MBP 2.4 vs MBP 2.5? or wait?

[hoangcong]

hi everybody,

I am into digital photography, using mostly photoshop and occasionally final cut pro.
I also like to create website so I would look for something that can run photoshop and dreamweaver at the same time smoothly.
I would also like something that can do the above things + running another OS (windows xp) or burning a dvd.

The price gap is huge between the base 2.4 model and the 2.5.
I was just wondering which one would be more fit for me?

I was also wondering whether it'd be good waiting for the new mbp and get the new mbp base model then since my budget is tight (i think my patience can be witheld till late july =\ )

Thanks for your help!

[mankar4]

probably won't see an update till august. 2.5 makes no difference over 2.4.

[illidian]

The differences between the 2.4 MB and the 2.5 MBP include:


Integrated (Very Porr) Graphics vs. Dedicated
Plastic vs. Aluminum Casing
13.3" Glossy Screen vs. 15" Glossy OR Matte Screen
LCD Screen, no backlighting vs. LED Screen with Backlighting
No Multi-Touch vs. Having Multi-Touch


The importance is roughly in that order as well. If you aren't running 3D graphics, that even becomes a moot point as well.

[dukebound85]

The differences between the 2.4 MB and the 2.5 MBP include:


Integrated (Very Porr) Graphics vs. Dedicated
Plastic vs. Aluminum Casing
13.3" Glossy Screen vs. 15" Glossy OR Matte Screen
LCD Screen, no backlighting vs. LED Screen with Backlighting
No Multi-Touch vs. Having Multi-Touch


The importance is roughly in that order as well. If you aren't running 3D graphics, that even becomes a moot point as well.


read the op. hes deciding between 2.4 MBP or a 2.5 MBP


op, disregard the previous post as he was comparing a macbook to a mbp

as far as differences, save the money and get the 2.4....you wont notice a difference and if there is one, it is slight

[hoangcong]

The differences between the 2.4 MB and the 2.5 MBP include:


Integrated (Very Porr) Graphics vs. Dedicated
Plastic vs. Aluminum Casing
13.3" Glossy Screen vs. 15" Glossy OR Matte Screen
LCD Screen, no backlighting vs. LED Screen with Backlighting
No Multi-Touch vs. Having Multi-Touch


The importance is roughly in that order as well. If you aren't running 3D graphics, that even becomes a moot point as well.

Sorry i think you misread lol
I was either looking for the mb pro 2.4 or the mb pro 2.5 of course i wouldnt get an integrated graphics :D

[hoangcong]

read the op. hes deciding between 2.4 MBP or a 2.5 MBP


op, disregard the previous post as he was comparing a macbook to a mbp

as far as differences, save the money and get the 2.4....you wont notice a difference and if there is one, it is slight

Thanks :)
I think i will get 2.4 with 4gb ram upgrade but im still pondering if i should wait for the new mbp.. ive been readin horror stories of people on this forums that have been waiting for months :D

[dukebound85]

Sorry i think you misread lol
I was either looking for the mb pro 2.4 or the mb pro 2.5 of course i wouldnt get an integrated graphics :D

for the needs you listed though, a mb would be more than enough. just get a secondary monitor and youd save a bundle


just another thought though

[dukebound85]

Thanks :)
I think i will get 2.4 with 4gb ram upgrade but im still pondering if i should wait for the new mbp.. ive been readin horror stories of people on this forums that have been waiting for months :D

dont upgrade ram through apple

get the ram off newegg and save a LOT (like 80 bucks for 2 x 2gig sticks or 40 bucks for a 2gig stick to give 3 gigs total)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2013340551+1327924738&name=For+Apple+Notebook

[hoangcong]

dont upgrade ram through apple

get the ram off newegg and save a LOT (like 80 bucks for 2 x 2gig sticks or 40 bucks for a 2gig stick to give 3 gigs total)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2013340551+1327924738&name=For+Apple+Notebook

Would i lose warranty if i change to custom ram? do apple center do it for us for a fee?

[Watabou]

Would i lose warranty if i change to custom ram? do apple center do it for us for a fee?

