Before Tuesday, there was no way a MacBook and a MacBook Pro could appear in a single review. Too much separated the two systems, from outer appearance (build materials and backlit keyboard) to inner nitty gritty (graphics processors, etc.). To group the two classes together would have been like simultaneously reviewing a Ford Focus and a Ford Mustang. But the new MacBook and MacBook Pro are far more similar than they are different. From the glass-bezel screen to the front side bus, these computers finally deserve to share the name MacBook. They're brothers, one a pro, the other a vastly accomplished amateur. Here's our verdict, after two days of thorough nonstop testing.

Build

Stylistically, distinguishing the new MacBook from the MacBook Pro is nearly impossible. They are both cut from a single piece of aluminum in what looks to be an identical manner, save for the MB obviously being smaller.

This new "unibody construction" process does make for a more solid laptop, too. The chassis is one piece, made stronger by its lack of connecting corners—and less prone to manufacturing flaws, according to Apple.

The case is indeed more rigid, flexing less while carrying the notebook one-handed and supporting our wrists better during typing. (The old MBP supported wrists just fine as well, but only because the weight was distributed from the case to the hard drive and optical drive. Carrying it would cause it to give a bit.)

Side beveling distinguishes the laptops as part of the MacBook Air generation, ditching the clean box design of yesteryear. But unibody construction has updated the design in subtle ways, recessing the keyboard through a formerly impossible non-welded aluminum curve—and a similar rounded chunk has been cut from the front of the system to make for easy opening.

When you open the new MacBooks, be careful not to smudge your iSight lens. It's positioned right where your fingers go—and ours is now covered with grease. In fact, the entire black gloss surrounding the screen is in pretty poor shape. Closing the computers is vastly improved, however. Instead of the bang of plastic and click of the hook lock, it's a gentle impact, soft like felt, held closed by invisible magnets. Setting down the laptop is more pleasant as well, as both the MB and MBP feature the Air's larger rubber pads.

Unfortunately, the new aluminum build still interferes with Wi-Fi signals. Historically aluminum laptops have had shorter ranges than their plastic counterparts and the new MacBooks are no exception. Stretching the limits of the new MacBook, the old MacBook (above left) located hotspots where the new MacBook (above right) did not. That's not to say the metal laptops are particularly bad and there's no indication that they're worse than current MacBook Pros.

The MB is half a pound lighter than its predecessor, and that's a weight difference you'll notice. It's significantly thinner, too, shaving off 0.13 inches, while retaining the same footprint. The MBP, however, is 0.2 inches wider and longer than its predecessor, while only losing a minor 0.05 inches of thickness. It is also 0.1 pounds heavier. (You can read more about these differences in our Sizemodo.) These adjustments help unify the design: Both new MacBooks share a thickness of 0.95 inches, which appears all the thinner due to the design's narrowed edges.

To many MacBook users, the greatest change will be the updated, clickable Multi-Touch trackpad. It's said to be made of glass, but it doesn't look or feel like glass, so don't expect the iPhone's screen to be transplanted below the keyboard. It feels almost the same as the old MBP trackpad, and the finish offers a perfect level of resistance, allowing the finger to slide around easily but not in a skating-on-ice kind of way. As for the clicking, it's the source of mixed feelings for us.

The base of this controversy is that the entire pad doesn't click. Instead, the surface sort of pivots like a springboard from the top edge. In turn, users will find the bottom part of the pad to have the most give when clicking, so much so that it almost feels like the old trackpad button is still there. Unfortunately, the springboard design also causes a dead zone in the middle where clicking takes a good deal of effort.

From a design perspective, the clicking allows the trackpad to be sleeker. The joke is that Jobs, long a proponent of single-button mice when most people favor two, has finally gone to zero buttons. From a usage perspective, not much changes. You can drag and drop with one finger by firmly pressing as you move, but there's a better chance you'll still use two fingers like you did with the old trackpad.

The new four-finger gestures, like sliding down for Exposé or sliding right to swap programs, are a win, but it can be awkward to make that four-finger claw while typing. We'd argue that Exposé is such a useful function that we'd like to reassign it to a less awkward three-finger slide, perhaps. Unfortunately, remapping gestures is not an option—boy, would it make a great firmware update.



