Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MacBook and iPhoto performance?
- Thread starter jayb2000
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
T&l?
Sorry, what is T&L?
Also, I should have been more specific. I am wondering about the 1.83 versus 2.0. I know the graphics are the same, but i was wonering about applying affects, doing slide shows, etc.
I am coming from an iMac G3, so I know anything will be faster, but wondering if the $200 bucks is worth it for the 2.0.
I already have a DVD burner (not dual layer, but it works fine) and a FW drive, so I don't need the superdrive.
Its like 16% higher price for 8% CPU speed, so on that level it does not make sense. If I needed the SD, I would do it in a heartbeat, but that $200 would go towards 2gig of ram, which I was thinking would help more.
Thanks Again
Sorry, what is T&L?
Also, I should have been more specific. I am wondering about the 1.83 versus 2.0. I know the graphics are the same, but i was wonering about applying affects, doing slide shows, etc.
I am coming from an iMac G3, so I know anything will be faster, but wondering if the $200 bucks is worth it for the 2.0.
I already have a DVD burner (not dual layer, but it works fine) and a FW drive, so I don't need the superdrive.
Its like 16% higher price for 8% CPU speed, so on that level it does not make sense. If I needed the SD, I would do it in a heartbeat, but that $200 would go towards 2gig of ram, which I was thinking would help more.
Thanks Again
I am curious to know about this too...I have 5000 photos in my library and growing. I currently own a 2.0 MBP and I am considering scaling down to the 1.83 Macbook.
EGT
macrumors 68000
The $200 extra for the 2.0GHz version is not worth it. Spend the extra cash on RAM.
I'm approaching 11,000 photos on a 1.25GHz Powerbook with 1 gig of ram and it runs fairly well. I haven't tried it on anything faster so I have nothing to compare it to but I'm happy with it. Thumbnails can be a little jittery at times and sometimes smart albums can take a little while to register changes made to titles or ratings etc. I wouldn't say it's anyhing significant to note.
The iLife '06 version brought about much needed improvements, especially the overall performance and speed. If my powerbook can run it well I'm sure the Macbook could run it far better. Why are you looking to downgrade from a MBP, PieMac?
I'm approaching 11,000 photos on a 1.25GHz Powerbook with 1 gig of ram and it runs fairly well. I haven't tried it on anything faster so I have nothing to compare it to but I'm happy with it. Thumbnails can be a little jittery at times and sometimes smart albums can take a little while to register changes made to titles or ratings etc. I wouldn't say it's anyhing significant to note.
The iLife '06 version brought about much needed improvements, especially the overall performance and speed. If my powerbook can run it well I'm sure the Macbook could run it far better. Why are you looking to downgrade from a MBP, PieMac?
EGT said:
Mostly to recoop some $ (I recently upgraded my Canon Rebel XT to the Canon 30D which cost a few bucks) and I feel that the MBP is really more of a laptop than I truly need...especially since I have access to my other half's iMac G5 that was purchased just this past November. Don't get me wrong, except for an irritating habit of dropping my wireless network connection from time to time (this is a software or firmware fix waiting to happen-it's all over the Apple support message boards), I've been really happy with my MBP, but I figure I can recoop about $600-700 when all is said and done.
I go back and forth...I owned a Powerbook before I upgraded this past March to the MBP...haven't owned an iBook since 2002. Part of me wants to just hang on to my MBP, and the logical side of me says downgrade...especially since the Macbooks are available with dual processors-didn't see that one coming, really.
Abstract
macrumors Penryn
The difference between the 1.83 and 2 GHz Core Duo in terms of performance numbers taken during tests so far indicate that the difference may not even be worth $20. 😛 The Superdrive would be the only reason to get the 2GHz over the 1.83, IMO. The performance difference is very very small, and will make no practical difference to anyone, not even people who will use their machine for graphics and video work. But again.......the SuperDrive.
Thanks All
Thanks for the tips.
Now to go look and make sure that black is not calling me name (from the online pics it is not), otherwise the low end 1.83 and 2 gig of ram will be coming sometime this summer.
Unless at WWDC they say 10.5 will be out soon, in which case I might wait for that. Of course, if I wait for that, then there might be speed bumps or even the Merom chips.
ugh, decisions, decisions.
Maybe I can get the 1099 version now and then give it to my wife next January 😎
Thanks again
Thanks for the tips.
Now to go look and make sure that black is not calling me name (from the online pics it is not), otherwise the low end 1.83 and 2 gig of ram will be coming sometime this summer.
Unless at WWDC they say 10.5 will be out soon, in which case I might wait for that. Of course, if I wait for that, then there might be speed bumps or even the Merom chips.
ugh, decisions, decisions.
Maybe I can get the 1099 version now and then give it to my wife next January 😎
Thanks again