By akademiotoelektronik, 28/10/2022

MacBook Pro 17 "Core i5 at 2.53 GHz | Macgeneration test

While the MacBook Pro 17 ’was the last to adopt the Unibody design (in January 2009), it will not have been long before the Core i5 and i7 chips on Apple's largest laptops appear for a long time..It is therefore on a logical material evolution that we bring here our observations and our tests.

More than an update

Marketed more than 13 months ago in Unibody format, the MacBook Pro 17 "undergoes its first real revision (the second in reality).A revision that we would have liked more in depth, even if this is partly the case, with the appearance for example of a new connection hub.The laptop remains well equipped on this side.He always benefits from accommodation in Express Card ¾ format disappeared on the 15 ", a firewire 800 port, a mini DisplayPort video release, just like three USB 2 ports.0 and a Gigabit Ethernet connector.

However, it is regrettable that Cupertino - however visionary and anticipator in the field of mobility - did not adopt the USB 3.0 while hard drives in this format are democratized in an accelerated manner.As well as the addition of an SD card reader would have been a judicious complement.Even professional video solutions are based on the Digital Secure format (practice for conveying small files such as profiles like, for example, on the Red Rocket camera).

Fortunately, the progress is palpable and this MacBook Pro 17 ’gains in power.The entry-level (object of our test) incorporates an Intel processor from the Core i5 mobile family, model i5-540m embedded (welded), clocked at 2.53 GHz and with 3 MB cache against 6 forCore 2 duo models.It is possible to opt for a Core i7 2.66 GHz for an additional € 180 (ouch!).The transition to Core IX induces two major technologies: hyper-threading and turboost (recall).The first gives the processor the ability to process two additional data flows (a total of four), a quadri processor in short.And the second, to set up the clock frequency of one or two cores - it is according to - while deactivating the hearts inactive processors for the benefit of the solicited alone, all by increments of 133 MHz.The frequency can then reach a peak of 2.93 GHz, with significant gains, as we will see.

Another notable point, the double graphic solution and its management by Mac OS X.The Core i5 (mobile version) in fact incorporates a medium performance GPU (Graphic processor): Intel HD, to which is added a more swift graphic solution signed NVIDIA: the GeForce GT 330M, with 512 MB of GDDR3.If we already knew this type of configuration with the Middle and High -end 15 and 17 ’’ of the previous generation, this solution benefits from another improvement;The ability to automatically switch from one chip to another without having to close its user session ...

For the rest, the laptop is delivered basic with 4 GB of RAM expandable to 8 for the trifle of € 360 (still expensive) and a 500 GB hard drive at 5400 rpm that can easily be replaced by amodel at 7200 rpm (count around € 45) or by an SSD.There, the addition becomes frankly heavy if we go to an SSD of 512 GB, an option billed the trifle of € 1170 ...

Light screens

Screen side, no notable change.The MacBook Pro is equipped with an LCD slab with LED type backlight (Light Emitting Diode or Electro Luminescent Diode), a definition of 1920 by 1200 pixels (the equivalent of the resolution of iMac 24 ''), which displaysIndeed the Full HD 1080p definition.On the catalog model, the screen is protected by a window which gives it this glossy (shiny) aspect very widespread today.But who, as we know, generates reflections often difficult to counter according to the place where we work.For this reason we decided to oppose the version of the catalog to a model (the same), but this time equipped with the anti -reflective option.The basic model was loaned to us by Apple and the optional model bought on the store.

First observation.If the model with a glazed surface will tend to flatter the eye with colors a little more "petting", things evolve once we establish a calibrated color space of screens.

To create an appropriate colorimetric space, we characterized the two MacBook Pro with a Colormunki Design probe and its X-RO software.Once our two profiles were established we were able to compare the rendering.

Obviously, the tiles differentiate themselves.Although the rendering of the brilliant slab is quite contrasting, it lacks homogeneity in blacks.Conversely, the slab that equips the laptop with the anti -reflective option is relatively homogeneous, no visible halo in blacks, and no chromatic distortion.Clearly, at 45 € the anti -reflective option is not a luxury, but indeed the solution we recommend.The fact remains that if this option is reasonably billed, the € 135 requested on the 15 ’model seem particularly excessive, even if we access a higher resolution ...