Its pretty easy to do it yourself. Go on youtube. They have a bunch of step by step tutorial. And no you won't lose any warranty.

[dukebound85]

Would i lose warranty if i change to custom ram? do apple center do it for us for a fee?

no you dont lose waranty as it is user replaceable. only thing that i might let apple upgrade on a mbp is the hd as thats not user replaceable (it is on mb though fyi)

[hoangcong]

no you dont lose waranty as it is user replaceable. only thing that i might let apple upgrade on a mbp is the hd as thats not user replaceable (it is on mb though fyi)

lol, you are really pushing me toward the mbp dukebound85, but mbt silver allu is so sexy :D

[illidian]

Sorry i think you misread lol
I was either looking for the mb pro 2.4 or the mb pro 2.5 of course i wouldnt get an integrated graphics :D

Whoops, sorry I misread.

In that case, there are virtually no differences that can be accounted for.

[Dmac77]

for the needs you listed though, a mb would be more than enough. just get a secondary monitor and youd save a bundle


just another thought though

I'm sorry, but IMO a macbook would not be nearly enough for him. Do you really think that a macbook has enough GPU power to run photoshop, and dreamweaver at the same time. It's barely enough for photoshop alone, and it's painfully slow just running photoshop.

Don

[irontony]

I own the new MacBook Pro 2.4 and added 4gb of 3rd party ram

First of all, and this is just my opinion but I've used both the 2.4 and the 2.5 and can honestly say the 2.5 is much more responsive for everything. Dont know if its because of the extra level 2 cache?

I honestly would of got the 2.5 model if I knew better.

I added 3rd party 4gb ram and it was easy to install and was much cheaper than apple. 2gb is usable for daily things and photoshop for *average users* So there's no rush for 4gb of ram straight away.

Save and just get the 2.5

My 2c

cheers

[oxfordguy]

I own the new MacBook Pro 2.4 and added 4gb of 3rd party ram

First of all, and this is just my opinion but I've used both the 2.4 and the 2.5 and can honestly say the 2.5 is much more responsive for everything. Dont know if its because of the extra level 2 cache?

I went for the 2.5 MBP in the end, not because its 0.1Ghz faster than the 2.4, but because is have 6Mb of L2 cache instead of the the 3Gb of L2 cache in the 2.4 MBP, this can actually make quite a big difference to real-world speeds.
With the 2.5 MBP you also get 512Mb instead of 256Mg VRAM for graphics, though I don't think this makes much difference in practice. I'm still happy I went for the 2.5 over the 2.4, despite the extra cost. I think it would be hard to justify the 2.6 MBP model, though, as you already get the increased L2 cache in the 2.5

[Scott6666]

Cache adds 0 to 10% depending on the app. Not worth the cost.

Read that given buss limitations on the graphics card, it cannot effectively use the extra VRAM. not worth the cost.

Spend $50 for the HDD upgrade from 160gb to 250gb though.

Get a really nice computer for $2,050, save $450.

[illidian]

I'm sorry, but IMO a macbook would not be nearly enough for him. Do you really think that a macbook has enough GPU power to run photoshop, and dreamweaver at the same time. It's barely enough for photoshop alone, and it's painfully slow just running photoshop.

Don

Ummm, you do know that having a dedicated graphics card does nothing for 2D graphics?

A MacBook 2.4 can run Photoshop and Dreamweaver just as well as any other 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo machine.

[hoangcong]

Ummm, you do know that having a dedicated graphics card does nothing for 2D graphics?

A MacBook 2.4 can run Photoshop and Dreamweaver just as well as any other 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo machine.

I was looking to play some games from time to times like the sims2 or age of empire 3 something similar to that but not too computer hungry.
Would the 2d graphics handle that on XP os while running Mac os?

[skye12]

I have a month old 2.4 MB with 4GB of ram. It is amazing and the screen
is very nice.

Imo 75% of MBP users didn't need them really. You just get into the
tech spec buyer syndrome.

