MacBooks Get a Memory Boost

MacMemory.jpg

Owning a 15-inch MacBook Pro doesn’t mean settling for less memory than the 17-inch can handle. Not anymore, and not if you’ve got deep pockets.

Apple now offers an 8.0GB memory upgrade kit for mid- and high-end 15-inch MacBook Pros. The kit includes two 4GB modules and costs a big $1,200. At that price it’s not for everyone, but it should satisfy power users who prefer a smaller laptop yet don’t want to compromise on speed or performance.

The upgrade kit is available for the 2.66-GHz ($2499) and 2.93-GHz ($2799) 15-inch MacBook Pro models, both of which ship with 4GB of RAM and no RAM upgrade option.

By the way, this comes with free shipping, so that’s something.

17-inch MBP fan / overheating issues causing GeForce 9600M to bug out?

Oh, brother. We can already tell this one’s going to be a fun, enjoyable journey to follow. Shortly after Apple’s 17-inch unibody MacBook Pro began making its way out to early adopters, small legions of owners have reported all sorts of bizarre graphical glitches. While we first assumed that it was NVIDIA’s GeForce 9600M causing all the mayhem, further investigation has led us to believe that faulty fan controls could be the culprit. Granted, all of this is just speculatory at the moment, but it seems that some users have noticed that their fans aren’t kicking into high gear when they should. ‘Course, some folks have seen those RPMs spin up while the funky lines and psychedelic colors remain, so it’s still hard to pinpoint a definite root cause. We’re told that folks from NVIDIA and Apple are spending their weekends working to figure it out, but we can’t help but be reminded of an eerily similar string of events with overheating MacBook Airs just last year. Hopefully a fix will be out soon; till then, just pretend those erratic colors are some new curative feature.

Read – Fan grumbling
Read – More discussions

Filed under:

17-inch MBP fan / overheating issues causing GeForce 9600M to bug out? originally appeared on Engadget on Sun, 08 Mar 2009 18:41:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

iMac 2009 Review

Apple may seem different than other companies, but the recession is kicking their ass too. The move they made with the new iMac was the smartest they could make under the circumstances—it’s a great deal.

In this new iMac release, Apple didn’t invest in a radical new design. That sort of thing doesn’t go over in an economic downturn. The case is identical to all other iMacs since August 2007, down to the brushed aluminum body and the occasionally annoying high-gloss screen. What Apple did instead—something they won’t let you forget—is drop the price of the 24″ iMac from $1800 to $1500 while spiking the performance.

The baseline chip used to be a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo; now it’s a 2.66GHz, with the Nvidia GeForce 9400M integrated graphics now found in almost every other Apple product. iMacs used to come standard with 2GB of RAM, now there’s 4GB in the entry-level 24 incher that I tested, along with a 640GB 3.5″ hard drive.

The 20″ iMac is cheaper at $1200, but doesn’t carry as much value: It comes standard with only 2GB of RAM and a 320GB hard drive. You’d really need to up the RAM to 4GB, so that brings the bill to $1300. At that point, you’re just $75 away from doubling the internal hard-drive capacity. Now, at $1375, you’re a stone’s throw from the other system, the $1500 iMac with its noticeably larger screen—a screen that, mind you, Apple asks $900 for when sold a la carte. (I reviewed with the iMac side-by-side with the 24″ Cinema Display; they’re essentially identical even though iMac is CCFL while the Cinema Display is LED.)

The $1500 model really sits in the sweet spot. Stepping up beyond that may not make much sense either. Apple charges $1000-a thousand dollars!—to swap 4GB of RAM for 8GB. The good news there is that there’s an easy-access RAM-swap hatch, so Apple is almost encouraging you not to buy the extra RAM now, but to upgrade on the open market later when prices drop to sane levels. You can swing a 1TB hard drive for $100 more. However, if you save the $100, you keep the 640GB internal, and have the money for most of a 1TB external too.

People who are serious about gaming or video work do have higher-end iMac choices. There’s a 2.93GHz system for $1800, and you can jump to 3.06GHz for $150 more than that. At those levels, you also get dedicated graphics processors: There’s the basic Nvidia GeForce GT 120 256MB, then the $150-more GeForce GT 130 with 512MB. Another $50 on top of that gets you the ATI Radeon HD 4850 with 512MB. Those choices are good if you know what you’re looking for because, as the good people of iFixit found out, the iMac is not built for the average user to upgrade anything but RAM. Still, for most people—for most uses including anything less than serious gaming—it doesn’t make sense to buy above the $1500 2.66MHz iMac, especially given the performance I’ve seen.

