October 24, 2006 7:28 AM PDT

MacBook Pro laptops upgraded with Core 2 Duo

Related Stories

Apple photo software has eye on amateurs

September 25, 2006

Apple speeds up iMacs with Core 2 Duo

September 6, 2006

Apple shows Leopard's spots

August 7, 2006
Apple Computer has revved up its MacBook Pro notebooks with Intel Core 2 Duo processors, double the memory and a faster FireWire peripheral connection.

Unlike some of Apple's computer announcements--like last month's unveiling of Core 2 Duo-equipped iMac desktops--the new MacBook Pros look just like their predecessors. The high-end laptops, geared toward business and creative professionals, are still available in 15-inch and 17-inch models in the familiar brushed aluminum.

But inside, Apple has made some changes. Now equipped with Core 2 Duo processors, the 15-inch MacBook Pro is available in 2.16GHz and 2.33GHz varieties. The 17-incher comes with a 2.33GHz Core 2 Duo.

MacBook Pro

With the souped-up chips, Apple estimates that the 2.33GHz dual-core model is up to 39 percent speedier than the previous MacBook Pro with a 2.16GHz Intel Duo processor--and seven times faster than the older PowerBook G4 laptop with a 1.67GHz IBM PowerPC processor.

In addition, a new FireWire 800 port now complements the existing FireWire 400 port so that MacBook Pro users can connect to higher-end peripheral devices.

With the improved processors, Apple hopes that its MacBook Pro laptops will be more appealing to customers who run memory-heavy applications like its own Aperture photo-editing software.

Ever since Apple's mid-2005 announcement that it would switch to Intel processors, the Cupertino, Calif.-based company has been gradually releasing machines with the new chips. Apple's transition to Intel was complete with the unveiling of the Mac Pro desktop in August.

The new 15-inch MacBook Pro laptops, which Apple said are available Tuesday, cost $1,999 for the 2.16GHz model and $2,499 for the 2.33GHz version. The 17-inch MacBook Pro is set for release next week at $2,799.

See more CNET content tagged:
Apple MacBook Pro, Intel Core 2 Duo, Apple MacBook, Apple Computer, dual-core

47 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
eh?
Apparently this is not the definition of investigative reporting - the
new iMacs look very much like the models they replaced and the
MacBook Pro's never used a single core variant of the Core Duo.
Back to school for this reporter!
Posted by sd1004 (6 comments )
Reply Link Flag
...?
Apparently you didn't read the article... It says like the iMacs, they look like their... (blah blah blah)
Where did it say the MacBook Pro used a Core Solo?
Posted by mustangwll (3 comments )
Link Flag
Amazing
Its amazing how the old macs were to be "just as fast" as their PC Counterparts, but now the new Intel (PC) powered macs are 7 time faster then they were before?

Apple has always been good at lieing... er... Marketing.
Posted by zeeboid (92 comments )
Reply Link Flag
RE: LIE???
The Power PC chips that were in the Apples were designed years ago. No $hit todays generation of chips are faster then the old ones. That is not a marketing lie.
Posted by psedog (40 comments )
Link Flag
PowerPC v. Pentium
That old Apple comparison was that the IBM PowerPC chip was faster than the Intel Pentium chip...which was definately true.

TODAY'S Untel Core 2 Duo chips are also way faster than their previous Pentium chips as well...true.

Today's Intel Core 2 Duo dual processor is also faster than the PowerPC G4 chips that were in the Apple laptops before the Intel transition & before Intel dual processor on one chip Core 2 Duo...true.

The only lying here is your previous response Mr Z.
Posted by Llib Setag (951 comments )
Link Flag
Still waitin on Adobe?
And CS3 is right around the corner

<holding breath>
Posted by jeph4e (23 comments )
Reply Link Flag
wow! how original
Dell, Toshiba, HP... what are you doing? when you guys introduced Core 2 Duo ages ago, it hardly make it in the news.. and now when Apple finally caught up with you, it is a headline on CNET
Posted by cary1 (924 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Intel Core 2 Duo ready laptops 08-2006
Less than 2 months ago...ooooooo, ages & ages ago.

Dude, this is news because Apple has been going through a chip transition from PowerPC to Intel Core chips...

