Replacing the MacBook RAM, Hard Drive (Video) and Benchmarks

Discussion in 'MacRumors News Discussion (archive)' started by MacRumors, May 18, 2006.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    [​IMG]

    With the introduction of the Apple MacBook, one of the new features offered to end users is the ability for users to replace the internal hard drive. Typically, Apple laptop hard drive replacement has required the involvement authorized technician in the past.

    Both the MacBook's RAM and Hard Drive are accessible through a panel under the battery and the process has been detailed in this Video from MacWorld.

    MacWorld also provides the first benchmarks of the new MacBook, comparing it to the G4 iBooks it replaces as well as the current MacBook Pro and iMac.
     
  2. macrumors 6502a

    amateurmacfreak

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    #2
    Cool. Makes it look very, very easy. :)

    EDIT: Benchmarks look great too, but I'd go for MBP for looks and graphics.
     
  3. macrumors 6502a

    Temujin

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Location:
    Copenhagen
    #3
    The "ram-levers" is quite ingenious IMO.
     
  4. macrumors 65816

    yankeefan24

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2005
    Location:
    NYC
    #4
    Wow. Can't wait until tomorrow night (when I might get one)! Looks so easy.
     
  5. macrumors newbie

    Pokeon

    Joined:
    May 4, 2006
    Location:
    -= Somewhere in space =-
    #5
    Benchmarks arent as good as a I hoped but are alittle better then I expected
     
  6. macrumors 65816

    runninmac

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    Location:
    Rockford MI
    #6
    Wow that Hard Drive is amazing!
     
  7. macrumors 68020

    Heb1228

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Location:
    Virginia Beach, VA
    #7
    I didn't think upgrading RAM could get much easier than it was in the Powerbook and iBook G4s. Little stuff like this is one of the many reasons I love Apple.
     
  8. macrumors 603

    jeremy.king

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Fuquay Varina, NC
    #8
    Are all those apps Universal? Why even bother comparing PS in Rosetta on an Intel vs. native on a G4?
     
  9. macrumors 6502a

    Xephian

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    Location:
    United States
    #9
    Did better than I expected in C4D.
     
  10. macrumors 65816

    yankeefan24

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2005
    Location:
    NYC
    #10
    I don't know about all of them but PS is not universal. I repeat not universal.
     
  11. macrumors regular

    dagger01

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2004
    Location:
    USA
    #11
    Ummm...

    I want to know why a 2GHz Core Duo iMac and a 2GHz Core Duo MacBook don't give the same results? The only thing different about them is the hard drive speed and that certainly shouldn't impact these tests enough to skew the results that far.

    EDIT: Except the Zip file creation and the graphics test, I'd see that as obvious.
     
  12. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #12
    As is the ease by which the DS can be replaced.

    Apple trumps everyone in ease of use.
     
  13. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2003
    #13

    For a couple reasons:

    (a) The Intel is significantly faster in raw clock speed, and has has two cores. Thus, it's reasonable to think that the Macbook version might match the iBook G4 version.

    (b) For people who NEED to use Adobe app's, knowing whether it matches the G4-optimized version is an important thing to know.
     
  14. macrumors 68000

    MrCrowbar

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    #14
    I guess the hard drive (5400 rpm) is what slows the Macbook down compared to the iMac 20". The iMovei Filter is on the GPU, right? Kinda impressed about that GMA thingie. Really seems to handle 2D stuff well. And it ouperforms the iBook on 3D by little. :p
    Face it, gaming mashines are expensive. If you want a thing for gaming, Falcon Northwest has some nice stuff. I'll stick with Apple for the useful every day stuff.
     
  15. macrumors 68000

    dongmin

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    #15
    I found this interesting:

    UT2004 test:

    21.4 fps: PowerBook 15" 1.67ghz (Mobility Radeon 9700)
    17.8 fps: MacBook 13" 1.83ghz x2 (Intel 950)


    So, compared to the old PowerBooks, the integrated Intel graphics is actually not that bad. I imagine the significantly faster CPU helps somewhat.
     
  16. macrumors 6502

    X5-452

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    Location:
    Calgary, Canada
    #16
    They give very similar results in several tests. The only difference between them, aside from hard drive speed, is that the MacBook has integrated graphics, while the iMac has a dedicated card.
     
  17. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    #17
    Right, Macbook is great for regular use, not for gaming.
     
  18. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 18, 2006
    Location:
    Nantes, France
    #18
    Wow. Non-gamers really don't need to go pro. Or does the integrated noticeably affect the responsiveness of the GUI ?

    --------------------------
    http://www.fifth-essence.net: OS X, Qt and Ruby programming, and much more !
     
  19. macrumors 68030

    Capt Underpants

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2003
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    #19
    Depressing framerates... exactly what was expected though :(

    Otherwise it's an awesome machine. I'm still deciding whether it's worth it (for me at least... I was hoping to consolidate my mac and gaming PC, but the macbook won't do it). It would make my mac experience much better, but I'd have to keep the PC. Decisions decisions...
     
  20. macrumors member

    nem3015

    Joined:
    May 18, 2006
    Location:
    Pleasanton, California
    #20
    MacBook 2.0 White with 2Gb Ram and 120Gb disk

    Apple Store $2049
    Do it yourself $1620

    and doing it doesn't void your warranty :D

    just hurts Apple feelings maybe a little bit lol
     
  21. macrumors G3

    QCassidy352

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #21
    Are you kidding me? Those benchmarks convinced me once and for all just how unbelievably horrible the integrated graphics are. A 2.0 core duo edges out a 1.42 Ghz G4 (which itself only has a 32 MB card!) and loses to a 1.67 G4?? Absolutely disgusting. Look at what the core duo can do with a decent chip (imac and mbp)... the integrated graphics are totally hamstringing a fantastic processor.
     
  22. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 18, 2006
    #22
    My own benchmarks

    you know, every time see see a new Apple product, i wonder about the benchmarks.

    i have a 12" Aluminum Powerbook G4/1.33GHz, w/1Gb RAM. i opened MS Word 2004.

    it took about 12 seconds.

    i went to the Apple store yesterday, found a MacBook Pro Core Duo 2 GHz, and opened MS Word 2004.

    it took about 9 seconds.

    i repeated this for Excel, Photoshop, and GarageBand. all were within a few seconds of each other.

    operating the programs on both machines, i noticed very little difference in operating speed and snappiness.

    up to five times faster than my G4? bull.

    that said, i want the new black MacBook. :)
     
  23. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    #23
    Replacing hard drive was never difficult... but this is a cakewalk!
     
  24. macrumors 65816

    j-a-x

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2005
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    #24
    It's weird that they didn't compare it with a 12" powerbook, since that's the machine it's replacing.
    I want to know whether upgrading would be worth it (even though I can't afford that right now).
     
  25. macrumors 6502

    Mainyehc

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2004
    Location:
    Lisbon, Portugal
    #25

    Do you even know that the new Macs have INTEL PROCESSORS inside them? The x86 architecture is entirely different from PowerPC so all of those apps except Garageband, being PowerPC apps, have to be translated on the fly by Rosetta (and they are all really heavyweight... PS? Whoa!). The simple fact they even run at all should seem as miracle in itself! So stop trolling and read before you post:

    http://www.apple.com/rosetta/
    http://guides.macrumors.com/Rosetta

    Oh, and btw, FreeHand 11 absolutely FLIES on a 17'' iMac CoreDuo 1.8 GHz, when compared with my Rev. A 20'' iMac G5 1.8 GHz, and that's under Rosetta... go figure!
     

Share This Page