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.
What type of true performance difference can I see between a 1.83 and a 2.2 MB?
- Thread starter one1
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
tersono
macrumors 68000
It's going to depend on what apps you're running. For standard day-to-day use, you're not going to notice a whole lot of difference. If you're a Photoshop user, then frankly the extra RAM will make more difference than the CPU if you're dealing with big files.
Overall, if you have the 1.83, I really don't think it would be worth upgrading to the 2.2. Not enough performance hike for the dough.
Overall, if you have the 1.83, I really don't think it would be worth upgrading to the 2.2. Not enough performance hike for the dough.
Consultant
macrumors G5
Barefeats.com has benchmarks. You just have to find the old benchmarks and compare to recent benchmarks.
It's application and sometimes harddrive dependent.
It's application and sometimes harddrive dependent.
Effectively none. Once it's a c2d, it's far overpowered for what 99% of consumers will use it for.
Unless you're doing something REALLY CPU intensive. I mean REALLY REALLY CPU intensive, then there would be no noticeable difference at all.
Break out a few benchmark utilities and a stopwatch and you might be able to measure the difference but are you going to notice if you have to wait 6.5s for something instead of 5.8s?
Break out a few benchmark utilities and a stopwatch and you might be able to measure the difference but are you going to notice if you have to wait 6.5s for something instead of 5.8s?
netdog
macrumors 603
The Core Duo won't take 4GB or RAM. The C2D referenced in those benchmarks will only read 3.3GB. Santa Rosa C2D MBPs (2.2, 2.4, 2.6) will read 4GB.