu-Siemens, but the quality of the Apple unicase design convinced me. Good to hear that Craig runs the MBP also with Nec 2690 - I suppose you need the "Mini DisplayPort to DVI Adapter" for that.

My configuration will be probably the MBP 13" 2.3 GHz with 8 Gb Ram and a OCZ Vertex 3 SSD (SATA600).
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: mediumcool on March 12, 2011, 03:29:12 am
Interesting thread. Looking for a small (windows-)notebook I considered the MBP 13" because of the display quality. There are also some good notebooks from Lenovo and Fujitsu-Siemens, but the quality of the Apple unicase design convinced me. Good to hear that Craig runs the MBP also with Nec 2690 - I suppose you need the "Mini DisplayPort to DVI Adapter" for that.

My configuration will be probably the MBP 13" 2.3 GHz with 8 Gb Ram and a OCZ Vertex 3 SSD (SATA600).

The one-piece design is clearly better (stronger and less creaky) than the traditional screwed-together approach. Like your config. Is there an envy emoticon?
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: Thomas Krüger on March 12, 2011, 04:10:32 am
However, the MBP 13" lacks a decent graphic card and a opaque display. But nobody is perfect.
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: Steve Weldon on March 12, 2011, 05:13:12 am
Interesting thread. Looking for a small (windows-)notebook I considered the MBP 13" because of the display quality. There are also some good notebooks from Lenovo and Fujitsu-Siemens, but the quality of the Apple unicase design convinced me. Good to hear that Craig runs the MBP also with Nec 2690 - I suppose you need the "Mini DisplayPort to DVI Adapter" for that.

My configuration will be probably the MBP 13" 2.3 GHz with 8 Gb Ram and a OCZ Vertex 3 SSD (SATA600).

I'll admit, its a nice case.  And at first glance it seems about as good as it gets.  Yet, I'm not so sure it is.  The trade off is weight.

My Lenovo x201s Thinkpad (http://www.bangkokimages.com/Articles/Equipment/entryid/606/Lenovo-x201s-Thinkpad-Review.aspx) for instance has a carbon fiber coated shell over a forged magnesium frame.. and comes in at 2.4 pounds with the standard battery.  It's milspec rated for dust/water/shock. 

Anyone know if the MBP's are milspec rated?  I've never seen them rated, but they might be..

I hope Lenovo's new x220 series (new Sandy Bridge updated line) adds a x201s type model, with a higher rez 1440x900 LED (ips all the better) screen, the milspec rating, and lower weight..  If they do I'll upgrade mine.

Btw.. I run my 2690 with the x201s as well.. not often, but it does it well.  So I hope that x220 upgrade I'm looking for includes HDMI or DP..
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: mediumcool on March 12, 2011, 05:23:26 am
However, the MBP 13" lacks a decent graphic card and a opaque display. But nobody is perfect.

By opaque, d’you perhaps mean matte?  ;D

(http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/9253/opaqued.png)

I detest shiny screens and have two of ’em!
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: mediumcool on March 12, 2011, 05:32:09 am
There will always be something bigger, better, faster...sooner or later you gotta jump in.  If you play the waiting game you may wait forever.

My situation is a bit different because I already have a 13" bought last year, and an 3Ghz iMac from around the same time, so I have had them for about 6 months. The iMac will keep its job for at least another six to nine months because it is fine for 90% of what I throw at it, but the upgrade to the new MBP is simply not compelling. As a portable, not intended for heavy lifting, it’s fine. Just wished Intel worked harder on integrated graphics (but it is much better than previous efforts).

But I do know people whose computers are years out of date, because they wait …
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: mediumcool on March 12, 2011, 06:19:09 am
I'll admit, its a nice case.  And at first glance it seems about as good as it gets.  Yet, I'm not so sure it is.  The trade off is weight.

My Lenovo x201s Thinkpad (http://www.bangkokimages.com/Articles/Equipment/entryid/606/Lenovo-x201s-Thinkpad-Review.aspx) for instance has a carbon fiber coated shell over a forged magnesium frame.. and comes in at 2.4 pounds with the standard battery. 


That is light! But what’s the resolution on the 12.1" screen?

Not that I’ll be getting one.  ;D
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: Steve Weldon on March 12, 2011, 07:41:19 am
That is light! But what’s the resolution on the 12.1" screen?

Not that I’ll be getting one.  ;D
1440x900..