And what have I seen? Well, you can see from these benchmark charts (which I also ran in the Mac Mini review) that the new iMac stays on top the whole time, through batteries of tests, when compared to both the Mac Mini and the far more expensive MacBook Pro (using the same graphics chipset):

Xbench test results

Geekbench test results

In real world testing, I made further discoveries of the iMac’s pre-eminence among its Mac peers. Ripping a 26-track CD in iTunes took just 3 minutes and 50 seconds on the iMac, while it took nearly 10 minutes (OK, 9:45) on the Mini with 2GB of RAM.

Playing Quake 4 with framerate counter turned on also revealed hidden power. While the Mac Mini kept up with the action and detail by dropping frames—45fps average, down to 20fps during heavy fighting—the iMac mostly maintained a smooth 60fps, dipping into the 50s when things got rough.

No matter what your level of PC knowledge is, you realize that there are faster, beefier desktop systems. Apple itself has the $2500-and-up Mac Pro (with similar graphics card options and much more serious core processors), and if you really know what you’re doing, you can build or customize your own system anyway. In the Windows world, the options are almost limitless. Because of all of those other options, the number of people who will be ordering up an iMac for over $1800 will probably be small.

It also makes buying a Mini—and the necessary peripherals—less justifiable. The message, heard loud and clear in this time of financial strife, is that $1500 will get you a system that would have cost well over $2000 not long ago, and that spending less than that will mean compromises that might not hold you over for long enough. I know some of you think $1500 is too much money for a computer, and I can respect that. But for people with the right kind of budget, the new entry-level 24″ iMac is a smart buy. [Product Page]

In Summary
Low-end specifications have been notably boosted

Price has decreased—$300 per configuration—in spite of performance bumps

Very difficult to upgrade by hand, except for adding RAM

The included keyboard is trimmed down to its barest key set, but you can ask for one with a number pad at no extra cost

$1500 for the 24″ might still be considered pricey by some potential buyers, and the $1200 model doesn’t present as much value

Screen glare can be annoying, and the screen and back are easily smudged (see gallery)

NVIDIA’s GeForce 9600M causing issues in 17-inch MacBook Pro?

It’s hard to say at this point whether we should point the blame at NVIDIA, Apple or right in between the two corporate campuses, but it seems that an uncomfortable amount of 17-inch MacBook Pro owners are having some serious issues with their GeForce 9600M graphics card. For those unaware, there is actually a 9400M in there too, but word on the street has it that the random green lines and nasty artifacts are only showing up when the more potent card is kicked into action. Most folks are saying that a reboot solves the problem momentarily, but eventually it returns to bother, annoy and sadden new owners. Anyone else out there pulling their hair out over this? Here’s hoping a firmware update is all that’ll be needed to bring closure to yet another NVIDIA-Apple related fiasco.

[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]

Filed under:

NVIDIA’s GeForce 9600M causing issues in 17-inch MacBook Pro? originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 05 Mar 2009 21:48:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Mac Mini 2009 Review

The Mac Mini is the greatest Mac that never was, always just a little too expensive and/or a little too underfeatured to be perfect. This time it’s closer than ever to perfection—but still falls short.

Sure, a $500 price tag would be great. But if we can’t get that, can’t we at least get an HDMI output? Dell, Acer and others now sell teeny desktops with HDMI outputs—some even have Blu-ray players. It’s pretty much the right thing to do at this time, but Apple’s not doing it. That’s not surprising: Apple is slower to adopt popular PC standards such as USB 2.0, the CD burner, and that Blu-ray drive. And the company itself is adamant that the Mini is seen as a desktop machine, not an entertainment PC. Some people believe Apple keeps HDMI out of the Mini to protect the HDMI-laden Apple TV. If true, it’s sad, because Apple TV just isn’t good enough to protect with the life of another product.

We can all agree that it’s nice to have a reasonably affordable Mac out there in the universe, and most of us can agree with Apple’s decision not to redesign the outer shell of the thing—it’s still attractively simple. But I want a Mac Mini in my living room, and I want it connected to a 50″ flat panel TV. With one cable. Why is that wrong?

The good news is, the new Mac Mini is a worthy little beast. In spite of its seemingly wimpy 2.0GHz dual-core processor, it keeps up with most of the basic stuff you can throw at it. The internal redesign of the Mac Mini is really about coupling that Core 2 Duo with Nvidia integrated graphics, and I have to say, it seems like that worked out nicely. It’s the same GeForce 9400M chipset we see in the MacBook, the MacBook Pro and, not coincidentally, the new iMac, and when it comes to rendering 1080p movies and playing a little Quake 4 on a 24″ monitor, it gets the job done.

