Which Mac books specs are better?

[ckesten]

2.0 ghz with 4 gigs of ram

or

2.4 ghts with 2 gigs of ram

not concerned about hard drive space... which do you think is a better computer?

[raremage]

Assuming they are both Core 2 Duo CPUs, unless you are doing things that are exceptionally processor intensive, you're probably going to see better performance gains out of the 4 Gigs of RAM.

That assumes all else is equal; there could be other differentiators (backlit keyboard, for example) that you may want to consider.

[dvdhsu]

Originally Posted by raremage

Assuming they are both Core 2 Duo CPUs, unless you are doing things that are exceptionally processor intensive, you're probably going to see better performance gains out of the 4 Gigs of RAM.

That assumes all else is equal; there could be other differentiators (backlit keyboard, for example) that you may want to consider.

Yes.
It depends what you're doing with the MacBooks.
Usually more RAM is better, but if you're working with processor intensive tasks (encoding, processing, or any Pro Application) you would be better off with the 2.4 GHZ configuration.
If you're using for day to day activities, you should get the 2.0 with 4 Gigabytes of RAM.

[ckesten]

thanks guys.. its just for day to day.. nothing crazy

[darngooddesign]

You can easily, and inexpensively, upgrade the 2.4 to 4 gigs of RAM; however, you can't upgrade your 2.0 to 2.4 nor can you get the backlit keyboard in the 2.0. For day-to-day stuff the backlit keyboard is a significant feature, to me a tleast. That alone is the main reason why I would never choose the 2.0.

[Tomorrow]

I'd get the 2.4 for two reasons:

(1) Most of the time, 2 Gb of RAM is plenty.
(2) You can always upgrade the RAM. That processor is stuck in there.

[petermcphee]

I have the 2.4 ghz configuration with 4GB of ram, and I think it's the bee's knees, the ant's pants, and the cat's pajamas.