MacBook Pro 17" (1920x1200) i5-540M or MacBook Pro 15" (1650x1080) i7-620M?

I' am for the first time ever seriously considering getting myself my first Mac computer!

So I've been looking at basicly two models, both got almost the exact same price tag here in Norway, so I'm not sure which one to go for.


The first ones is a MacBook Pro 15" with High-resolution 1650x1080 glossy screen, featuring the top of the line Intel Core i7-620M CPU the other is a MacBook Pro 17" with even higher resolution (1920x1200) glossy screen, featuring the slightly slower Intel Core i5-540M.


I don't list the other specifications as I don't really care about them, I already got a pair of 4GB 1600MHz CL7 (2x2GB) DIM's and a Intel X25-M 80GB SSD that I'll be using anyway.



There will be lots of movies and series played on my MacBook Pro, that's why I don't really considering paying a premium for the anti-glare screen, even though I love anti-glare and tend to struggle with glossy screens I don't see the point in actually paying more for it. And when watching movies and series, in often very dark rooms the glossy screen actually have some advantages.


The hard thing to decide here is slicker and lighter, with smaller screen and lower resolution, but better CPU versus the bigger, more heavy but featuring bigger screen and Full-HD+ resolution but slower CPU.



Today I use a Lenovo ThinkPad T400s, which is a 14", very thin and light notebook, with rather crappy resolution and horrible contrast ratio on the anti-glare screen.


I've figured that I'm not really in the need for a massive 17" screen, but on the other hand screen size is a great thing when watching movies and things like that and I would love a 1080P capable screen, so it's really sad to not see a 1920x1200 option on the 15" model, otherwise I would jump upon that wagon right away!

And the other thing to consider is the whole Core i5-540M versus Core i7-620M, with higher L2 Cache and overall better performance the Core i7 would be ideal, but after reading the Core i5 vs i7 thread I'm not sure the performance gain compared to the higher power consumption and potentially higher temperatures makes it worth it?



So I'm slowly moving towards the 17" model, but I'm afraid that it simply might become too big, resulting in it being a hassle in use because it gets too heavy and to big dealing with.

After all moving from 14" and 1.5kg into 17" and 3.0kg is quite a big step?



Would love someone else's opinion on this matter, what would you go for is you were in my shoes?

 

i once bought a 17" laptop, thinking i wanted something that big. i got rid of it quick... it was a behemoth. how often would you be lugging that beast around?

 

go for the 15"...the screen and size make it the best choice...

 

the only advantage glossy will net you is crushed blacks and unnatural contrast.

don't be fooled.

get the anti-glare, a X-Rite EyeOne Display LT from Amazon...calibrate your screen and enjoy the benefits of color accuracy.

 

yeah the antiglare is easier on the eyes.

 

That's exactly what concerns me the most about the 17", might it be just too big?

There is one advantage with these MacBook Pros though, the 17" isn't really that thick or heavy for the size, but of course the it takes up more space.

But I rarely take my computer outside of the house, which makes the extra size manageable.

I have to agree that the overall size and weight fall in the benefit of the 15" compared to the 17", as I feel I don't really need the extra two inches, it's the better resolution that drags me towards the 17" instead of the 15".

It sounds almost like you prefer the screen on the 15" instead of the 17", why might that be? Considering the 17" got higher resolution and all?

I've actually never owned a glossy screen, my desktop screen is a 24" HP LP2475W H-IPS, which is anti-glare, my current ThinkPad T400s is anti-glare, so I don't really know how much trouble it might be with the glossy finish.

On the other hand, I've seen several anti-glare notebook screens, and I have to admit that the screen on my T400s is just yuck when it comes to watching movies and series on it. The contrast ratio is very poor, and when looking at episodes from Lost and 24 there is a clear lack of contrast between the darker and the lighter parts of the image, is almost like the black levels are completely washed out, it's bleeding everywhere and that's with a white-led backlight.


It's a true blast to use in different applications etc.. It's very clear, and you can really crank up the brightness, and there is barley any noticeable delay in the respond times, it's just when watching movies I feel I've got this over brightened screen, it almost feels like the gama settings has been set to +5 instead of 0.


I've tried to tweak this without any luck, I tried VIVID colour settings which helped a bit, but far from enough. I just feel sad when watching videos on my current notebook screen.


I know that these 14" screens are supposed to be the worst ones out there, but it isn't the first anti-glare screen I've used and overall I have this feeling that the contrast ratio on notebook screens are just awful? I feel like the black levels NEVER manage to go deep enough, and the brightest scenes are simply too bright, I struggle when trying to tell things apart from each other while watching videos.



This might sound tiny bit more overwhelming that what it is, it's not like the screen is crap all to getter, is just that I got the feeling of anti-glare and movies simply doesn't seem to bound that well?


But again I have never owned a MacBook Pro, and their all know for great screens so might be that the Apple anti-glare is in it's own league compared to what I've got on my T400s, after all the T400s is all about business and nothing about multimedia.

That I have to agree, everything I've seen of glossy screens have been a challenge for my eyes, but as I'm normally using my notebook in not that bright rooms and normally don't use it outside I hopped the glossy part wouldn't be that much of a hassle?

But is seems to me that there isn't really anyone that can recommend the glossy screen over the anti-glare one? So perhaps I should go anti-glare instead.

 

I made the thread here with all the MBP photos in it.

trust me...or just go to an Apple store. the matte screen is easily the best option.

and I assume people would recommend the 15" because it's closer to the dimensions of a pad of paper and thus, more likely to fit into standard cases, bags, etc. 17" is more difficult to accomodate in terms of bag/case options because it's the less popular size.

 

the reason i like the 15" better is that the resolution seems perfect..a resolution greater than that would ruin the experience of reading on a laptop...i've seen a 17" before and trust me,you dont want to lug it everywhere with you.1920x1200 is perfect on a 17" screen but not on a 15"

 

Well, I'm still pretty much in the same boat though!

The 15" Anti-Glare Core i7-620M (1650x1080) is priced slightly above the 17" Anti-Glare Core i5-540M (1920x1200).. The difference is so small that we can just say they cost about the same.


Still have to decide between:

- 17" (with the added space and weight)
- Core i5-540M with lower power consumption, but also slightly lower performance
- The best screen resolution

Or

- 15" (Thinner, lighter and smaller)
- Core i7-620M, higher power consumption (more heat?) but better performing
- Lower screen resolution



It's a darn tough choice to make

 

on the contrary, I love lugging my 17"+ around. "lugging becomes relative when the difference is less than 2lbs.

but it is harder to find nice looking bags for the 17" range. it all depend on the dimensions and if it's too awkward for you.

 

Another thing that come to cross my mind, how is the built in iSight camera on today's MacBook Pro's? (Again, never owned a MacBook before)

It seems like it's been the same 1.3MP camera for ages now?
How should that compare to my current 2.0MP camera on my T400s?


I know 1.3MP vs 2.0MP doesn't really matter at all, I've seen some really rubbish 1.3MP cameras like the one on SL400 which never looked good no matter what conditions.

On the other hand I've also seen some really great 1.3MP cameras, but I do have to say I love the current one (2.0MP) on my T400s, it works even in complete darkness (of course the colours gets little messed up, but it's sharp and it works better than I've seen on any notebook camera before, it's in the same league as my Logitech QuickCam Pro 9000).


I do use the web-cam quite a lot, so it's important to me that the overall quality is above decent and that it doesn't require light conditions, I don't need it to be perfect even in very dark rooms, but it should at least be able to work without me looking like an alien.