It gets the job done when there’s enough RAM, that is. That extra 1GB stick actually doubles the 9400M’s shared memory from 128MB to 256MB, and when you’re playing games, you’ll notice that in the textures and motion smoothness. It’s hard to tell from the shots below, but textures appearing in Quake 4 on the 2GB Mini were much closer to those on the new iMac, which is far more powerful with a 2.66GHz dual-core processor and 4GB of RAM.

Quake 4 Demo
Mac Mini with 1GB of RAM vs 2009 iMac



Mac Mini with 2GB of RAM vs 2009 iMac


Nobody is going to use the Mini as their primary gaming machine—as you can see in my Xbench and Geekbench testing, the two Mini configs always trailed more expensive Mac systems, and in many tests fared the same or worse than their predecessors—but between the Core 2 Duo and the 9400M graphics, it’s a solid computer.

Xbench test results


Geekbench test results


The better news is, there’s no good reason to buy the more expensive $800 one. The $600 config comes with the same processor and DVD burner. As I insinuated, you should up the RAM to 2GB for $50 extra, but even then, your total shouldn’t exceed $650. Unfortunately, judging by this teardown and a chat I had with Apple, they intentionally made it hard for people to upgrade it themselves.

At that point, all the $800 model has going for it is a 320GB hard drive, and nobody pays $150 for a paltry 160GB of bonus storage. Going from a 160GB drive to a 320GB drive is like going from 40mph to 50mph on a 65mph interstate. Go get an external drive—it just now took me four seconds to spot this 1TB Iomega Prestige external drive on Amazon for $117! That Mini only has five freakin’ USB 2.0 jacks—let’s don’t be afraid to tie up one or two.

My feelings on the Mini end somewhat mixed. It’s now powerful enough to be a nice iPod-syncable movie ripper/server with the Front Row experience I can control from the couch. I can still set this up without spraining my brain, but there would be lots of compromises.

For instance, it would either take a cheap Y-cable for analog stereo out, or a Toslink-to-mini optical cable ($2.24 at Monoprice) that could connect to a receiver for surround sound. It would also take a video adapter of some kind. Many TVs have DVI or VGA inputs, and all now have HDMI inputs, so there are plenty of adapters you can get. There’s a Mini DVI-to-HDMI adapter ($9.88 at Monoprice), or an even snazzier Mini DisplayPort-to-HDMI plug, which Monoprice will sell for $14.25 sometime around March 15.

But you see where I’m going here, right? No matter how awesome Monoprice is when it comes to cables and adapters and crap, this is all spaghetti the Mini shouldn’t need. Apple: Where’s the flippin’ HDMI? You put not one but two video outputs on this thing, and yet I still need an adapter to plug it into anything but a $900 Apple monitor. Yes, thanks for including that Mini DVI to DVI adapter in the box, but I’m pretty sure that just proves my point. [Product Page]

In Summary
It’s nice and compact, just like its externally identical predecessors

The Nvidia GeForce 9400M integrated graphics do appear to make everything faster and smoother

Very difficult to upgrade by hand, but at least there’s a cheap RAM upgrade

No HDMI means it can’t be a great home-theater PC

Needs video adapters for most monitor or TV connection

MacBook Pro 17-inch unibody review

There’s not much that can be said about the 17-inch version of the MacBook Pro that hasn’t already been said about the 15-incher (and to some extent, the MacBook). Still, the big, big brother of the family has a few key differences that make it stand out from the rest of the gang. The first being its non-removable battery, built out of tech which Apple claims will result in groundbreaking lengths between charges. The second difference, available only as an option, is a non-glossy display — an addition which many have pined for since Apple’s full throttle decision to move to extremely high-glare screens. Are these changes compelling enough to induce users to upgrade? Will previous 17-inch fans find a slam dunk or a dud underneath the unibody exterior? Read on for the full scoop.

Continue reading MacBook Pro 17-inch unibody review

Filed under:

MacBook Pro 17-inch unibody review originally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 04 Mar 2009 17:42:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Apple MacBook Pro 15-inchers get quiet CPU spec bump

While poring over the metric ton of PR this morning, we didn’t immediately notice that Apple has turned up the juice ever-so-slightly on MacBook Pro 15-inch models. Instead of coughing up a CPU bump from 2.4GHz to 2.53GHz, the company now offers an upgrade path to 2.66GHz and the 17-inchtastic 2.93GHz, which should ensure your lap is ruined for ever and ever. Any other surprises Apple?

