13" MBP 2.4 or 2.66 GHz?

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by dizzydot, May 29, 2010.

  1. dizzydot macrumors member

    dizzydot

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Location:
    UK
    #1
    Hi all,

    I've been waiting to finally make the switch from PC to Mac, and have decided on the 13" model for portability and cost reasons. I held out until they did the upgrade but sadly the 13" didn't get the processor upgrade and I can't afford the 15".

    Anyway, I want to obviously get the best that I can afford, and I was going to upgrade to the 500GB HD anyway (my 120GB is virtually full)
    My biggest question is do I go for the 2.4 or 2.66 GHz? Is it worth paying out that extra £250 (£210 when you allow for the HD)?

    I know I can upgrade the RAM to 8GB but tbh I'll probably do that myself later on down the line in about a years time.

    I don't know if I'm falling into Apples's trap of "faster processor must be better therefore get it now seeing as that's one thing I can't change at a later date." :rolleyes:

    We all know Macs are bloody expensive anyway, so I imagine keeping this for about 3-4 years before buying another whole new machine.

    I don't at present do anything intensive, but my present laptop (Acer aspire, 1.66 GHz Intel core 2 duo, 2GB ram, 120GB HD) is really starting to struggle and programs won't respond if I have more than a couple running.

    I really don't know that much about computers so please ignore my ignorance, if I go for the base model am I still going to notice an significant improvement on the performance compared to what I have now or should I spend as much as I can now and get the 2.66 even if it's just a slight improvment over the 2.4GHz?:confused:

    Thanks in advance for any replies - much appreciated.:)
     
  2. Bennieboy© macrumors 65816

    Bennieboy©

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Location:
    england
    #2
    go for the 2.4Ghz, you wont tell the difference in clock speeds ;)
     
  3. eXan macrumors 601

    eXan

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Location:
    Russia
    #3
    What he said :)
     
  4. iamvexed macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    #4
    I just bought the 2.4, and am loving it!

    Also, the moment I bought it, I upgraded it with a 640gb hd that I bought at newegg, and put the 250gb hd that came with the computer in an enclosure. So instead of paying Apple $135 to upgrade to a 500gb hd, I paid $100 for a bigger hd than Apple was offering AND a 250gb external hd(the hd was $85 and the enclosure was $15). You said you're willing to upgrade the RAM yourself later, so I thought I'd point out that there are not insignificant benefits to upgrading the hd yourself.

    Best of luck with your decision!
     
  5. dizzydot thread starter macrumors member

    dizzydot

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Location:
    UK
    #5
    Thanks for the replies :)

    So with the 2.4GHz 500GB hd 4GB ram, I should see a significant performance improvement over my present Acer laptop?
    The reason I ask is it's difficult to compare one system to another particularly when spec numbers really don't mean much to me :rolleyes: :eek:

    Thanks again and apologies if I'm asking dumb questions.
     
  6. dcoux09 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2010
    #6
    No question is a dumb question, you're investing a lot of money and you want to make sure that you do your homework. I think going with the 2.4 is smart, you really won't see a big difference with speed vs. the 2.66 model. As far as performance, yes I do think you will see a difference with your new MBP over your Acer. I was in the same boat, where my 120gb harddrive was full; with a 500gb one, you will most likely not fill it, however having the extra space really makes your machine run a little bit smoother. With 4 gb of ram running on OSX, programs open immediately and I never encountered a problem of a sluggish application. I personally use my MBP for simple stuff... internet, pages, keynote, iphoto, itunes... that's really about it. If you use more ram hogging programs, like photoshop or logic, then I can't attest to that, but if you're a basic user who just wants speed and no more blue screens, then your new MBP will be exactly what the doctor ordered. Plus, the portability of a 13 inch machine, 10 hours of battery, and a backlit keyboard make it a great little laptop. Enjoy!
     
  7. EasyJW macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2010
    #7
    2.4 [​IMG] you really wont tell the difference... ram will make a bigger difference!
     
  8. Vantage Point macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2010
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #8
    The 10% CPU difference will only manifest itself in the most demanding applications and when it does it will be relatively negligible. I agree with everyone else, save your money and get the 2.4. I have a 2.26 MB I take on Photo trips and with 4Gb ram is performs just fine.
     
  9. opera57 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    #9
    Yeah the 2.4 will most likely be fast enough for you, I have a 3.06ghz iMac and a 2.13ghz Macbook Air, and most of the time when I'm using the Macbook, I really can't tell the difference in speed! [​IMG]
     
  10. J&JPolangin macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2008
    Location:
    Thule GL @ the TOW
    #10
    ...use the $$ towards an SSD upgrade and RAM yourself...
     
  11. spudtc macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 29, 2010
  12. iCantwait macrumors 65816

    iCantwait

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
  13. Black.Infinity macrumors 6502

    Black.Infinity

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2010
    Location:
    Apple tree-Toronto
  14. dizzydot thread starter macrumors member

    dizzydot

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Location:
    UK
    #14
    Thanks

    Thanks for all the replies - they are much appreciated. I'm taking all your advice and getting the 2.4GHz model which I should be ordering in about a week. :D

    Thanks again.

    dizzydot (soon to be :apple: owner)
     
  15. Vantage Point macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2010
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #15
    Great. There are several threads on this very topic and few if any people have recommended the 2.6 over the 2.4 for the price. That price difference is best invested in RAM, hard drive or Apple care
     
  16. seb-opp macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Location:
    London/Norwich
    #16
    The 2.4 is a good choice - I just got it and its about twice as fast as my 2006 1.8GHz macbook so you should see a similar, if not bigger improvement. Hard disk speed is a big bottleneck, so in a few years you could invest in an SSD which should make a bigger difference than a small boost in CPU speed.
     
  17. sunshadow macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2010
    #17
    Is it easy to clone a hard drive for upgrading from the default to a 500gb, or do you actually install OSX on a new drive? And if so, do they provide you w/ software to install the OS on a new internal drive?
     
  18. iamvexed macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    #18
    Yes and yes. There are programs like Carbon Copy Cloner that make cloning the hard drive very easy. But Apple will also send restore disks with new computers. I recently used those to load the OS onto a new hard drive.
     

Share This Page