Ableton Forum

Hi Guys

Has anyone used ableton on the new i7 13" Macbook pro, and what sort of performance did you get with and without an Audio Interface?

I'm pretty well decided on the 13" for portability, but I'd rather make sure I do the research first

i have the core I5 2,3 ghz 13" macbook pro (entry level)
i'm more than happy with it , it's as powerful as my PC desktop with a Q6600 quadcore 2,4 CPU (yes it's older, but still very capable)
In my humble opinion, it's more than powerful enough for my needs (electronic music production, techno/electro/)
the CPU never go beyond 50% (lot of tracks, virtual synths like Dcam, Reaktor.etc..)
on my previous core 2 duo 2,4 macbook pro , i was reaching the limit, not anymore...

With the live 8 performance test i get 35% with the internal soundcard and 27% as soon as i plug one of my external soundcard (NI audio 2 DJ and mackie blackjack= same results)
i've read the I7 does something like 23% at the same test, not so much difference between the I5 and I7 models.
My previous 15" unibody macbook pro (core 2 duo) = 49% at the same test..

i hope it helps ?

cheers

yeah that's excellent news

Cheers

i haven't done any performance tests, but i believe i have the most recent mac book pro 13 inch...and it runs very smoothly. Opening a set with a lot of samples is sometimes laggy, but I just wait it out for a minute or so then its good to go.

No problems.

If you can help me figure out how to set up my mixer please let me know lol.

apc40 and mpk mini both run perfect, no problems

The new MacBook air runs even faster

Rave wrote:The new MacBook air runs even faster

Now why is that? It's one thing I've heard mentioned now & then but don't quite understand.

The top Macbook Air is 1.8Ghz compared to the base model MBP 2.3Ghz. And you could configure them both to have the same i5 or i7 processor so that shouldn't make a difference.

I know the SSD in the air makes it feel snappier. And I see there's a small difference the MBP has 3MB cache where the air has 4MB. But but for processing audio & plugins in real time doesn't it all still boil down to the clock speed?

MBA is more aerodynmic - maybe thats why

Sure the 2.3Ghz CPU in my MBP17 seem faster than by 2.2Ghz CPU by a margin that clock speed alone cannot possibly justify - must be larger cache I guess, but I really cant see any way the 1.8Ghz option CPU in the MBA could be faster.

Khazul wrote: but I really cant see any way the 1.8Ghz option CPU in the MBA could be faster.

+1

bump
more on macbook air adventures.........whos got the i7 version?

I,m used to working on a 15inch screen but am curious if a 13 inch screen is big enoug for serious producing and editing?

[quote="commuter"]i have the core I5 2,3 ghz 13" macbook pro (entry level)
i'm more than happy with it , it's as powerful as my PC desktop with a Q6600 quadcore 2,4 CPU (yes it's older, but still very capable)
In my humble opinion, it's more than powerful enough for my needs (electronic music production, techno/electro/)
the CPU never go beyond 50% (lot of tracks, virtual synths like Dcam, Reaktor.etc..)
on my previous core 2 duo 2,4 macbook pro , i was reaching the limit, not anymore...

With the live 8 performance test i get 35% with the internal soundcard and 27% as soon as i plug one of my external soundcard (NI audio 2 DJ and mackie blackjack= same results)
i've read the I7 does something like 23% at the same test, not so much difference between the I5 and I7 models.
My previous 15" unibody macbook pro (core 2 duo) = 49% at the same test..

i hope it helps ?

cheers

you have exactly the same as I bro. Quad core Q6600 2.4 cpu pc desktop and entry level MBP pro. The MBP is amazing eh. simply booting up Ableton is faster. Like you i still use my desktop for big screen production and laptop for playing out. perfect!

for the question on the screen size, I will say working on a 13" notebook by itself is cumbersome. It is NICE for when you are on the go and like to whip it out in a coffeeshop and make some beats. I ended up for my home studio is just grabbing a monitor hookup and running it through a 22" LCD. Makes things way easier when you arent on the go...yet maintains the original idea of being portable when you want to be.

Khazul wrote:MBA is more aerodynmic - maybe thats why

Sure the 2.3Ghz CPU in my MBP17 seem faster than by 2.2Ghz CPU by a margin that clock speed alone cannot possibly justify - must be larger cache I guess, but I really cant see any way the 1.8Ghz option CPU in the MBA could be faster.

One of my mates put an ssd drive in his old mac and he says it flies and its not a very high spec cpu either

skatr2 wrote:for the question on the screen size, running it through a 22" LCD. Makes things way easier when you arent on the go...yet maintains the original idea of being portable when you want to be.

I'm planning to hook it up to my 28" monitor for home use.

IMO 28 would be to the point where its too cumbersome to look at, without sitting a fair distance away from the screen. Even on a 22" screen I have to crank the view up to 110% to make 16 tracks and 4 sends fit well and be easily readable. Just some food for thought on monitor size. You want to still have all of it in your gaze and limit too many unnecessary head movements.