On the laptops' underside you'll notice a big difference. The removable battery has been tucked under a panel next to an easily removable hard drive. Apple is offering a lot of expensive drive upsells, including a 128GB SSD for the Pro, but who cares? Replacing a MacBook hard drive with your own Newegg purchase no longer requires the complicated dissection of one's laptop. Held in by just a few screws, it's easier to replace than some tower hard drives. Of course, this elegant solution is like a gateway drug. Why not have another hatch for replacing the memory?

To the chagrin of at least a few long-time MBP users, the keyboards of both the MB and MB Pro have also been influenced by the Air as they're black, separated and intensely backlit. There's a ton of side light spill, which looks neat until it gets distracting. (Note: the entry-level silver MB does not have a backlit keyboard.) The function keys have been rearranged a bit as well.

But while the keyboards look indistinguishable from one another, they feel different. The MacBook's is softer and similar to the former MacBook. The Pro's is clickier and similar to the former Pro's. See a pattern? Not visible with the naked eye, you can feel the lineage of these systems, evidence that Apple has not forgotten its history or the taste of its various demographics.

The screens, too, are deceptively different between the MB and MBP. Both share LED backlighting and the shiny screen coating that can be quite a distraction—a user will find himself staring at his reflection with any decent amount of ambient light. But it's important to note that, beyond the spec-sheet distinction of the 13-inch screen's 1280x800 pixels and the 15-incher's 1440x900, these are not identical LCD technologies in different sizes.

The difference is clear when demoing an MPEG4 of Batman Begins. The MBP screen is warmer than the MB's to the discerning eye, but any dunce will catch the massive differences in contrast and viewing angle. Our shots in the dark exacerbate the MB's less impressive black levels, but this photo really is close to what we saw. As for the unwatchable distortions in image quality when five feet out or standing at a not-so-unthinkable viewing angle, those are just as bad to the naked eye as they are to camera. Notice the MBP screen remains unblemished from any angle/distance.

One design element of note: Both screens now tilt back another 10 to 15 degrees over previous generations. If you've ever sat there watching a Windows person pushing your MacBook display past its rotation point, you'll recognize just how important this update will be.

Connecting to an old external screen, however, could be problematic. The DVI port has been replaced by a mini DisplayPort in both new laptops. As for your old monitor, no biggie, if it's 24-inches or smaller just use a mini-DisplayPort-to-DVI adapter ($30). But if you're driving a 30-inch monitor, you'll need a mini-DisplayPort-to-dual-DVI adapter, which isn't bundled with either laptop and runs $100 on its own. Ouch. We're hoping for an aftermarket solution.

In terms of other ports, the MB offers gigabit Ethernet, two USBs, mini DisplayPort, mic and headphone jack. Note the one major omission: FireWire. Even the $1000 plastic MacBook has FireWire, though in truth there isn't a lot of FW support these days beyond professional applications—even new iPhones and iPods have ditched it completely. Upgrading to the MBP gives you all the ports in the MB but adds FireWire 800 and an ExpressCard slot. (FW400 devices need to track down a FW400-to-FW800 cable.) Plus, both new MacBooks have the snazzy battery-life indicator on the side next to the ports.



Operation and Performance

Examine the MB and MBP under the hood, and it quickly becomes apparent that the similarities are more than skin deep. For instance, while the MB starts at 2.0GHz, its processor reaches 2.4GHz in the $1600 configuration. This processor is the exact same one that you'll find in the lower-tier $2000 MBP—including the same 3MB L2 cache and 1066MHz front side bus. In fact, the only MBP to reach a 6MB L2 cache starts at $2,500. In other words, there's not much CPU benefit in that $700 gap between the baseline aluminum MB and the entry-level MBP. Oh, and no matter what you're willing to spend, both the MB and MBP hold a maximum of 4GB of memory.

So where's the power difference? Aside from the optional 2.53 and 2.8GHz CPUs, it's mainly in the video processing. The MB features a GeForce 9400M integrated graphics card that promises to be 5X faster than similar offerings from Intel. The MBP features that same integrated graphics card, but then adds a 256MB or 512MB GeForce 9600M GT alongside of it. Just make sure to note that the MBP doesn't run its dual graphics cards simultaneously. Only one runs at a time—the low-power one when the MBP is in "Better Battery Life" mode, and the amped one when in "Better Performance" mode—and you need to log out of the system in order to switch from one card to the other. Some notebook makers such as Alienware allow a computer to do this on the fly, and even use both video cards at once for full-throttle performance. (For more on this, check out Giz Explains.)

