Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Buying Tips and Advice

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jan 16, 2008, 09:42 AM   #1
iEric
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
1.6 ghz vs. 1.8 ghz

question.

will one be able to notice the difference between the 1.6 ghz and 1.8 ghz core 2 duo in the macbook air?

is it worth it to spend $300 more for it?

will it make a difference considering the HD only goes 4200 RPM?
__________________

13" MPA, 1.8 Ghz i7; TBD; 32 GB iPhone 4
iEric is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2008, 09:51 AM   #2
keysersoze
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NH
My guess is it won't make much of a difference. Major bottleneck with hard disk speed. 5-10% speed increase in applications when boosting by 200Mhz, as seen in barefeats tests. If you consider that worth $300, than maybe you would want it.
__________________
i love brits

keysersoze is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2008, 09:51 AM   #3
clevin
macrumors G3
 
clevin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
no. you won't see much difference. consider most macs are running at 1.5GHz most of the time even with 2.6GHZ CPU. I would consider it for extra $50, not extra $300.
clevin is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2008, 09:54 AM   #4
eddietr
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Virginia
I wonder if the 1.6 has any advantage in either heat or battery life?
eddietr is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2008, 09:55 AM   #5
clevin
macrumors G3
 
clevin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddietr View Post
I wonder if the 1.6 has any advantage in either heat or battery life?
it would be miniscule if any.
clevin is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2008, 09:59 AM   #6
eddietr
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Virginia
Quote:
Originally Posted by clevin View Post
it would be miniscule if any.
Probably right.

I went for the 1.8 myself. But I doubt the performance difference will be that earth-shattering.
eddietr is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2008, 10:03 AM   #7
iEric
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
i may go for the 1.8 ghz.

for resale reasons.

mmm would going from a 2.0 CD to a 1.8 C2D be considered an upgrade?

will i see a difference afterall?
__________________

13" MPA, 1.8 Ghz i7; TBD; 32 GB iPhone 4

Last edited by devilot; Jan 16, 2008 at 11:34 PM. Reason: Merged posts; please use "Edit"
iEric is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2008, 10:06 AM   #8
sushi
Moderator emeritus
 
sushi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: キャンプスワンピー [Japan]
Quote:
Originally Posted by iEric View Post
will one be able to notice the difference between the 1.6 ghz and 1.8 ghz core 2 duo in the macbook air?
For those who do tasks like e-mail, web browsing, word processing, simple spreadsheets, listening to music or watching a movie, there will probably be no difference.

My guess is that the base MBA is a good offering for most folks.
sushi is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2008, 10:12 AM   #9
snickelfritz
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Tucson AZ
I seriously doubt it, except in benchmarks.
Personally, I would apply that $300 toward the SSD, which will go a long way toward improving the overall speed of this notebook.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clevin View Post
no. you won't see much difference. consider most macs are running at 1.5GHz most of the time even with 2.6GHZ CPU. I would consider it for extra $50, not extra $300.
Um, when and why would a 2.6ghz CPU run at 1.5ghz?
__________________
2.4ghz 24" iMac (Aluminum); 4GB RAM; 320GB HDD; 250GB external G-Drive; 10.6.3; Adobe CS3.

Last edited by devilot; Jan 16, 2008 at 11:34 PM. Reason: Merged posts; please use "Edit"
snickelfritz is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2008, 10:16 AM   #10
iEric
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by snickelfritz View Post
I seriously doubt it, except in benchmarks.
Personally, I would apply that $300 toward the SSD, which will go a long way toward improving the overall speed of this notebook.
i thought about that but i need more memory anyways.
__________________

13" MPA, 1.8 Ghz i7; TBD; 32 GB iPhone 4
iEric is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2008, 10:17 AM   #11
clevin
macrumors G3
 
clevin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by snickelfritz View Post
Um, when and why would a 2.6ghz CPU run at 1.5ghz?
there is a app called "core duo tem", you can check how fast your cpu is running

Most Modern OSes (win/OSX/Lin) adopt so called step-speeding technology for laptop to reduce power consumption and prolong the battery life.

oh yes, I should have mentioned that this mostly applies to laptops, especially when on battery power. "Most mac and most of the time" might be a little bit overstated.
clevin is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2008, 10:50 PM   #12
dmw007
macrumors 603
 
dmw007's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Working for MI-6
$300 is a bit of a steep price for a modest upgrade in processing power. I would doubt that the difference in performance would be very noticeable- if even noticeable at all. Now if the 1.8GHz C2D had extra L2 cache or a faster fsb then the difference would probably be noticeable.
__________________
3.2 GHz Mac Pro Nehalem
PowerBook 1400cs/133, 450MHz G4 Cube, 500MHz Pismo
iPhone 3GS, 60GB iPod
dmw007 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2008, 11:30 PM   #13
iEric
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
do you think i'll see a speed difference between a 2.0 Ghz CD (in my MBP) and a 1.8 Ghz C2D?

which one will be faster?
__________________

13" MPA, 1.8 Ghz i7; TBD; 32 GB iPhone 4
iEric is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2008, 11:34 PM   #14
NAG
macrumors 68030
 
NAG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: /usr/local/apps/nag
The MBP is faster, obviously.

