Tested: The $1500 Dell XPS 15 vs. the $1500 MacBook Pro 13 - abrahamtopas1947

The fans receive spoken. It wasn't enough last year for me to compare Microsoft's Surface Leger to Apple's MacBook Pro 13. Silly Pine Tree State, I patterned a dual-heart 13-inch laptop computer should get rising against a duple-marrow 13-inch laptop. But nooooo, fans cried: For this to be a "fair fight," I should have honeycombed the Surface Book against a MacBook Pro 15.

Unremarkably, comparison the 4.5-pound, 15-edge, quad-core MacBook Pro 15 to the 3.3-hammering, 13-inch, dual-nub Surface Book would be just the sort of Apple-to-orange mismatch I'd ne'er consider. But the fans argued the price was the thing—comparing a loaded-finished, $2,699 Surface Book to a top-of-the-line, $2,700 MacBook Pro 15 was "really fair."

Well Hunky-dory then, fans: You privation it, you got information technology. Let's ignore form factor and focus on price and performance, and go steady what happens.

Unfortunately, I don't have a circulating MacBook In favou 15 to bear against a Surface Book, so I decided to coiffe the next best thing: Put over a $1,500 Dell XPS 15 (config here in Dell's salt away) up against a $1,500 MacBook In favor of 13 (here's the config in the Apple store).

Lapp terms. Saami everything? Barely. Read on to see impartial what you get for the money.

Malus pumila

The 2022 MacBook Pro 13 packs Intel's last gen Broadwell CPU with Iris Pro art.

The dual-core contender: MacBook Pro 13

The MacBook Pro 13 in use for this showdown is the current 2022 model with a dual-core Core i5-5257U, 8GB of LPDDR3/1866 and 256GB PCIe drive. Even though information technology rolls Intel's 5th-gen (Broadwell) CPU, I didn't pick this architecture to put option the Mac at a disadvantage. The simple fact is Apple only just put KO'd its get-go laptop with Intel's live Skylake Central processor, and that 12-inch MacBook has no business in this fight.

That aside, the MacBook Pro 13's design boasts a beautiful screen, a very good keyboard and "force" trackpad. IT's pretty much what you expect of a premium product at a premium price. There's no discrete graphics inside the MacBook Pro 13, but it does backpack Intel's Iris Pro 6100. All told, this laptop sells for $1,500 as of this writing.

Gordon Mah Ung

The XPS 15 packs a quad-core Skylake chip with a GeForce GTX 960m inside.

The quad-core contender: Dell XPS 15

Dell's latest-generation XPS 15 gets the "infinity bezel" discussion along its riddle. It has a quad-core Core i7-67700HQ, 8GB of DDR4/2133 RAM, GeForce GTX 960m, and a 256GB PCIe NVMe SSD. Information technology doesn't feel quite a as solid arsenic the MacBook Pro does, but it has the right way build quality with a decent trackpad. The screen connected this particular unit is a 1920×1080 IPS with an anti-glower finish. It's OK, but clearly the MacBook Pro 13's screen has more pizzazz with its high pixel density and glossy fetch up.

Dell offers the same laptop computer with multiple configurations, but this one is probably the best bang for buck. At $1,500 you get a PCIe SSD, while lower-priced configurations use hard drives. That's a deal-breaker for many—or at least, IT should be. You could get a 4K UltraHD touchscreen and larger SSD, but they'd add significantly to the cost.

The best bang for 1,500 bucks

Because the original centerin of my Surface Book vs. MacBook Pro story was functioning, I'm not going to compare ports or cover and speaker prize. This is about how much bang for the jerk you're acquiring for $1,500. This "pro" class, subsequently completely, is about people who really need all the CPU and GPU performance they can puzzle over in a laptop that English hawthorn be their each day driver.

Gordon Mah Ung

The MacBook Pro 13 packs more picture ports than the Dingle XPS 15, just it lacks a modern USB Type C / Thunderclap 3 port.

Geekbench Pro 3 Multi-Core Performance

The Geekbench Pro 3 test actually originated on the Macintosh merely has since been ported to Android, iOS and Windows. I'm non totally sold on its use A a crossbreeding-platform comparability test and, in fact, information technology's quite controversial. But when you're comparing the same CPU computer architecture on OSX and Windows it seems less exposed to the yelling matches that break out over the validness of what it tests and how it applies to actual computer science.

Here's the result from the Multi-Nub test: At that place are clock speeding differences between the threefold-core Broadwell in the MacBook Pro 13 and the Skylake splintering in the Dell XPS 15, but we tooshie see the nice grading between cardinal cores and four cores here.

Geekbench Pro 3 shows that having much cores is better.

Cinebench R15 performance

Cinebench R15 is a popular rendering benchmark that got its set about along the Amiga. It's a "real-earthly concern" test in that the same locomotive engine is used on Maxon's Movie theatre 4D intersection. The free CPU bench mark tests a PC's performance at rendering a single scene, and it loves CPU cores. Throw more at IT, and you beget a higher grudge.

No surprise: Like Geekbench, the scaling favors the musculus quadriceps femoris-core in the XPS 15 over the threefold-core in the MacBook In favou 13.

Maxon's Cinebench R15 also shows the quadrangle-core crushing the dual-sum.