[illidian]

I was looking to play some games from time to times like the sims2 or age of empire 3 something similar to that but not too computer hungry.
Would the 2d graphics handle that on XP os while running Mac os?

You sound confused. I was replying only to Dmac77's post, which is full of inaccurate information.

I don't know the exact capabilities of the x3100, but The Sims 2 an old game (released in 2004). I'm going to guess, based on no factual evidence, that a MacBook would run The Sims 2 because of its age and doesn't appear to be very graphics-intense to me. Age of Empires 3 is newer (2005) and while the screen shots don't look like it is too intense, it may be with all the units and such on screen at once. I'd guess that it would run well enough for you to play, but you may have to turn down all the graphics and still experience a bit of lag. Hopefully someone else can come in and verify more for you.

[oxfordguy]

Cache adds 0 to 10% depending on the app. Not worth the cost.


Depends what you're using the MBP for...


Read that given buss limitations on the graphics card, it cannot effectively use the extra VRAM. not worth the cost.

Spend $50 for the HDD upgrade from 160gb to 250gb though.

Or the 200Gb 7200rpm drive, if you want better performance...

[hoangcong]

thank you all for the useful feedbacks!
This should be my first mac so I don't want to mess up that is why i am a bit confused... (the one i used in uni for media production amazed me that is why i am hooked on mac now)
Hopefully I'll decided soon :p

[Wotan31]

probably won't see an update till august. 2.5 makes no difference over 2.4.


as far as differences, save the money and get the 2.4....you wont notice a difference and if there is one, it is slight

Where do you get these "makes no difference" assumptions from? They're certainly not based in reality, that's for sure.

The difference is not just 0.1 Ghz. The difference is in the CPU cache. 3 Mb on the 2.4 vs. 6 MB on the 2.5.

That's a *huge* difference, particularly when it comes to tasks like photo editing. It will be immediately noticeable with the very image you edit in Photoshop. Anyone who says otherwise has never actually compared the two (i.e. they're full of BS) and has no grasp on the relationship between hardware and performance.

Don't believe me? Go google up some benchmarks - doesn't even have to be laptop benchmarks, PC benchmarks will prove the point. Now find the numbers for a 3 MB CPU and compare them to a 6 MB CPU of similar clock speed. The difference is not slight.

Personally, I wouldn't even consider the 2.4. It's a waste of money when for $500 more, you can double your CPU cache (on top of the other upgraded bits). If you're set on the 2.4, you might as well save a few bucks and drop down to a regular Macbook 2.4 - it's the exact same CPU!! IMO, the only reason to get the MBP over the Macbook is for the 6 MB CPU (and discreet gfx, if you need that).

[Westsider 4 Mac]

Always get the most computing power you can afford. If that = the 2.6, then buy it. :apple::D

[cazlar]

A MacBook 2.4 can run Photoshop and Dreamweaver just as well as any other 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo machine.

AFAIK, while this is true, there are rumours that CS4 will be GPU-accelerated. If these pan out, the MBP could pull ahead of the equivalent MB in Photoshop performance in the future. It is only a rumour though

[dukebound85]

I'm sorry, but IMO a macbook would not be nearly enough for him. Do you really think that a macbook has enough GPU power to run photoshop, and dreamweaver at the same time. It's barely enough for photoshop alone, and it's painfully slow just running photoshop.

Don

um photoshop (CS3 at least) does not rely on the gpu....

plus i use photoshop ALOT on my mb and have NEVEr had an issue..

please stop spreading misinformation

[dukebound85]

I was looking to play some games from time to times like the sims2 or age of empire 3 something similar to that but not too computer hungry.
Would the 2d graphics handle that on XP os while running Mac os?

i can play halo (not on highest settings but easily playable for me) on my mb with the gma950. the new x1300 should be better for graphics as well

[dukebound85]

Where do you get these "makes no difference" assumptions from? They're certainly not based in reality, that's for sure.

The difference is not just 0.1 Ghz. The difference is in the CPU cache. 3 Mb on the 2.4 vs. 6 MB on the 2.5.

