Macbook Pro vs Air 13"

My wife is looking at either the Pro or the Air 13", and we wonder what would best suit her use:

Surfing
Writing
Viewing videos
Playing music
Photo editing (possibly)

What will be most durable (5-6 years)? Does the power of the Pro make it more likely to last longer without much bugging/slowing down? I read Apple will release a new version of Air with sandybridge in about one month, how much more powerful will it be?

 

Both the Air and Pro would handle those with ease. If you are looking for longevity, the Pro would definitely last you for 5 years. I'm not sure on the Air though, but maybe the (rumored) upcoming refresh will shed some light on how much of a boost it will get.

Apple might refresh the Air with something other than an Intel chip... like maybe an ARM chip similar to what's powering the iPad/iPhone.

Edit: I have a Core-i7 desktop that's 2 years old now that squashes anything I throw at it. Granted its a desktop, but the Core-i5/Core-i7 chips are definitely contenders, and I think anything running those chips will last a considerable amount of time.

I'm hoping the Air gets boosted to a Core-i5 or Core-i7. If that happens, then definitely get the Air.

 

i dont disagree they apple has discussed changing to arm core however i dont expect that any time soon. more likely to see core i5 and corei7

 

definitely MBA 13". wait for the refresh though.

it'll be lighter and have a better screen(less glossy + higher res).

the only thing that MAY hurt is photo editing, but I think the SSDs will help make up the lost CPU power. In any case, the benefits occur in every use case and the negative only happens in one case.

 

Intel HD 3000 and 5 years? Do you know what the refresh gpu is going to be on the Air 11" and 13"?

 

I would not recommend the MBA when the OP is asking for 5-6 years of operation and the capability of editing photos. The MBA is a really nice computer, but it isn't upgradeable and its ability to handle photo-editing is dubious. The Macbook Pro would be a much better fit for the OP's needs.

 

MBA 13: Hellova lot more stylish design thanks to its thin-and-light form factor. Higher res screen. SSD HDD.

MBP 13: Faster processor because of less TDP constraints. Notably faster GPU (albeit it's still the HD3000 and inadequate for gaming). More storage.

Really depends what you'd rather have really.

 

Thanks for all the respons, I guess we'll just wait and see what the upgraded version of the Air has to offer then!

 

I would choose the air. They have a better higher res screen. photos are much nice to look at. you really see a difference. I cant wait to see what they bring out the 14th.

 

The only reason why you would go with the air is for the portability, and if you like the thinness, but the 13" mbp is portable enough I think

 

The Geforce 320m on the Air is still superior to Intel HD 3000. So if gaming is your priority then grab Air.

Don't get caught up with notebookcheck ranking HD 3000 above 310m and saying they are comparable because they aren't after testing the games myself using a 310m and Intel HD 3000. The driver support and memory on the dedicated card alone almost doubled the performance in frames per sec.

Evidence of this is using my cousins 2720qm m14x 720p running the fastest Intel HD 3000 with 650mhz/1300mhz clock and pitting it against a Toshiba i5-460m w/ Geforce 310m. Tried 4 games at least (F.E.A.R, WoW Cataclysm, Cs Source, left 4 dead 2). The 310 is about 30-40fps more than the intel hd 3000 (same 1366x768 native res, same settings. I thought at first it was probably the intel driver, after trying diff drivers and updating to latest one both from intel and Dell, the performance is still inferior to the entry level geforce 310m.

The reason why notebookcheck has the intel hd 3000 higher than the 310m in their list is possibly because of the 2nd gen cpu, boosting it on benchmarks but no real effects on the gaming itself.

Hope this helps

 

first gen i3/i5/i7 you are testing on does NOT have an Intel HD 3000... it has an "Intel HD" ... not the 3000. The 3000 is only in the Second Gen, and is MUCH MUCH faster than the Intel HD in the First Gen.

 

the i7 2720qm is a sandy bridge model, and that is where he is conducting his testing regarding the intel hd 3000, or at least that is what I could make up with the post

 

Reading comprehension.

 

yes, I thinks it's obvious I misread thinking the i5 460 was the intel test machine, no need to be crappy about it. But the test results do not sound even close to right for a HD 3000, so I didnt double check what I read. I have a c2d with 320m machine, and a i7 HD 3000 machine, and there is no way I can pull differences like that and I have a few games where the 320m is slower than the HD 3000. Since benchmarks show the 320m is on par with the 310m, I don't believe those results for a second.

 

If you're serious about getting 5-6 years of use, the MBP will be more likely to handle future needs because of the faster CPU and upgradeable memory and hard drive.

Somebody also said the MBA isn't good for photo editing, which is not true. You'd only notice the speed difference if you're a pro and batch editing lots of photos at once. For most people, the MBA is a better choice for photo editing because of the higher screen resolution.

 

Check this out — MacBook Pro vs. MacBook Air vs. white MacBook: Which 13-inch Apple laptop should you buy? | Crave - CNET
Comparison charts. Air clearly looses on everything even to ordinary macbook.

 

unless you read closer... like under the GPU section, or under how much money it costs to power the things.

 

well ye, we all know that air got slightly better gpu i am saying that everything else is SO MUCH worse. I am pretty sure that mbp will beat performance in pretty much any game.

E.g. when i am turboboosting my CPU i get like 10 more fps in witcher 2. That makes me think that cpu matters

 

I'm deciding between these two as well. Waiting to see what the refreshed Air is like.