[M0T0XGUY]

I'm starting to wonder whether the 2.4GHZ model is really worth $300 more than the 2.0. I played around with both models in the NYC Apple Store, and struggled to find major differences in processing power with most applications. Plus, the base model with 2GB of RAM easily blew away the base, 2.1GHZ white model (my reference point) in all aspects of computing. I'm in no rush to order, though.

 

[hempcamp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M0T0XGUY /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm starting to wonder whether the 2.4GHZ model is really worth $300 more than the 2.0...

Yeah, for what most computer users do, there is negligible difference between the two.

I got the 2.4Ghz iMac last year because the greater amount of video ram rather than for the extra processing power, since I knew I'd be spanning to my 24" Dell. The only thing the extra 400Mhz per core helps with for me is Handbrake and Boinc.

--Chris

 

[silverstonettl]

Slightly off topic but where would I notice the difference in 256 MB of video ram versus 512 MB? I'm looking at the new Macbook Pros and I'm debating whether I should just pay the extra money just for the video memory.

Also, does anyone know any sites that sell Macs and don't charge sales tax? Amazon used to be good to buy from but some changes in New York law prompted them to start collecting tax. Interestingly enough, Buy.com found some way around it and doesn't. If I decide to buy new, I'm tempted to make the drive up to New Hampshire where they don't charge sales tax.

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by silverstonettl /img/forum/go_quote.gif Slightly off topic but where would I notice the difference in 256 MB of video ram versus 512 MB? I'm looking at the new Macbook Pros and I'm debating whether I should just pay the extra money just for the video memory.

FPS (Frames Per Second) games. Thats about it I think...

 

[shigzeo]

i only wish i had purchased the 7200 rpm harddisk. when express card ssd become properly available, i don't think i will worry! i need speed as ID and PS are incredibly slow for saving large files

 

[tintin47]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M0T0XGUY /img/forum/go_quote.gif My Dell Optiplex Desktop and 17 inch CRT are starting to look pretty archaic as far as computers go. Lately, I've been noticing a pattern of needed mobility: I want a device I can bring pretty much anywhere and that still remains fast enough for my needs. Clearly, my 5 year old Dell computer isn't exactly fitting the bill here. In fact, I'm looking for something a bit more radical and functional; and the new Macbooks have me contemplating a leap away from Windows OS. I have just one general question concerning value however: would I see a bigger performance gain from a faster processor or more RAM? I can either by the base Macbook with 4GB of RAM, or the upgraded, 2.4 GHZ Macbook with 2GB of RAM; but not both upgrades. If it helps, I'm a big photography guy and run some graphics intensive programs like Photoshop, Aftereffects, and Capture NX2, but otherwise limit my computing to iTunes and internet browsing.

Definitely go for the 2.4 ghz processor. The new macbooks have much better video cards than the old ones, so you no longer need to buy a pro to run things like photoshop. That said, the processing speed is much more important than 4 gigs of ram. How could you use that much, unless you have every app on your computer open? Not only that, but Snow Leopard, OSX 10.6, is set to be released in the summer and basically halves the ram needed for all applications for about $100.

 

[shigzeo]

i frequently get page outs even with 4 gb. i think 8gb might let me work properly but even with minor projects and light cpu use, i use at least 3,1 or so gb.

that said, im no pro, so if my computer takes a little while longer to render, i will not lose time. however, i think the harddisk and ram make a bigger difference for everything. cpu only in rendering maybe but the file saving im sure and general os responsiveness served by ram and harddsik will make a much bigger difference than a bit of cpu power that will be dwarfed soon anyway.

years ago i made a computer and chose to go with faster cpu but found with upgrade in ram and faster hd that the thing felt a new computer.

so too did tiger over panther though!

 

[craiglester]

isn't 4gb the max ram for a macbook / macbook pro?

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by craiglester /img/forum/go_quote.gif isn't 4gb the max ram for a macbook / macbook pro?

From what I have read the new chipset support 8GB, and Mac OS X see all 8GB but is not able to take advantage of it all. Seems like Apple need to come up with a software fix for Mac OS X.

Source: The 4GB RAM limit of the new MacBooks is semi-accurate - Appletell

 

[Gatto]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlanY /img/forum/go_quote.gif It may not have dedicated graphics, but the new MacBook uses the 9400M chipset which is only about 30% slower than the dedicated graphics of the last generation MacBook Pro (the one they sold a month ago). (And the 9400M blows away the previous iteration MacBook Pros that used the dedicated Radeon X1600.) It's fast enough for most people except really hardcore gamers.

dedicated is still a requirement for certain programs no matter what speed everything runs.

 

[Bones13]

I have always been of the opinion to get the best available with upgrade options.

Choose your display size laptop, and get the fastest processor you can afford. The memory and hard disk can be upgraded later if required.

While costing more up front, you never know when that extra horsepower will extend the life of your laptop, causing you to replace it later rather than sooner.

With the prices of laptops, if you can spend 300 dollars now and get an extra 6 months or 2 years of functional life, its worth it. Even if you don't "need" it today.

 

[shigzeo]

the new macbook pro chipset can support up to 8gb but it has only been proven to work up to 4gb for now. the older version can use 6gb of 8gb if you use 4gb sticks.

they look amazing. the solid chasis is worth an upgrade if the hardware is not. that said, i will not upgrade till my mbp goes the way of dr phil - i am just happy that i have massively worthwhile hardware to look forward to

 

[reemixx]

400MHz isn't much of a difference. It'll save you a bit of time here and there, but you're talking in seconds. If the cost is no issue, then by all means, go for the 2.4GHz and upgrade the RAM later. But if you're looking at the best bang for buck, the 2.0 model is an absolute sweet deal. Adding 2 sticks of 2GB RAM (especially now since it's DDR3) will make the machine absolutely fly. The only other major differences between the 2.0 and 2.4 model is the backlit keyboard, which is kind of a gimmick anyway, and hard drive size. Depends on how important these are to you.

If I was you (as you say, you do a lot of photography/graphics work) I'd be getting the 2.0 aluminium MacBook, upgrading the RAM to 4GB, and putting any extra cash in a top quality external display like an Eizo or some of the NEC offerings. None of the MacBook panels are nearly as good as those in the MacBook Pro. The same goes for the iMac 20" vs the 24", the latter is vastly superior. So any major graphics work would be better done on an external display no matter which model MacBook you get.

Good luck with the purchase. I'm sure you'll be happy no matter which one you buy. The new MacBooks look absolutely stunning.

 

[M0T0XGUY]

I'm only hesitant to pluck down a significant sum on this thing because it's barely gonna see about 2 years and 6 months of use; after which I'll buy a new Mac for college. I figure the 2.0 will probably suffice for my everyday needs, and the extra RAM will improve the overall speed of the computer. When college comes around, I plan to shell out for next greatest laptop and most - if not all - possible upgrades.

 

[frozenice]

If you wait until Black Friday you will probably get both the RAM and the 2.4.