For those who would like to get an idea of their slab, once calibrated, we invite them to download the adequate profile for the basic model.

All the power of quad-cores

It must be recognized that multi-man processors were frankly expected by aficionados and, no doubt, just as much by professionals or even simply those who wanted power.In this case, Core i5 undoubtedly offers the best compromise both in terms of performance and price.

We first submitted it to the essential Bench software: Cinebench R10 and R11, Xbench 1.3, in Geekbench 2.1.2 For the sake of consistency with previous tests (a version 2.1.6 is available recently), then at our battery of application tests.

More suited to the calculations rendered 3D, multi-thread processors will necessarily do the affair of certain users more than others.Obviously, the power delivered by the NVIDIA graphics card will also allow a better preview display just as it will do players of all stripes even once connected to a Cinema Display 24 "LED".

The adoption of Core IX processors, beyond the frequency and the number of cores available, it is also exchanges with the RAM that play a determining factor.The exchanges being direct, the power voucher is also at this level what we have been able to check like the Mac Pro and the IMAC 27 ’’ in the catalog.

To give an idea of the right power of the new laptops of which the 17 '' is now part, we have compared the scores obtained under geekbench by all the MacBook Pro - tested to date by the editorial staff - to the iMac 27 ''Core i7 which has a quadri cœurs CPU to which are added 4 logical cores.

Our application tests are based on four software and a Finder test.The first test is to encode with Imovie a sequence in "large" quality (960 x 540 pixels) a 720p film of 10 minutes.Then we export the video obtained with QuickTime X in iPhone format.

The Finder test is based on compression in.Zip of a 1.47 GB file for archiving.This file includes a few thousand text and images documents.

Then with Garageband we carry out the export of a file of about thirty minutes to obtain a podcast file.Finally, with Photoshop CS4, a script performs a series of actions on an image file.

Finally, the MacBook Pro 17 ’’ vintage 2010 undoubtedly offers, with the 15 entry -level Core i5 model, the best value for money if we rationalize with the power offered.A purchase that we can consider sustainable with software and system developments that are coming in the coming years.

SSD or hard drive?

The hard drive plays a crucial role and induces a more or less significant level of performance depending on the applications we use.It is also the bottleneck of the current architecture of microcomputers.On laptops, the phenomenon and all the more important as the discs in format 2.5 ’’ are generally slower than their equivalents 3.5 ’’ (except for specific, very fast hard drives: between 10,000 and 15,000 rpm: WD Velociraptor type, Seagate Cheetah 15k or Savio® 15K).

Today, there is an alternative, it is called SSD (Solid State Drive) or Solid State disc.Based on Flash Type Nand memory, these storage units are - on paper - much faster than conventional discs ... Even if, in this case, we still prefer hard drives 2.5 ’’ at 7200 rpm, slower, certainly, but above all less expensive.Count an average of € 2.59 per GO for SSD (250 GB) against € 0.17 from GO for a DD 500 GB at 7200 rpm and € 0.09 from GO for a 500 GB 2 disk.5 ’’ in 5400 rpm, that is to say ...

We compared the original hard drive, in this case, a 5400 rpm256 GB.All three volumes were installed in turn in the laptop loaned by Apple.

Comme on peut le voir, l’indice moyen de transfert sur des fichiers de 2 à 10 Mo est plutôt bon : 79 Mo/s sur le disque dur d’origine (capture du haut), mais bien inférieur comparé à un 7200 trs/m : 102 Mo/s et sans commune mesure avec celui de notre SSD qui atteint les 160 Mo/s en écriture.

Obviously, the SSD is by far faster.It is also the least linear unlike the two Hitachi of our test which culminate respectively at 79 and 102 MB/s both in reading and in writing.

Sur de gros fichiers (de 20 à 100 Mo) la tendance s’inverse pour le disque Hitachi d’origine qui perd de sa linéarité contrairement à son équivalent 7200 trs/m (image du centre). Face au SSD, on constate un écart allant jusqu’à 148 Mo par seconde en lecture (énorme).