Filed under:

Apple MacBook Pro 15-inchers get quiet CPU spec bump originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:53:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Haiku Review: Apple MacBook Pro 17-inch (Unibody)

Mac%20Pro%2017-inch.jpg

Apple’s iconic
seamless aluminum frame
just got supersized.

Tony Hoffman

For the full-length, free-verse Apple MacBook Pro 17-inch (Unibody) review check out PCMag.com.

The 17-Inch MacBook Pro Review

While Apple grandly updated their notebook line to the new unibody design, the 17-inch MacBook Pro, Apple’s granddaddy of mobile computing, was left behind. Now, the 17-inch model joins its siblings—with promising bonus features.

Design

With nothing to scale this image, it’s nearly impossible to tell the new 17-inch MBP from the 13- or 15-inch unibody macs. From the outside, it’s the same thing, only bigger. At first it’s a little intimidating to see such a large, unadorned block of metal. But at 6.6 lbs, it’s actually not as heavy in your hands as you’d expect. And at .98-inches in stature, it’s only ever so slightly thicker (.03 inches) than the other two MacBooks.

Apple will tell you that the MBP17 is the thinnest, lightest 17-inch notebook in the world. We’ll tell you that for a monster of a laptop, it manages to not be too monstrous. The 17-inch (1920×1200) screen is a sharp, contrasty and colorful panorama, but it’s the little touches that make the MBP17 manageable: The system’s near-silent operation (using a 256GB SSD instead of a hard drive) is almost unnerving. Its underside gets warm, but never hot. And the unibody design makes particularly good sense in this larger size, as the wide chassis does not flex to your grip as you might expect.

The battery is one of the only components that’s significantly different than that of the smaller machines. Striving for 8-hours of battery life the newly designed power pack screws right into the chassis. (Lots more on that topic below.)

What’s missing, however, is the underside hatch that made for easy hard drive and battery replacement. This smart design feature, recently introduced in Apple’s 13- and 15-inch unibody laptops, has been replaced by a series of screws to remove the bottom panel, and another series of screws to remove the battery. Removing a few screws is by no means a horrendous exercise, but we can’t help but feel that it’s a step in the wrong direction. The most spend-happy pro users will be the most likely to crack the lid of their laptops—so this design choice will likely annoy a key part of the MBP17’s target audience.

What’s Different About It?

Compared to the MBP15

• Supports 8GB of RAM; the MBP15 only supports 4GB

• Includes a 256GB SSD option; the MBP15 only a 128GB

• The MBP17 includes five speakers with a wider frequency response

• There’s one extra USB port (3 total)

• Slightly faster processor options

(note: shot comparison of 13-inch model)

Compared to the old 17-inch MBP

• 40% larger battery (95WH vs. 68WH)

• Glossy and matte screen options are now available

• The screen has equal resolution, but a 60% wider color gamut

• Unibody structure, of course

Performance

The MBP17 features a 2.66 or 2.93GHz processor, up to 8GB of RAM and dual Nvidia 9400M (integrated) and 9600 (discrete) graphics cards. A 320GB 5400RPM hard drive comes standard, but that can be upgraded to a 320GB 7200RPM drive or a 128GB/256GB solid-state drive. (Note: There’s no option for a 500GB hard drive, though they are readily available if you want to swap one in.)

The model we tested was fully loaded, with a 2.93GHz processor, 8GB RAM and 256GB SSD.

Still, because the MBP17 is so similar to the 15 internally, we’re going to point you in the direction of our last review for benchmarks on the dual Nvidia 9400M and 9600 graphics cards. We also ran Xbench and uploaded the predictably impressive results to their database. However, one feature we wanted to be sure to check out was the new 256GB SSD option, a drive made by Toshiba. It’s a $750 upgrade that we were able to test in our review model.

SSD Speed Benchmarks:

Against the stock drive that comes with MBPs, the speed gains are obvious. However, the SSD market is still very young. There are only a handful of drives out there, so how do you know if Apple’s $750 offering is price competitive?

Searching through the XBench results forums, we found a user who tested out a G. Skill Titan 256GB SSD on a unibody mac. It’s not rated to be as fast as Samsung’s $1000 SSD gold standard, but according to these benchmarks, it’s still considerably faster than the drive Apple will sell you. The catch? The Titan runs $500, or $250 less than Apple’s bundled Toshiba. In other words, as with most upgrades, you’re still better off going through a third party for your SSD.