Next-gen GPUs used to be of consequence for only gamers, but the next generation of OS X, Snow Leopard, promises to use the GPU for lots of subtasks, especially anything math intensive like encoding video. We're already seeing individual apps like those in Adobe's new CS4 making use of the GPU for non-gaming tasks. A faster GPU with the new OS just over the horizon won't just do 3D faster—it'll make your whole computer faster. (More here, here and here.)

To test out the CPU and GPUs, we put the new MacBook, last generation MacBook Pro, the new MacBook Pro with power savings and the new MacBook Pro running at full speed through XBench and Geekbench performance tests.

From a CPU standpoint, the metal MB really is just a tiny MBP (our tested processors have nearly identical clock speeds). So unsurprisingly, performance gains between our MB and MBP test systems were negligible. GeekBench confirmed that basic and floating point processing were pretty much the same across the board.
In XBench especially, you'll notice that the old MacBook Pro has an edge. Most of this performance gap can be explained by its slightly faster 2.6GHz processor. However, in real world application, when dealing with big chunks of data the newer MB's 1066 MHz front side bus will offer benefits not seen in this graph. Notice the small performance spike in the memory task in current gen laptops. That's because the new memory is clocked at a faster speed.

Still, benefits from the previous generation to this one, or from the MB to MBP are slim, often falling below 5 and 10% even in the limited GPU benchmark tests. The differences are there, sure, but the performance gains between the $1600 MacBook and $2400 MacBook Pro are not astounding.

But benchmark programs can be deceiving with simple tasks that don't take into account how the whole system fits together, especially when we're talking about graphics. So we tested the systems in a real world application that could most accurately judge its GPU power, 3D gaming. We loaded Spore.

Spore demoed on MacBook. 1280x600 resolution, all settings maxed.

Spore demoed on MacBook Pro. 1440x900 resolution, all settings maxed.

Admittedly, Spore may not be the best graphics benchmark as its animations are a bit rough to begin with. Still, the MB has noticeably more pop-ins and seems to be struggling loading complete textures. Then toward the end of the MacBook clip as the ship zooms back to land, the MacBook's integrated graphics, even while rendering the scene at a far lower resolution, can't compete with with the MacBook Pro and its discrete graphics. Unplayable choppiness ensues.
Just for kicks, we ran Spore with the MacBook Pro in "Better Battery Life" mode to see what it would look like on the integrated GPU. Draw your own conclusions, but we still consider the performance a half step above that of the new MacBook—especially as the MBP is running the game in 1440x900 resolution. We'd attribute the performance gains to the slightly faster processor and extra 2GB of RAM. (On a side note, does anyone else notice that despite us cranking all test settings to high detail, there's obviously a software automated detail curve? The MB has fewer objects and less intricate textures than the power friendly MBP. And there's a similar jump between the power friendly MBP and the normal mode MBP.)

We'll be testing the GPU more in the future, but where the benchmarks came up short our eyes cannot be fooled. That integrated graphics card just doesn't compete.

According to Nvidia, those using Boot Camp should note that whatever power/graphics setting was last used in OSX will be applied to Windows. UPDATE: According to Apple, Boot Camp can only utilize the more powerful discrete graphics on the MBP.

But no matter how quickly these laptops are crunching numbers, the great news is, they're doing it with less lap heat. Both the new MB and MBP operate with cooler bottoms than before. Heat seems less likely to pool in the rear of the system now, and that's probably because of the unibody construction: Without rivets, screws or seams, it makes a great half-pound heatsink. This thermal update is critical, since Apple recently recalled a great number of their last-gen notebooks for heat-related video-card failures.

As for battery life, we tested the laptops under identical operation settings playing back an H.264 movie and then a DVD movie. (Screens were set to medium brightness, Wi-Fi on and keyboard backlighting on low.)

As you see, be it a digital download or an optical disc, it's tough to make it through any movie on the MBP. The DVD playback was worse even than older versions of the MBP. However, disabling discrete graphics in Power Saver mode buys over 40 minutes of DVD playback. So the good news is you'll make it through a movie. The bad news is that you'll have to neuter your MBP to get there.

So Who Needs The MacBook Pro over the Macbook?