Apple laptops had previous Intel Core Duo chips & now MacBook Pro's have Core 2 Duo Intel chips.

Yes they are available in other vendors such as Dell, but their matching configurations are more expensive than MacBook Pro notebooks.
Posted by Llib Setag (951 comments )
Link Flag
Read 'em & weep Cary dude
Newsvine.com

Apple Does It Again New Macbook Pros Cheaper Than Dell

News Type: Event  Wed Oct 25, 2006 4:51 AM EDTtechnology, apple, mac, windows, os-x, dell, macbook-pro, price-wars

Sean Balsiger

After seeing how well equipped the updated Macbook Pros are I decided to go and compare them to comparable Dell machines. To my pleasant surprise the Macs are substantially cheaper.

I took a quick look at the Dell store and found the Dell Precision line to be closest to the Macbook Pro line. It is their high-end line of notebooks. I started out with the basic 15.4 inch model and upgraded the Dell to match the standard features the Macbook Pro has. For the most part they are identical, there are a few differences though. first of all, I didn't upgrade the Dell's screen. I'm guessing an upgraded screen would be closer to Apple's but I wanted to give Dell the best chance possible to beat Apple (so that people won't try to claim I'm just trying to make Apple look good). The next difference confused me. The Macbook Pro had a 128MB video card. The Dell has a 256MB card and can use 256MB of shared system memory for a total of 512MB. I'm not an expert on video cards but we'll call Dell the winner. The final difference is that the Dell does not have a DVD burner. I could have added one but the Macbook Pro is 6x and all I could find for the Dell was 8x so I left it with a Cd burner.

Final Price - Apple: $1,999 Dell: $2,874

There is an $875 difference in Apple's favor. You could buy the 17 inch Macbook pro with a 2.33GHz processor, 2GB standard memory and a 160GB HD for about the same price. Or you could upgrade the 15 inch model to a 2.33 GHz processor with 2GB of RAM and a 200GB HD and still have over $100 left over.

This brings us to the comparison of the 17 inch models. These models are pretty straight forward. The only difference between the Macbook Pro and the Dell is that one has an ATI graphics card (Apple) and the other has an Nvidia card, both have the same memory. Other than that I didn't upgrade the Dell's screen and I did add a DVD burner since the 17 inch Macbook Pro is 8x.

Final Price - Apple: $2,799 Dell: $4,142

This time there is a difference of $1,343 in Apple's favor. The myth that Apple computers are more expensive than PCs need to end. They have proven that they are committed to selling well-equipped computers at reasonable prices. Now people just need to take the time to compare the systems and realize that with a Mac they are getting a better computer at a better price with a better operating system, and if they don't like Mac OS X they are still better off to spend hundreds of dollars less and buy a copy of Windows for their Mac. Is there really a reason to stay on PCs anymore?

Update: One of the comments pointed out that the Dells come with 3 years of support. 3 years of Applecare is $349 so with that factored in the price differences are:
15.4 inch: $526
17 inch: $994

P.S.: If you hate Apple/Macs then why spend so much time on the C|NET article about MacBookPro notebooks & listen to Steve Jobs Keynote speechs?

Bi-Platform curious are you Cary? Hmmmmm?
Posted by Llib Setag (951 comments )
Link Flag
Still waiting for MacBook
I have been holding out for the MacBook to be upgraded to Core 2 Duo. How about it Apple???
Posted by pilaa (253 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Patience....
Apple will *eventually* switch the MacBooks to the Core 2 Duo line, but not for a while.

The student/home MacBooks do not need a 64 bit chip and the 10%-30% increase in performance is not a big deal for students/home users. This is why no vendor's bottom of the line machines are Core 2 Duo's now.

I expect a new iteration of MacBook Pros in the spring with the new Core 2 Duos with the faster front side busses and better overall front ends. At about the same time I expect the MacBooks to go to Core 2 Duo variants.