That's a *huge* difference, particularly when it comes to tasks like photo editing. It will be immediately noticeable with the very image you edit in Photoshop. Anyone who says otherwise has never actually compared the two (i.e. they're full of BS) and has no grasp on the relationship between hardware and performance.

Don't believe me? Go google up some benchmarks - doesn't even have to be laptop benchmarks, PC benchmarks will prove the point. Now find the numbers for a 3 MB CPU and compare them to a 6 MB CPU of similar clock speed. The difference is not slight.

Personally, I wouldn't even consider the 2.4. It's a waste of money when for $500 more, you can double your CPU cache (on top of the other upgraded bits). If you're set on the 2.4, you might as well save a few bucks and drop down to a regular Macbook 2.4 - it's the exact same CPU!! IMO, the only reason to get the MBP over the Macbook is for the 6 MB CPU (and discreet gfx, if you need that).

depending on his usage is the key here. some people cant afford the money for an upgraded system. by your logic, anyone who runs photoshop should pay 4k+ and get the best computer you can get since obviously it will run better:rolleyes:

but for everyday things, you cant tell a difference
resource intense stuff? of course you will be able to

and im not full of bs, i have a quad core 3 ghz and a dual core 2 ghz and for internet and stuff no difference. only difference is for intese apps and thats why i have the quad core

bottom line: you get what you can afford and even the 2.4 mbp will not be slow

[Wotan31]

depending on his usage is the key here. some people cant afford the money for an upgraded system. by your logic, anyone who runs photoshop should pay 4k+ and get the best computer you can get since obviously it will run better:rolleyes:

Not at all, my point was that the Macbook 2.4 will perform *exactly* the same as the MBP 2.4 in non-GPU-accelerated apps. They use the exact same CPU, exact same chipset, exact same memory. My logic here says to buy the cheaper Macbook 2.4, as there's no computing advantage when compared with the MBP 2.4.

but for everyday things, you cant tell a difference
resource intense stuff? of course you will be able to

and im not full of bs, i have a quad core 3 ghz and a dual core 2 ghz and for internet and stuff no difference. only difference is for intese apps and thats why i have the quad core

Gee oh wise one, master of the obvious, *of course* for general internet browsing "and stuff" there's no appreciable difference. Don't need any benchmarks to tell us that. :rolleyes: But general desktop usage and internet browsing was not the question here was it? Suggest you go back and read the opening post in this thread - the intended apps are Photoshop and Final Cut. Are you insinuating that these are not CPU intensive applications??

bottom line: you get what you can afford and even the 2.4 mbp will not be slow

No, that is not the bottom line. The bottom line is getting the best "bang for your buck", not buying the most expensive machine you can afford. If you can afford the MBP 2.5, by all means, get it - it will be *significantly* faster at the intended apps (again, those are Photoshop and Final Cut).

Here's my point (once again) If you cannot afford the MBP 2.5, you might as well save a few bucks and drop down to the Macbook 2.4 because it performs *identically* to the MBP 2.4 but costs a lot less.

[skye12]

Other World Computing (OWC) has a nice quicktime video on installing ram
and harddrives into a MB. I did it myself a month ago and its easy.

You need a 000 phillips to remove the L bracket and the heads are really small.
Have to put fairly good pressure on screws before you try and turn so you don't strip 'em. Got mine at Sears for about $3.00.

4GB kit going for around $95 right now, though many think ram prices will
again be going up SOON.

[lhotka]

um photoshop (CS3 at least) does not rely on the gpu....

plus i use photoshop ALOT on my mb and have NEVEr had an issue..

please stop spreading misinformation

CS4 (as the poster said) will use GPU acceleration - it's been demo'ed. Performance improvement on large files (>500MB) is dramatic - minutes become seconds. Small files won't have much improvement.

Plus Snow Leopard and/or 10.7 are supposed to enable general programs to leverage the GPU. There is, and should be, a performance and capability difference between the MB and MBP given the price difference. The GPU is one big piece of that.

For 80-90% of the people, they won't see a difference. For the rest of us though, a MB just isn't enough horsepower.