In one word, pros. (Suiting, we know.) Video professionals will need the MBP because the MB no longer has FireWire, still a big deal for video guys. USB is fast, but its speeds aren't sustained. Those who use FireWire require predictable transfer rates, a connection that won't drop during realtime video playback from an external hard drive or capture from a video deck.

Anyone who requires an ExpressCard, too, will need to spend the extra cash on a MBP. Many 3G peripherals use this slot—and some correct Apple's willful memory-card ignorance by filling it with an SD/MS reader—but there are just as many USB peripherals, so its omission in the MB probably isn't as damning as FireWire's.

And then, of course, there's the group that requires the MacBook Pro's discrete graphics card with a half-gig of dedicated RAM. Large textures and massive Photoshop files require a level of performance that the basic MacBook's integrated graphics, even Nvidia's most boastworthy—just can't replace.

In this regard, we see the line drawn in the sand between the MacBook and the MacBook Pro. Similar processors, different graphics and FireWire and ExpressCard only if you pay up.

Through the course of this review, we've focused on what makes the new MacBook different from the new MacBook Pro. We've sifted every detail we could find in what we're sure looks like a lot of nitpicking. So let us make it clear: The new MacBook is our favorite MacBook to date, and the same can be said about the new MacBook Pro. If you respected Apple build quality before, know that the latest unibody construction takes that quality to the next level with systems that are both durable and extremely comfortable to use.

But better still, the people who in the past might have been suckered into paying extra for the MacBook Pro's superior design now have the chance to buy a standard-priced MacBook and still glow with pride. It's not the huge price drop some were hoping for, but it's certainly savings for some.

The class boundary remains, but it's blurrier than ever. [All the New MacBook Details]

MacBook above.

• The optical drive is identical in the MB and MBP, and it's SATA
• MBP RAM isn't tough to replace, but hard drive requires a Torx screwdriver
• The keyboards can be user-serviced, but require removing 56 screws first
• "Unibody" construction is "elegant"
• "The new MacBook is really a 13" MacBook Pro. It uses the same design, and same manufacturing quality"

Read the full play-by-play over at ifixit. And be glad that isn't your computer that they ripped apart...or was it? [ifixit]

Two graphics cards? It sounds crazy, preposterous, retardiculous. It's actually not. It's not unique to the MacBook Pro at all. PC users might be more familiar with Nvidia's Hybrid SLI, which pulls similar dual-card wizardry. In a nutshell, it lets you use the less power-hungry integrated graphics processor when you're doing lighter stuff to save battery, and then when you want a lot of video-crunching Mr. T powah, you can flip on the discrete graphics card. Of course, there's balls-to-the-wall full SLI too, which uses two entirely separate graphics cards in one notebook for Hulk power and about 45 seconds of battery life, like in one of Alienware's beasts.

Nvidia's standard hybrid SLI for PC actually uses both the integrated and discrete GPU at the same time when it goes into turbo mode, and it'll let you switch on the fly or have it automatically flip between the two depending on the power source. But the MacBook Pro uses Apple's spin on Nvidia's tech that simply lets you pick one or the other (not both, booooooo) and you have to manually flip the switch in system prefs, log out and back in, pretty annoying. Battery life is apparently an issue with the new MacBook Pro, considering that the integrated 9400M card now nets you five hours of go-time, the same as the separate, more power-hungry 8600M GT in the previous model, whereas the new discrete 9600M GT now gets you only four.

The other major reason for the huge upgrade to more proficient graphic cards in both the MacBook and Pro is Snow Leopard, which will be big on parallel processing and offloading work to the graphics card—graphics cards are particularly adept at parallel processing because of the way they're designed and the fact that they have a buttload of cores. (Here's a more in-depth explanation of that.) And if graphics cards are driving more and more of the general computing experience, the truly shitty ones in the last generation of MacBooks just won't cut it.

Nvidia's been heavily investing in "General-purpose computing on Graphics Processing Units" (GPGPU)—again, using the graphics card for more general applications—on its own for a while, actually. When they demoed their latest, most badass cards for me a few months ago, it was heavily tilted on those types of applications, including in-game physics and Folding@Home. They actually have their own development kit called CUDA that lets programmers leverage graphics cards using a standard programming language—PhysX, a physics gaming engine, is probably the most well-known application of it so far. (Nvidia isn't sure when PhysX come to Mac, but they're looking at it.) Not so coincidentally, CUDA for Mac came out in August. These cards also support Apple's own graphics programming language, called OpenCL.