Patience grasshopper.
Posted by shadowself (202 comments )
Link Flag
So far so good...Where is BluRay?
When will the other shoe drop...If you purchase a 17" MacBook
Pro now, you'll hate yourself for the next three years that you
didn't wait just three more months for when Apple and all the
other major notebook mfgrs offer high def. DVD burners like
Sony and a handful of other do now. Watching high Def DVD on
a note book my be nice, but the real reason for me is STORAGE!
I need DVD's that can store all my photos and iMoves, and the
current generation DVD, even dual layer just can't/won't
compete with BluRay DVD disc.
Posted by CptBill (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
Blue Ray or HD/DVD?
PC manufacturers seem to be gravitating towards HD/DVD over Blue Ray. HD/DVD burners are being made available now while Blue Ray isn't. Can someone please clarify which format is being used where in the computer industry?
Posted by Seaspray0 (9714 comments )
Link Flag
Is this a damn joke?
You're posting comments on the article that is announcing the arrival of Core2Duo MacBooks about how you think they will be available in spring. Read the article, perhaps you'll see they were introduced on the DAY YOU ARE WRITING THE ARTICLE.
Posted by mustangwll (3 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Still Waiting laptop released for Mac OS X 10.5
Well, its really tempting...but still I will be patient until the one released for Mac OS X 10.5 comes out...! Anyone knows when is it going to be?
Posted by ivannanto (3 comments )
Reply Link Flag
"Spring"
All I've heard so far is that OSX.V is coming out Spring of 2007.
Posted by Amazingant (146 comments )
Link Flag
Still Waiting laptop released for Mac OS X 10.5
When the laptop for Mac OS X 10.5 is going to be released? Still this new macbook pro intel core 2 duo doesnt tempting me much...dont wanna waste budget if new ones will come in near times...hehehe
Posted by ivannanto (3 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Specifications
If you get exactly the same spec Dell laptop or desktop machine as
a Mac the Mac will work out cheaper.

As for intoducing Core 2 Duo, so how come Intel have only just
launched there own adverts this week?

Afterall it was such a long long long long time ago that they
became available.
Posted by (8 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Read them & weep
Apple Does It Again New Macbook Pros Cheaper Than Dell
News Type: Event  Wed Oct 25, 2006 4:51 AM EDTtechnology, apple, mac, windows, os-x, dell, macbook-pro, price-wars
Sean Balsiger
After seeing how well equipped the updated Macbook Pros are I decided to go and compare them to comparable Dell machines. To my pleasant surprise the Macs are substantially cheaper.

I took a quick look at the Dell store and found the Dell Precision line to be closest to the Macbook Pro line. It is their high-end line of notebooks. I started out with the basic 15.4 inch model and upgraded the Dell to match the standard features the Macbook Pro has. For the most part they are identical, there are a few differences though. first of all, I didn't upgrade the Dell's screen. I'm guessing an upgraded screen would be closer to Apple's but I wanted to give Dell the best chance possible to beat Apple (so that people won't try to claim I'm just trying to make Apple look good). The next difference confused me. The Macbook Pro had a 128MB video card. The Dell has a 256MB card and can use 256MB of shared system memory for a total of 512MB. I'm not an expert on video cards but we'll call Dell the winner. The final difference is that the Dell does not have a DVD burner. I could have added one but the Macbook Pro is 6x and all I could find for the Dell was 8x so I left it with a Cd burner.

Final Price - Apple: $1,999 Dell: $2,874

There is an $875 difference in Apple's favor. You could buy the 17 inch Macbook pro with a 2.33GHz processor, 2GB standard memory and a 160GB HD for about the same price. Or you could upgrade the 15 inch model to a 2.33 GHz processor with 2GB of RAM and a 200GB HD and still have over $100 left over.

This brings us to the comparison of the 17 inch models. These models are pretty straight forward. The only difference between the Macbook Pro and the Dell is that one has an ATI graphics card (Apple) and the other has an Nvidia card, both have the same memory. Other than that I didn't upgrade the Dell's screen and I did add a DVD burner since the 17 inch Macbook Pro is 8x.

Final Price - Apple: $2,799 Dell: $4,142

This time there is a difference of $1,343 in Apple's favor. The myth that Apple computers are more expensive than PCs need to end. They have proven that they are committed to selling well-equipped computers at reasonable prices. Now people just need to take the time to compare the systems and realize that with a Mac they are getting a better computer at a better price with a better operating system, and if they don't like Mac OS X they are still better off to spend hundreds of dollars less and buy a copy of Windows for their Mac. Is there really a reason to stay on PCs anymore?