Despite good performances for a disc of this capacity and at this speed of rotation, the 5k500 Hitachi cannot compete with its big brother 7k500 and even less with our SSD Troqx which displays an average rate in writing up to around 150 MB per second.But to look a little closer, these figures are obtained with test software: Quickbench 4.0 which establishes measures, but these do not always reflect reality the use.And when we compare the Hitachi 7k500 (at 7200 rpm) to the SSD Patriot the gap remains significant in writing (around 42 MB/s), certainly, but it does not justify - in our opinion - that we invest550 € more for a lower capacity (divided by two)… unless we want at all costs a real rolls in terms of portable storage.

Autonomy: could do better

The new automatic rocking system between the two graphic chips (managed by Mac OS X as a function of the applications launched) starts from a good feeling, that of simplicity and complete transparency for the user.However, the mechanism is perfectible.At least, and to simplify, it seems necessary that some publishers make changes to their applications to properly manage the process and not rely on a graphics card a priori disproportionate for their needs.

Otherwise, autonomy suffers from it ... (Read MacBook Pro: Surprises in the rocking of graphics cards and MacBook Pro: GFXCARDSTAS gives the choice of cards).

On its Apple website announces between 8 and 9 autonomy for the MacBook Pro 17 '', a very nice promise which, if it had been held, would have made the trick of thousands of users, especially the real (es)nomads.

While his predecessor held the record, especially in DVD reading with 311 minutes, or 5 hours and 11 minutes, it is now dethroned.We still hoped that the newcomer does just as well, even better.Unfortunately, it is not the case.An observation that we were able to verify as we three tests.

Recall that Cupertino describes as follows his methodology: "Measuring the battery life by browsing several websites and writing text in a text processing document with a display luminosity set to 50 %".

We have reissued each of our tests 3 times in order to avoid the problem of variation that we had noted during the tests of the two models 15 ’core i5 and i7. First observation, lorsqu’on lance Coconut Battery (version 2.6.6), the software displays a nominal capacity of 12967 mAh is almost double the battery which equips the 15 '' models of the range, well almost ... because, these are the theoretical values which, once translated electronically,rather correspond to a theoretical autonomy of 11 hours.Only here, from theory to practice we are never after surprises.Yet Coconut Battery is quite precise on this point.We have verified the capacity announced by the system, they are quite similar ...

Un rapide coup d’œil sur les informations système et on peut voir que la capacité annoncée, soit 12758 reste dans la moyenne de chiffres de l’utilitaire.

If the values in milliampères suggest the best, Apple still announces a maximum of 8 and 9 hours, it is a lot, we have seen, according to our methodology, that it is not the case.

Our first test is based on the loop reading of a film on DVD until the full battery exhaustion.The brightness is set out of 80%, the sound on 50% and the Wi-Fi as well as the Bluetooth are disabled.

We carried out this test three times in a row.The first time, the machine was blank and no application, except those installed by Apple, was present in the system.

The MacBook Pro held 4 hours and 34 minutes before turning off, 274 minutes, our best time.Then, once the laptop recharged (we have timed: it takes about two and a half hours), we have revived the said test always with the same film: Star Wars - Episode 2, the attack on the clones.This time, it was with our system.The battery has stopped working after 4 hours and 21 minutes.A quick glance allowed us to check that it was the Intel graphic solution that was in service.

Finally, our third test will have kneel the poor battery after 4 hours and 5 minutes.A drastic fall in autonomy when we carried out the three tests rigorously under the same conditions.Odd…

Bien que l’on puisse supposer que la dalle 17’’ consomme plus et que le Core i5 demeure énergivore, cela n’explique pas la chute de l’autonomie. Il suffit de comparer avec son homologue 15’’ aussi en Core i5 voire avec l’ancien MacBook Pro 17’’ pour constater la perte. C’est 37 minutes de moins que son devancier.

Our second test is to launch reading an HD film (encoded in H264 in format.MKV) with VLC 1.0.5 and to ensure the background of email with email that performs the operation every minute.Wi-Fi is active, bluetooth deactivated and the brightness set on 80% and the sound always at 50%...

The laptop remained on 4 hours 14, it is 14 minutes better than the MacBook Pro 15 ’’ Core i5 and 42 minutes more than the model based on Core i7 at 2.66 GHz.If we have the feeling that this 17 ’’ is not too bad, it does not really shine, especially if we refer to the little white macbook unibody which holds almost 4 hours on this test.

Finally, our latest test is based on web oriented use in music.iTunes in the background, reading a loop album, we launched Firefox 3.6.3 which automatically recharged every 30 seconds the home page of our site.The brightness always 80% and the sound to 50%, the battery will have given signs of weakness until after 5 hours and 51 minutes (the famous warning message which arises 10 minutes before the final extinction) therewhere the 15 "Core i5 displays 6h 11 min.

It's good, very well, if we compare to the 5 hours 15 that we had obtained with the MacBook Pro 17 '' from the previous generation, even if the latter's test was a little heavier (Photoshop CS3 was thenin action), but it remains below the MacBook Pro 13 '' 2.66 GHz that displays 35 minutes better!

Honorable autonomy in fact, but well below what we hoped ... But in its discharge, this MacBook Pro is more of transportable than laptop what professionals have long accommodated.

A poor isight

Paradoxically, if we can say that overall this 2010 vintage is progressing, it is unfortunately not the case with the isight which, as on the last 15 '', and unlike the MacBook Pro 13 '', regressesconsiderably.Just compare even with that of the white macbook unibody to realize it.

Loin de rivaliser avec la version intégrée à l’actuel MacBook, l’iSight du portable de notre test affiche une image tirant vers les rouges, mais plus nette que celle de son équivalent 15’’ (ce qui n’est pas bien difficile) et plus contrastée.En basse lumière, malheureusement, les choses se gâtent. Si l’on peut reprocher aux actuels modèles de la gamme de manquer de sensibilité et de présenter un rendu rougeâtre, cette version de l’iSight est sans doute la pire. Tout vire au magenta ! On est loin de l’image produite par la webcam de l’ancien MacBook Pro 17’’.

To wonder what Apple does?Why don't we benefit-simply-a constant image quality.What interest has Apple to sell high-end laptops, the prices and their denomination imply, with components that lose in quality?Obviously, we can put on that cutting up on the margins is essential when we want to make figures, but it is clearly to prejudice the product.Apparently a detail, but which is very important.It is not a few cents of euros that will change things.At least let's hope that the next generation will take on a component (optics) at least as good as that of the MacBook.

Game

With a NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M chip, the means of the founder's catalog, which incorporates a total of 512 MB of video and distills no less than 48 flow processors (32 for the GeForce 9600m GT), the MacBook Pro 17'' of our test is perfectly equipped to approach the playful universe as it is represented today.We were able to check it as well on the machine and once connected to a Cinema Display 24 ’LED’ ’.It must be said that the 512 MB of GDDR3 are enough for the management of the screen which, -let us remember a native resolution (1920 by 1,200 pixels) Full HD as the 17 '' -, or even a possible future model 27''.

First under Mac OS X (10.6.3) Then Windows XP Pro (Service Pack 3), the prints collected are just as good as on the MacBook Pro 15 ’’ Core i7.The majority of the big titles of Mac OS X run very well.We tested it with Quake 4, Prey, Call of Duty 4 Modern Warfare, Tomb Raider Anniversary and the Sims 3 in its native resolution, no problem with jerks or slowdowns identified.

Considéré comme notre référence sur notre plateforme Call of Duty 4 Modern Warfare fonctionne parfaitement dans la résolution native de l’écran, mais les options graphiques ne sont pas aussi complètes que sur PC.

We also reiterated our test with the Cider version of Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 while configuring graphic options so as to find a fair balance between playability and fluidity.There, do not expect to play in the native resolution of the slab.If the game appears properly on the 15 ’core i5, its resolution being lower, on the 17’ ’despite all the good offices of the GPU, it is unplayable.