The other bonus to SSDs is how quickly they boot. From the picture, you can see that our MBP17 booted in 31 seconds, despite me having a few hundred icons on the desktop. The MBP15 (normal hard drive, 4GB RAM) took about 90 seconds to load a similar configuration, or “three times longer” in marketing speak.

Battery Life

Everything so far about the new MBP17 is all well and good, but we think there’s one claim in particular that’s going to interest consumers the most: A 7-8 hour battery life*.

*Assuming screen at half brightness, Wi-Fi on, light browsing, light word processing (so no Bluetooth but otherwise a standard configuration). 8 hours on integrated graphics, 7 hours with more beefy discrete GPU.

Indeed, the MBP17’s battery is huge. It takes up roughly the whole bottom half of the computer’s underside. To make the battery as big as possible, Apple removed even the battery’s removal mechanism. Apple’s lithium polymer pack screws in and promises a shelf life of 1000 complete charges—which also means 2000 half recharges or 4000 quarter recharges—before the battery depletes to 80% capacity.

And while we didn’t have the time to test Apple’s 1000 recharge claim, we were able to run some battery tests.

First we put the system up against a day of blogging. This test was admittedly harder than Apple’s cushy benchmarking, but I wanted to see how it would stand up to true pro use. So with the screen just a hair above half brightness, Wi-Fi on, Bluetooth off, backlit keyboard on, discrete graphics on, heavy web browsing and occasional Photoshop work, we achieved 3 hours 57 minutes of run time.

Should we be pissed? After all, Apple offers 7-8 hours in their ads! That’s your call. In truth, we’ve found that most laptops hit about half their rated battery life under real world conditions (cough, netbooks, cough). If we can only cover our ears and hum through Apple’s latest marketing campaign, we’re actually fairly pleased with about 4 hours of heavy use from a fully loaded 17-inch laptop—especially since that metric includes no real compromises to our workflow.

We also wanted to simulate watching a movie on the plane. So we played back an MPEG4 with the screen at half brightness, discrete graphics off, backlit keyboard off, Wi-Fi off, Bluetooth off and headphones in. We received 4 hours 39 minutes of run time. That’s nearly two hours longer* than we received from the MBP15, and 2 hours 30 minutes longer than we received from the MB13. That’s basically the difference between watching one movie and watching two.

*The previous MBP tests had Wi-Fi on, the backlit keyboard on and speakers on. These alterations should account for a small amount of the increase, but my no means a majority. The 17-inch unit also has an SSD, but these non-spinning drives don’t necessarily mean power savings.

For the Lazy Readers Needing a Summary

A 17-inch notebook has never been designed for the mainstream consumer. But then again, nothing about this MacBook Pro is aiming for the mainstream. It’s a laptop that starts at $2800, and our fully loaded test model runs a hair over $5,000. Its screen is as big as most CRT monitors from just a few years back.

The thing should feel like a beast on the couch, but it actually doesn’t. It’s almost frightening how quickly you adjust, appreciating the extra screen space while disregarding that this system is supposed to be a “laptop” in name only.

If you can get over the purported 8 hours of battery life and settle for longevity around half that number, you’ll be welcomed with a laptop that feels like a desktop but is actually a laptop. It’s a Cadillac that you can just about park, a triple cheeseburger in the bun of a double, a stocky man in a well-tailored suit. And we’re liking it. We just can’t help but ask, why can’t Apple fit a 256GB SSD or 8GB of RAM—or even a 4+ hour battery—into a 15-inch MBP?



It’s a big honking computer in a smallish package



As with the other unibody systems, the MBP17 runs cooler and quieter than past MacBooks



Battery life is reasonable, but will fall short for pro users looking for a true day of use



Apple’s Toshiba SSD upgrade is pricey for its performance



There’s no easy pop-off bottom panel like in other unibody models

External Sources [ifixit, Xbench]

Apple MBP 17-inch Unibody: Benchmarked and Thoughts

17 and 15-inch MBPs.JPG

The Unibody 17-inch MBP completes the circle of Apple laptops that received the new aluminum enclosure. The design is absolutely gorgeous, and with all the additions, including a huge battery and twin graphics chipsets, Apple still kept it feathery light; it’s the lightest laptop in its class. The big story here, though, is the battery, as it is now a non-removable one. Despite the initial shock, what Apple did actually worked in its favor. The original 68WH battery is now 40% bigger, now at 95WH. Without benchmarking the system, you already know that battery life is bound to improve.

See how the battery scored after the jump.