And I agree that the $300 would be better spent toward an SSD than the 200 mhz processor upgrade.
NAG is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2008, 12:03 AM   #15
iEric
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by NAG View Post
The MBP is faster, obviously.

oooh..mmm..really? even though the MBP is a CD and the MBA is a C2D?
(forget the difference in hard drive speeed, i'm talking just plain processor speed)
__________________

13" MPA, 1.8 Ghz i7; TBD; 32 GB iPhone 4
iEric is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2008, 12:12 AM   #16
NAG
macrumors 68030
 
NAG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: /usr/local/apps/nag
Here are some old old benchmarks if you want to get a feel for the difference between the two. It isn't going to be exact as these aren't the same machines and aren't the same exact chips.
NAG is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2008, 08:38 AM   #17
PieMac
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
I placed an order for the 1.8 ghz and I think I'm going to be cancel and order the 1.6 ghz. I was thinking that it would help in that I might occasionally use Aperture, but for $300 more, I don't think it's really worth it. Besides, I'll be doing the vast majority of photo work on my 2.8 ghz iMac with 4 GB RAM!
PieMac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2008, 08:49 AM   #18
applefan69
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by PieMac View Post
I placed an order for the 1.8 ghz and I think I'm going to be cancel and order the 1.6 ghz. I was thinking that it would help in that I might occasionally use Aperture, but for $300 more, I don't think it's really worth it. Besides, I'll be doing the vast majority of photo work on my 2.8 ghz iMac with 4 GB RAM!
smart decision. If you ALREADY have a real fast mac at home... then this macbook air is somethin you should be buying as a "faster" mac. Yuo should be buying it, because it's unbelievably portable, and easy to carry with you everywhere you go.

iPhone did a good job letting you take your files with you everywhere, but now Macbook air is gonna do an EVEN better job, cause it's running full OS X, and has a full keyboard.
applefan69 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2008, 09:07 AM   #19
PieMac
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by applefan69 View Post
smart decision. If you ALREADY have a real fast mac at home... then this macbook air is somethin you should be buying as a "faster" mac. Yuo should be buying it, because it's unbelievably portable, and easy to carry with you everywhere you go.

iPhone did a good job letting you take your files with you everywhere, but now Macbook air is gonna do an EVEN better job, cause it's running full OS X, and has a full keyboard.
Exactly...I also have a 2.16 ghz MacBook Pro that I bought a year ago...at the time, it was my only computer. I caved when the new iMac's came out and got the whole enchilada: 24" screen, 2.8 ghz, 4GB RAM...of course, now the MBP doesn't get used all that much (at least in comparison as I do a lot of photo editing). I mainly use my MBP when I travel or just around the house for general surfing, email, and occasionally I might go in and tweak a photo here and there.
I realize that the MBP is a more powerful machine w/ more features, yadda, yadda...than the MBA, but I really would like a smaller, lighter form factor so, I'm Ebaying my MBP to purchase the MBA. To me, and for my purposes, it's worth it. Now if my laptop was going to be my main machine, I'd definitely keep the MBP-that's just not the case anymore, though.
PieMac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 31, 2008, 06:30 PM   #20
kockgunner
macrumors 68000
 
kockgunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by iEric View Post
do you think i'll see a speed difference between a 2.0 Ghz CD (in my MBP) and a 1.8 Ghz C2D?

which one will be faster?
The C2D should be faster since it has an 800 MHz FSB and a larger cache i think. And technology has improved and chips are running cooler which should also boost performance.
kockgunner is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Buying Tips and Advice

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Does the 3.8 Ghz MBP get noticeably hotter than the 3.5 GHz version alexor MacBook Pro 5 May 5, 2014 01:47 PM
15" rMBP, worth $180 to upgrade 2.3 GHz to 2.6 GHz? The New iPad MacBook Pro 20 Oct 25, 2013 02:01 PM
2.6 GHz vs 2.7 GHz Retina Macbook Pro Real World Difference dpnguye2 Buying Tips and Advice 40 Nov 15, 2012 02:21 PM
Mac Mini 2.3 GHz vs upgraded, more expensive MM Server 2.0 Ghz HAM2012 Buying Tips and Advice 0 Nov 13, 2012 09:47 AM
2.6 GHZ i7 mobile (Mini) CPU Vs Imac 2.9 ghz desktop i5?? Pie Chips Salad iMac 1 Nov 11, 2012 12:39 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:09 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC