question about the c2d mbp.....

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by extraid, Oct 28, 2006.

  1. extraid macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2006
    #1
    so i see now that the mbp has the option for up to 3gb ram....does that mean it still has two slots (meaning you need 1gb and a 2gb stick?) or does it mean i can have 3 - 1gb sticks?

    also, the hard drive situation... from what i've read about the 200gb hard drive (4200rpm) that I shouldn't get it simply because it runs too slow....why would they offer something subpar like this? do they not have a 5400/7200 - 200gb hard drive on the market?


    I have a 1.83 Core Duo mbp now - i'm wondering - do you think I should bother upgrading to the 2.33ghz model (with the 256mb video memory) and 160gb hard drive?

    I heard something about a santa rosa, however, I don't think that it would personally offer that much of an upgrade, will it?

    thanks, all imput is accept!! :D
     
  2. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #2
    2 slots; 1x2Gb, 1x1Gb.

    Yes it isn't as fast as other drives, but obviously some people value storage over speed and Apple feel (probably via market research) that it's a valuble addition to the BTO page. No there aren't faster drives.

    Upgrading is your decision, are you doing it because you need the performance? Is your current machine not fast enough for what you are doing? Is the cost of selling and upgrading worth it for the performance upgrade?

    Santa Rosa is a set of various features grouped together for the next generation mobile platform, currently c2d chips are using an older platform which can't get the best out of them. read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrino#Santa_Rosa_platform
     
  3. extraid thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2006
    #3

    Basically, i'm selling my MBP 1.83ghz for $1500 - so upgrading would cost only around $500-600 - it seems like it'd be worth doing so because this upgrade seems quite good. I also read something about them having the new wireless cards, the "n" version...is this true? Also, the 256mb video would be nicer for games and allow the life of the computer to prolong, no?
     
  4. Fearless Leader macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Location:
    Hoosiertown
    #4
    with the hd, the 4200rpm could possibly be as close to the 120gb 5400 rpm, in theory anyway. Since the data is more densely packed (approx. 70%) for every one turn the 4200 drive makes the 5400 would have to make 1.7 turns to get the same amount of data. meaning the the smaller drive would be 1.7 times faster. 4200rpm * 1.7 = 7140rpm comparable data speed.

    This of course is just theory and would work best on long streams of data, video, music. Short little bursts of data traffic the 5400rpm would more than likely win.

    also the cache has a play in the data speed of the drive.
     
  5. extraid thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2006
    #5

    thanks!
    so in your opinion...would you perfer the 160gb or the 200gb?
     
  6. hkk macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    #6
    The 160GB is likely a bit faster. But if you really care about the potential speed difference and need the additional space too, I'd recommend just waiting a week or so until people get their custom machines and run benchmarks with the different drives. Because before that, everything is just based on speculation.
     
  7. Fearless Leader macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Location:
    Hoosiertown
    #7
    i would take the 160gb. Its the sweet spot in size, price, data speed.

    ran some numbers real quick. The 200gb only has a 25% density increase, so its comparable speed to the 160 is only 25% faster, or 5250rpm. So the 160gb is still faster, its 100$ cheaper, and if you need more storage buy a nice external firewire drive and keep the internal drive for the price of the 200gb.
     

Share This Page