Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Next MBP or wait till Nehalem?

Dmac77

Dmac77

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Hi,

I'm currently wondering if I should get the next generation (Montevina) MBP, or wait for the Neghalem MBP. I don't need one right now, I would be getting it around christmas, if I get the Montevina.

I would use the MBP, for recording and editing with Logic Express 8. I also use PS for editing photos and use Aperture to organize my photos. I don't do any video editing, but I do program in xcode. I also play Flight Simulator X under bootcamp. All of this is currently done with my iMac (specs in sig), and I'm happy with the performance.

So my question is, would the next generation MBP's be able to handle what I want to do for the next 4 years, or will I be kicking myself for not waiting for Nehalem? Yes, I know that no one knows what the specs of the next MBP's will be, but just answer, with what you think the specs will be.

Thanks!

Don

PS

Please tell me if I sound confusing, I'll try to clarify more.
 
Dmac77 said:
So my question is, would the next generation MBP's be able to handle what I want to do for the next 4 years, or will I be kicking myself for not waiting for Nehalem? Yes, I know that no one knows what the specs of the next MBP's will be, but just answer, with what you think the specs will be.
Click to expand...
First of all, Nehalem isn't coming until Q3 2009 for mobile versions. So you'll be waiting a year or so for Nehalem MacBook Pros.

The advantages of Nehalem are:
  • Core improvements
  • Hyper-threading - One physical core appears as two "logical" cores
  • Improved cache structure including a new L2 cache
The high-end desktop version is 20%~30% faster than an equivalent Penryn CPU; the mobile versions may give a slightly lower performance increase.
 
iMacmatician said:
The high-end desktop version is 20%~30% faster than an equivalent Penryn CPU; the mobile versions may give a slightly lower performance increase.
Click to expand...

Just to expand on this point, this is because the mobile chips will not have the quick path that the desktop versions use, although from what I get from the oh-so-100%-accurate Wikipedia entry, it will not be using the FSB either.
 
I know that Nehalem won't be out for a year. I just don't know if I'll notice that much of a difference between Montevina and Nehalem for my uses. What do you guys think? Will the Montevina MBP's be able to use up to date programs for 4 years? And what exactly is quickpath (yes I looked at wikipedia)? I can wait a year, but it's becoming increasingly painful to use my iBook G3 even for basic tasks.

Thanks!

Don
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back