So even if you're the type of person that browses the net, edits Office docs and fiddles around in Photoshop rather than the type that plays WoW: Wrath of the Lich King or cuts video, graphics cards will matter to you almost as much as it does to those people: They're going to be critical not just in a lot of the awesome stuff you'll see coming out in the next couple of years but increasingly so in the way operating systems run, whether it's from Apple or Microsoft or anyone else. So get ready to hear a lot more about them.

Something you still wanna know? Send any questions about games, snow kitties or pancakes to tips@gizmodo.com, with "Giz Explains" in the subject line.

Phones, including Apple's own, have been fitted with these little stickers for years, but they're a rarity in laptops. You might want to think twice before you forget to mention the "used as a prop in an elaborate college drinking game" part on your next Applecare claim. Thanks, Justin!

The Review
• MacBook and MacBook Pro DUAL Review (yes, two at one time)

The News
• MacBook Pro announcement and first hands on
• Aluminum MacBook announcement and first hands on
• 24-Inch Cinema Display announcement and first hands on
• MacBook Air update

Additional Coverage
• MacBook Pro video tour
• MacBook Sizemodo, new and old
• Why the new MacBook Pro has two graphics cards
• All about MacBooks' new glass trackpad and multitouch
• Apple's Blu-ray woes
• The "Brick" aluminum carving process
• MacBook rumor roundup
• Comment: MacBook pricing is still too high
• Our liveblog of the Apple keynote
• Giz Explains: Why Does the New MacBook Pro Have Two Graphics Cards?
• Rumor: New 17-Inch MacBook Pro Delayed Until Early Next Year
[Apple on Giz]

The new MacBook and MacBook Pro may be molded by hand from a single piece of adamantium or whatever, but how do they size up to their previous versions? The new MacBook Pro actually has a larger footprint (X Y) than the old MacBook Pro, but it's also slightly thinner (tough to tell in person). But the new MacBook, on the other hand, has a nearly identical footprint (X Y), but seems much thinner than the old MacBook. And the numbers agree.

In other words, to the naked eye, big improvement on the MacBook dimensions. Minor improvement Maybe a wash or even a step back on the MacBook Pro dimensions.

0.13 inches doesn't sound like much, but combined with beveling, it makes the new MacBook look and feel much more like premium device.

The MacBook Pro refresh feels exactly what you'd imagine it to feel like from the images in our liveblog. The screen is bright and goes almost right up against the edge of the display portion of the top. The keyboard is similar to the MacBook Air and has the now-standard Apple separation between keys. Trackpad action is super smooth (the friction coefficient is lower than the trackpads that came before), which gives you much slicker feel when gesturing. For those of you that are afraid that your mouse button has been killed in favor of just a "touch" click, don't worry—the entire trackpad is a clicker. You can even assign part of the pad to right click. The whole thing works just about as well as the old button.

Also improved are the pads on the bottom of the body, which are now more like raised mounds than nubs. The hard drive/battery case comes off easily and you can actually get to both these things easily for hard drive replacement. The power button is smaller (nice), the hinge is strong enough to hold up the laptop backwards (also nice), and the vents in the back seem to be slightly smaller and more "blended" into the body. The body is thinner than it was, but it's nothing super dramatic.

Everything about the Pro is solid, and although we didn't forcefully try to bend it in half (too many witnesses), we gently felt how much more solid it is than current models, and it felt good. The rounded cover and edges add a more MacBook Air feel to the line, which is a welcome change to the more razor-sharp edges of previous models.

The glossy screen is what it is, and is bright, fast to light up and a bit too reflective if you position it with the sun behind you (no matte option anymore). Quick verdict is that it's definitely a step up in most ways over your current MacBook Pro.

The built-in audio and video capabilities in the new Nvidia chipset is supposed to be better than Intel's offering for High Definition video decoding, with 24p mode (progressive 24 frames per second video) and LCPM (Linear Pulse Code Modulation) multi-cannel audio support. [Homemedia via Macsoda]

Of course, it could just be a big ol' splotch of splotchiness, but it would fall in line with moving everything to a semi-consistent design, and would be incredibly helpful with more involved multitouch input.

And here's the top, all up close—notice there's no iSight camera. This is all most likely reading way too much into nothing, but the whole thing is odd—where did they get the picture and why are they running it? If you know something, let us know. [T-Systems via Engadget]