Hosted by site sponsor WebMate.
White & Black MacBook Q&A - Revised November 11, 2006
To be notified of new Q&As, sign up for EveryMac.com's bimonthly email list.
How fast is the original MacBook compared to the MacBook Pro?
Please note that all systems mentioned in this Q&A have been discontinued. The original MacBook and MacBook Pro were replaced by the "Late 2006" MacBook and MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo models.
As one would expect from a quick review of the specifications -- particularly given that processors are shared between some models across families -- the performance of the MacBook compares favorably to that of the MacBook Pro.
However, as one also would expect, the MacBook falls short in graphics intensive tasks due to the "the Intel GMA 950 graphics processor with 64MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared with main memory" compared to the substantially faster ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 graphics processor in the MacBook Pro models.
A number of sites have benchmarked the MacBook compared to the MacBook Pro, and each of these quoted sources should be reviewed in their entirety for the full perspective presented by the author.
In a MacWorld "First Look", James Galbraith compared the speed of a MacBook "Core Duo" 1.83 13-Inch and a MacBook "Core Duo" 2.0 13-Inch (Black) to the MacBook Pro 2.16 17", all with 1 GB of RAM installed.
The author noted "that the MacBooks held their own against the MacBook Pros on most processor-intensive tasks like Compressor, Photoshop, and Cinema 4D" with the exception of graphics intensive tasks, as the "MacBook Pro tallies 63 frames per second, compared to a little less than 18 for the MacBook" in an Unreal Tournament test.
In a CreativeMac suite of benchmarks for Final Cut Studio -- Final Cut Pro 5.1, Motion 2.1, and Compressor 2.1 -- Dave Nagel compared a MacBook 2.0 13" to the MacBook Pro 2.16 15", each equipped with 2 GB of RAM.
Nagel benchmarked that "in most cases, the results were fairly close" between systems running Final Cut Pro 5.1, but the MacBook fell short of the MacBook Pro running Motion 2.1. The results for Compressor 2.1 were odd, as the MacBook "tied the MacBook Pro in two tests. And it beat the pants off the MacBook Pro in two others, which can only be explained by the system component updates." It "lost to the MacBook Pro in only one test, and that by just a second."
He concluded that "like the MacBook Pro, the [MacBook 2.0 13"] proves a thoroughly viable machine for users of Final Cut Studio."
In a great in-depth review, ArsTechnica benchmarked the MacBook as well, comparing the MacBook 2.0 13" (White) to a MacBook Pro 1.83 15", each configured with the stock 512 MB of RAM. The author compared the systems with Xbench and Cinebench, along with other tests.
Given the slower processor in the MacBook Pro 1.83 15", it isn't surprising that ArsTechnica found the MacBook 2.0 13" to be "slightly faster when compared to the slightly older and slower MacBook Pro" in the Xbench test. Likewise, the author concluded that the "MacBook Pro's graphics hardware is clearly superior, and the hardware rendering numbers bear that out" in the Cinebench tests.
Permalink | Report an Error/Typo | Sign Up for Site Update Notices
<< White & Black MacBook Q&A (Main)
Established in 1996, EveryMac.com has been created by experts with decades of experience with Apple hardware. EveryMac.com includes, and always has included, original research incorporating detailed, hands-on inspection of packaging, computers, and devices as well as extensive real-world use. All information is provided in good faith, but no website or person is perfect. Accordingly, EveryMac.com is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind whatsoever. EveryMac.com, and the authors thereof, shall not be held responsible or liable, under any circumstances, for any damages resulting from the use or inability to use the information within. For complete disclaimer and copyright information please read and understand the Terms of Use and the Privacy Policy before using EveryMac.com. Copying, scraping, or use of any content without expressed permission is not allowed, although links to any page are welcomed and appreciated.