We see that the portage via Cider has its limits and, anyway, if you want to play with COD Modern Warfare 2, just go through Windows thanks to Boot Camp, its PC version is much more playable.

En 1920 par 1200 pixels toutes les options graphiques et d’antialiasing paramétrés, le jeu Tomb Raider Anniversary fonctionne de façon fluide. Ce qui est loin d’être le cas avec l’ancienne GeForce 9600M GT sur le précédent modèle.

For our Windows tests, we installed Windows XP Pro (Service Pack 3).After more than an hour of installation, we tried the following games in turn: Call of Duty 4 Modern Warfare, Medal of Honor Airborn, Farcry 2, Gears of War, James Bond - Quantum of Solace (La Démo),Crysis (demo), Street Fighter IV Benchmarck and Assasin's Creed II.

No unpleasant surprises, the first five titles make the most of the GeForce GT 330m and the playability is there.With Crysis, things have spoiled.Impossible to play, the demo systematically resulting in a dollage of Windows XP Pro.Pilot problem, problems inherent in demo, we cannot say, the time having sorely missed, we have passed to the next.Assassin’s Creed 2 is the only game that will have launched the GPU.If the environment is quite fluid on the MacBook Por 15 ’Core i7, the greater resolution of the 17’ ’does not allow you to play in a suitable way.No doubt, we would have taken better profit under Windows 7 and its more recent version of DirectX.

Dynamique, le moteur de Farcry 2 s’exprime en toute franchise sur ce portable. Il est indéniable que les utilisateurs et, accessoirement, joueurs apprécieront les performances globales du portable dans ce domaine.Options graphiques par défaut dans la résolution native de l’écran le jeu Quantum of Solace s’affiche fluide.Malgré de bonnes performances les toutes dernières productions nécessitent une carte vidéo puissante, Assassin’s Creed n’échappe pas à la règle.Medal of Honor Airborn réputé gourmand en ressources machine est parfaitement jouable. Cela démontre si besoin est que la GeForce 330M s’avère adaptée pour le jeu. Le contraire eut été étonnant quand on sait que le même jeu tourne aussi bien sur le dernier MacBook Pro 13’’ simplement doté d’une puce 320M.

Concretely, the graphic solution that has been chosen is a good compromise for those who wish to indulge in some video game pleasures.One aspect that we checked during our last test.Also available in the form of benching software, Street Fighter IV allows you to realize the performance level.Performance which, ultimately, does not deteriorate in the same proportions when we play on a 17 ’’ macbook pro of the old generation and that we rise in resolution.

En 1280 x 720 pixels, la résolution par défaut, les deux GPU 320M et GT 330M affichent approximativement le même nombre d’images par seconde. Ainsi sur le MBP 13’’ la petite GeForce obtient le score de 9950 points et 55.20 FPS, contre 8874 et 59.11 FPS pour le 330M du MBP 15’’ Core i7. La GeForce 330M du MacBook Pro Pro atteignant les 9869 et une moyenne de 59.05 FPS.

In summary, if the two video solutions (320m and GT 330m) seem to be in low resolution, which we play on the 13, 15 or 17 '' (object of this test), the performances are somewhat deteriorateWhen you set up the resolution (logic).The MBP 17 ’’ sees the number of its images per second descend to 47.64 (FPS, Frame Per Seconde) and his score drop to 7,870 points in 1920 by 1,200 pixels, its nominal resolution.

Conclusion

Logical evolution in the range This new version of the MacBook Pro 17 ’’ should ensure a great future as close to a general public as well as with professionals wishing to have a significant computing power supported by a large screen.It is true that the Core i5 2.53 GHz, a quad ultimately, fleshes the appropriate weapons: a good level LCD LCD panel even in basic version (image specialists will prefer the less expensive anti -reflective option onThis model), 4 GB of RAM, a 500 GB hard drive, an expressCard ¾, three USB 2 ports.0 Failing the USB 3.0 and, above all, a swift processor as desired.Obviously, all this at a price.2294 euros for the optional model (the plump sum of 15,047 francs, all the same) that is what you will need to relieve yourself to acquire the beast.An investment which, this time, will be more ... sustainable.