Blender Performance

Finding cross-political program OSX and Windows tests can be difficult, only a convenient 1 is the open-germ Liquidizer try out. IT's a popular free 3D app that's been used to produce the effects in many independent films. For this test I downloaded the 2.77a version of Blender and ran Mike Pan's BMW benchmark file happening both laptops. Liquidiser allows you to use the CPU to render a scene or opt for quicker GPU rendering too. I tested some.

The CPU lateral is newsworthy: The Dell XPS 15 is still faster by a good clip, but we're eyesight far inferior scaling going from the XPS 15 to the MacBook Favoring 13. So for folks victimisation Blender, pursuing more cores may not give in the performance you expect.

Going to the GPU, though, you can see a Brobdingnagian performance benefit, arsenic the GeForce GTX 960m in the Dell eats the lunches of some the Intel quad-essence and and dual-core chips. When I tried to run it on the Macbook Pro 13's Flag Pro 6100 graphics, it bombed out. Perchance tinkering with it could have helped, but looking over the Blender results at Blenchmark.com, I'm not seeing any submitted results from an Intel IGP. That tells me this cardinal tryout may be beyond the capability of Intel's graphics.

Either way of life, the Dingle XPS 15 again destroys the MacBook In favou 13.

Running the open source renderer Blender shows the big advantage of the GeForce GTX 960m. Intel's integrated graphics couldn't even run the test on default settings.

Cinebench OpenGL Performance

As you fire see from Blender, the world International Relations and Security Network't meet about the CPU. To drive place that stop I also ran the OpenGL benchmark in Cinebench. The results are quite predictable: While the Dingle XPS 15 power offer twice the CPU carrying into action of the MacBook Pro 13, its GPU carrying out is three multiplication the MacBook's. Yes, we are talking close to distinct GeForce GTX 960m with 2GB of GDDR5 vs. integrated artwork, only those are the cards we're dealt.

And nobelium, Apple doesn't actually offer the MacBook Pro 13 with discrete artwork. It's available but connected pricier versions of the MacBook Pro 15.

Cinebench R15 includes an OpenGL rendition test, which favors discrete graphics.

Tomb Raider Execution

The second graphics benchmark I ran was the brave Tomb Raider. In this brave, information technology's even more of a beat-lowered. The MacBook Pro 13 ISN't really ambitious the minimum criterional of 60 fps even with rattling low-aspiration graphics settings: We're talking 1280×800 resolution at Normal, and the MacBook Pro 13 at sub-30 fps. Not good. The takeout: GeForce GTX 960m > Iris Pro 6100, and XPS 15 > MacBook Pro 13.

Intel's Iris Pro graphics has get along a long right smart, but IT still can't beat a nifty separate GPU.

Battery Performance

For the almost part, any logical person can witness the Dell XPS 15 pounded the MacBook In favour of 13 risen and down the field in anything performance-related. The same sphere I expected this to flip roughly was battery life. To examine that, we take on a 4K video using iTunes on the Mac and Windows 10 Movies & TV player on the PC, with the brightness set to 250 to 260 nits and earbuds connected.

Here's where all that computer hardware in the Dell XPS 15 takes its cost. The MacBook Pro 13 has a huge advantage in endure time, some of that from Apple's having packed as much battery capacitance into the laptop as possible. The MacBook In favor of 13 runs a 76-watt-time of day cell, compared to the Dingle XPS 15's 56-watt-hour battery.

Dell does offer a larger capacity 84-watt-hour battery. That's basically 50 per centum more battery electrical capacity, which would probably translate into a perhaps 480 minutes' run time in our test. That's better, just still short of the MacBook Affirmative 13's scarper time.

Dell supporters might also contend that you could extend an external battery pack, which would likely take the XPS 15 recent the MacBook In favou 13. Don't go there. The larger battery International Relations and Security Network't available on the lower cost XPS 15 configurations, and that outer battery pack is more stuff to carry around and a $120 option. In the end, the MacBook Pro 13 wins the battery run along-down test hands down. Suck information technology ascending XPS 15 fans: You already cleansed the Mac's clock everywhere else. You can permit this one go.

The XPS 15 may kick the MacBook Pro 13's butt up and down the area in anything functioning related, but battery life sentence takes distant a punt seat.

Determination

Just in case the various benchmarks I retributory ran you through Don't win over you, I'll sum it for you: the $1,500 Dell XPS 15 destroyed the $1,500 MacBook Pro 13 in everything performance related with its one Achilles heel being just ho-hum assault and battery life.

This shouldn't come as a surprisal to you. A quad-pith, is expiration to be faster than a two-fold-meat in anything that uses those cores. And a discrete GPU of whatever competency smokes integrated nontextual matter such, IT's contraband in the state of California.

Were these results unexpected? Non from Maine. This dump is well-stacked.

The upshot is that yes, that $2,700 heavier, large MacBook Pro 15 would take over indeed mercilessly stick a Surface Book silly in performance-related tasks. The same tilt cuts the other direction: a $1,500 Dingle XPS 15 whips the snot out of a $1,500 MacBook Pro 13, which we just proved.

So maybe, just maybe, that comparability between the Surface Book and MacBook Pro from last year was the right way to run this confrontation.

Source: https://www.pcworld.com/article/414610/tested-the-1500-dell-xps-15-vs-the-1500-macbook-pro-13.html

Posted by: abrahamtopas1947.blogspot.com

Share this post