Update: One of the comments pointed out that the Dells come with 3 years of support. 3 years of Applecare is $349 so with that factored in the price differences are:
15.4 inch: $526
17 inch: $994

If you compare Apples to Apples & upgrade the DellMart Dells to equal the MacBookPro laptop, then Apple cost less.

(This does not take into account all the value of OSX+iPhoto+iMovie+Garageband+iDVD iLife suite + Firewire + iSight that comes with Macs...not included with Dell + XP so add even more $$$ to Dell's price. Plus lousy Dell service & downtime due to lousy XP OS)
Posted by Llib Setag (951 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Dear Pennypinchers,
I'm not going to crunch a price comaprison just for this thread,
but suffice to say I did ONE scenario just yesterday with the 17"
MacBook Pro and the Dell got creamed in price (see here -- note
these are Canadian prices: <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.ehmac.ca/showpost.php?" target="_newWindow">http://www.ehmac.ca/showpost.php?</a>
p=470477&#38;postcount=32 ) -- and I couldn't for the life of me
find a Dell E1505 with Core2Duo even though Dell said that they
offered it (see accusation of bait-and-switch in the above link).

Also, while you guys write off the Mac platform...
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://news.cbsi.com/Zombies+continue+to+chase+Windows" target="_newWindow">http://news.cbsi.com/Zombies+continue+to+chase+Windows</a>
+PCs/2100-7349_3-6129235.html?tag=nefd.pulse
Posted by MacDuff (62 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Which was faster?
Ironically, as a buyer of an imac core duo and a user of assorted
PC's from brand new to 5 years old at the office, the fastest
computer right now that I have is a 1ghz PowerBook G4 that is
three years old, with a full hard drive and just 1 gig of RAM. I
always thought Apple was BS'ing us too, pre-Intel, but in fact TWO
intel chips in one machine ( we have Core Duo in both a Dell and
the iMac) are still slower than a 1 ghz powerpc, in my day-to-day
experience.
Posted by notrylook (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Intel vs Freescale/Motorola/IBM - was apple full of it?
Ironically, as a buyer of an imac core duo and a user of assorted
PC's from brand new to 5 years old at the office, the fastest
computer right now that I have is a 1ghz PowerBook G4 that is
three years old, with a full hard drive and just 1 gig of RAM. I
always thought Apple was BS'ing us too, pre-Intel, but in fact TWO
intel chips in one machine ( we have Core Duo in both a Dell and
the iMac) are still slower than a 1 ghz powerpc, in my day-to-day
experience.
Posted by notrylook (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag
PowerPC is a great processor
No surprise there at all. Duo processors are quite screamers actually, but Apple has a long road to streamline, debug, and remove additional code that aid in the process of running Intel code and PowerPC code in the same machine. Very soon we will discover that Mac OS is actually quite faster in the Intel processors than what it is Windows, mainly because Microsoft builds its operating environments around a lot of hardware possibilities while Apple does around a well documented hardware platform and the registry plays a big role in this.
Posted by frank bruce (92 comments )
Link Flag
Core 2! Duo
See the 2? That's the newest Intel Chip, replacing Core Duo.
Posted by airwalkery2k (117 comments )
Reply Link Flag
A better comparision - HP vs. MBP
I've to agree that Dell's do place a substantial margin on their products, but not like apple who place ridiculous premium on their "decent", style conscious products. I am presenting you with a better comparision. Check this one out.

MacBook Pro

* 2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
* 2GB 667 DDR2 - 2x1GB SO-DIMMs
* 100GB Serial ATA drive @ 7200 rpm
* MacBook Pro 17-inch Widescreen Display
* SuperDrive 8x (DVD+R DL/DVD-RW/CD-RW)
* ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 with 256MB GDDR3 memory
* Mac OS X v10.4 Tiger

Subtotal - $2,699.00

HP dv9000t:

* 2GHz Intel Core 2 Duo T7200
* 2GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM (2x1024MB)
* 100 GB 7200 RPM SATA Hard Drive
* 17.0" WXGA+ Ultra BrightView Widescreen (1440x900)
* 8X LightScribe DVD+/-RW w/Double Layer / HD-DVD ROM +$450
* HP Mobile Remote Control
* HP IMPRINT Finish + Microphone + Webcam
* 512MB NVIDIA(R) GeForce(R) Go 7600
* Windows XP Media Center Edition / Free Upgrade to Vista Home Premium

Subtotal - $1,718.98

-------------------------------------------------

Price Difference between the dv9000t and Macbook Pro - $980.02

USD NINE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY. And what exactly does the MacBook Pro offer me extra?
Posted by digitalgypsy (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Not quite...
Your comparison isn't as accurate as you might think. The HP
has a 2Ghz Core 2 Duo, while the MacBook Pro has a 2.33Ghz
chip. According to the Intel OEM price lists, the 2Ghz chip is
$294 and the 2.33Ghz chip is $637. That knocks $343 off right
there. Next, the MacBook Pro features a higher screen
resolution, 1680 X 1050, to get that on the HP you need to add
another $50. The MacBook Pro has Bluetooth, you need to add
$15 more to the HP for that. The MacBook Pro comes with
restore CDs with OS X and other software, add $19 more to the
HP to get those. After the aforementioned items we're left with
a $553 gap. You also need to figure in the included iLife
software, to get close you'd need to add some combination of
the Sonic CD/DVD creator software, costing up to $79, and
some of the Corel photo software, starting at $39, you're still
missing anything like GarageBand and iWeb. You'll also need
virus and spyware protection if the HP is gonna touch the
internet, added around $40 more. Then you're left with an odd
design, weighing at least an extra pound, with the lopsided
touchpad mouse, cheap plastic case, and who-knows-what kind
of battery life. The MacBook Pro is aluminum, lighter, thinner,
features a backlit keyboard, and is a heck of a lot nicer to look
at. Case closed, I'd go for the MacBook Pro any day of the week.
Posted by CharlesP2001 (3 comments )
Link Flag
Not quite...
Your comparison isn't as accurate as you might think. The HP
has a 2Ghz Core 2 Duo, while the MacBook Pro has a 2.33Ghz
chip. According to the Intel OEM price lists, the 2Ghz chip is
$294 and the 2.33Ghz chip is $637. That knocks $343 off right
there.

Next, the MacBook Pro features a higher screen
resolution, 1680 X 1050, to get that on the HP you need to add
another $50. The MacBook Pro has Bluetooth, you need to add
$15 more to the HP for that. The MacBook Pro comes with
restore CDs with OS X and other software, add $19 more to the
HP to get those. The MacBook Pro has Firewire 400 and 800
ports for high-speed devices, the HP can't even have Firewire
added.

After the aforementioned items we're left with
a $553 gap. You also need to figure in the included iLife
software, to get close you'd need to add some combination of
the Sonic CD/DVD creator software, costing up to $79, and
some of the Corel photo software, starting at $39, you're still
missing anything like GarageBand and iWeb. You'll also need
virus and spyware protection if the HP is gonna touch the
internet, adding around $40 more. Then you're left with an odd
design, weighing at least an extra pound, with the lopsided
touchpad mouse (left handed people must hate this thing), a
cheap plastic case, and who-knows-what kind
of battery life. The MacBook Pro on the other hand is made of
aluminum, it's lighter, it's thinner,
it features a backlit keyboard, and is a heck of a lot nicer to look
at. Case closed, I'd go for the MacBook Pro any day of the week.
Posted by CharlesP2001 (3 comments )
Link Flag
As Dishonest a Comparison As I've EVER Seen
I JUST configured the two computers and even with a $300 sale discount the HP was just under $2400. You obviously left out a LOT of stuff that comes standard on the Mac when you configured the PC. Add to that the fact that the MBP uses a 2.33Ghz processor and the HP uses a 2.0Ghz processor and the disinformation you're running is even more glaring. Add to THAT the graphics which is 1440X900 on the HP and 1680X1050 on the MBP (the 15" MBP is 1440X900, probably a better comparison).

And then look at the software package . . . . PC vs Mac OS X. Poor kid, you don't get it at all, do you? It's a shame, I guess the schools are just not doing their jobs!

JoeL
Posted by joeldm (24 comments )
Reply Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.