The screen is nothing special, but it is matte and it has decent resolution for a 12.1" screen, and it can be profiled with decent results.  A capable road warrior.

And it's more than the weight, the texture of the outside box is such that it's easy to hold on to and doesn't slip, so it feels even lighter.  I use it all the time with the Kindle reader, it's so comfortable and light I can lay on my back and hold it up like you would a book..

You couple that with an full size keyboard, i7, 8g's of RAM, and a  256gb fast SSD (crucial C300), and 5-8 hours (depends on screen brightness mostly) of battery life off the standard battery and you fall in love.  I have the extended battery for it, but its still sitting here in the package never used.  What I should have done is bought a second standard battery, but who knew it would get such good life?

Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 12, 2011, 09:47:27 am

I used Windows when teaching multimedia at a technical college some years back—I couldn’t get the hang of it at first, and felt very closed-in until I realised that every app ran in its own window, quite different from the Mac approach of each app having the menu bar to itself when it is in the foreground, with all others waiting behind (or hidden) until needed. I suspect that a lot of Windows users trying a Mac may feel as if it’s too wide open at first, accidentally clicking through to the desktop for instance (there are fixes for this, as there are for so many system features and settings).



I find this feature of the mac os to be very irritating. Why?  Because I use many of my apps at less than full screen on the 2690.  The disconnect between the menu bar and the application window is un-nessisary and entails a much larger move to access the menu bar.  Windows is superior in this regard iMO.

Windows 7 was a big leap forward and if your windows experience is limited by XP for example you are missing what windows really is today.

At this point in time I think I also like the windows dock over the dock in OSX.  I too often have 5-6 programs running at any given time, sometimes with multi windows of the same app ( like windows explorer ) open and the dock in W7 allows me to see each open window in reduced size by simply sliding the cursor over the program icon in the dock.

Other differences/issues:

Finder compared to Windows explorer, I'm liking Explorer over finder at this point for moving files around, and I move a lot of files.  Its more of a format thing that functionality and I may get more comfortable with Finder as my time on the OS grows.

No cut and paste in OSX...Steve Jobs I can be trusted to know the difference between cut and copy...

Safari or IE9?  I prefer IE9.  Since I'm using the Mac exclusively for all my non production computing, maybe I'll grow into Safari.

This will be a cool long term test to be sure.  And I have my non-techie wife as another data point.  I just asked her and she said she was enjoying her mac.  I need to take it away for a few days and make her work with her Sony w7 laptop...which she always said she also loved and see what happens :)



Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: MrSmith on March 12, 2011, 11:22:15 am

At this point in time I think I also like the windows dock over the dock in OSX.  I too often have 5-6 programs running at any given time, sometimes with multi windows of the same app ( like windows explorer ) open and the dock in W7 allows me to see each open window in reduced size by simply sliding the cursor over the program icon in the dock.

with exposé and the multi touch trackpad  'all windows' 'program windows' and 'desktop' are instantly available by either using the hot corners or the 3 or 4 finger swipes.
i think a lot of mac users don't fully utilise the multi-touch trackpad, most people hate the way my macbookpro is set up but once you get used to it the navigation is very intuitive if you use it fully. you don't even have to physically click the button as everything is done with a tap of the fingertip(s)
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 12, 2011, 11:26:34 am
with exposé and the multi touch trackpad  'all windows' 'program windows' and 'desktop' are instantly available by either using the hot corners or the 3 or 4 finger swipes.
i think a lot of mac users don't fully utilise the multi-touch trackpad, most people hate the way my macbookpro is set up but once you get used to it the navigation is very intuitive if you use it fully. you don't even have to physically click the button as everything is done with a tap of the fingertip(s)

I hate trackpads.  And a good part of the time my 13 will be used closed and attached to a stand alone keyboard, mouse and monitor. Interesting information however.
Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: Thomas Krüger on March 14, 2011, 09:35:20 am
Update: At last we opted for a custom build Clevo P150HM barebone notebook - with matte display (not opaque  ;) ) that can substitute also our old workstation. And on the shopping list is also a 11" MacBook Air - once there is a version with something faster than the old USB 2 port.

Title: Re: New Macbooks
Post by: MarkoRepse on April 13, 2011, 05:37:21 am
Does anyone have the new quad-cores? How is the interactive performance in Capture One (on a high res external display)? I'm on a 2009 core 2 duo macbook pro without openCL support. It is quite slow. How are the last generation dual-core i5/i7s?