15" 2 vs 2.2 for Pro Tools 9 and audio use.

[skiltrip]

Definitely planning on picking up a new quad MacBook Pro 15" tomorrow.

Just wondering about if it's worth it for PT use to go with the 2.2GHz model.

I'm getting student pricing, so it's $300 more.

You get a bit less CPU (but still more than my old Q6600 PC I had) with the 2.0, and a much lesser video card. But I'm not playing games or doing any heavy video stuff. I might score to picture, but it's a little preview window, and honestly I don't think I need a horsepower video card. The hard drive is also a little less capacity, but I'll be swapping that out for a 7200rpm or an SSD at some point in the future anyway.

So it seems like it's basically $300 for 200MHz. What do you all think?

Is the 2.0 sufficient, or is the $300 worth it for the "future proofing"? Maybe I'll need the video card power one day? Not sure. The onboard video card on my 2010 13" MBP served me just fine, so I don't see why the one in the 2.0 wouldn't do as well.


Any input would be greatly appreciated.

 

[wjossey]

I recently purchased the 2.0ghz & I can't be happier. I'm a developer who uses OS X as their primary development environment (along with all my other colleagues), and it's been fantastic. I have a 240GB OWC SSD that I ported over from my old 13" MBP, and this machine absolutely flies. I'd recommend skipping the extra .2ghz and using that money to buy an SSD. You won't regret it.

 

[axu539]

Definitely planning on picking up a new quad MacBook Pro 15" tomorrow.

Just wondering about if it's worth it for PT use to go with the 2.2GHz model.

I'm getting student pricing, so it's $300 more.

You get a bit less CPU (but still more than my old Q6600 PC I had) with the 2.0, and a much lesser video card. But I'm not playing games or doing any heavy video stuff. I might score to picture, but it's a little preview window, and honestly I don't think I need a horsepower video card. The hard drive is also a little less capacity, but I'll be swapping that out for a 7200rpm or an SSD at some point in the future anyway.

So it seems like it's basically $300 for 200MHz. What do you all think?

Is the 2.0 sufficient, or is the $300 worth it for the "future proofing"? Maybe I'll need the video card power one day? Not sure. The onboard video card on my 2010 13" MBP served me just fine, so I don't see why the one in the 2.0 wouldn't do as well.


Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Honestly, unless you're rendering or playing games (and trying to push out more fps), the Intel HD 3000 would be sufficient for you. A lot of people (myself included) simply like to have the best. I've saved for a while for this machine, and it is the first new computer I'm buying myself. I don't want to look back in a year and regret not having gone all out after having waited for so long.

If your budget is limited, however, don't sweat it. Based on your needs, I doubt you'll ever even push the low end GPU. Like the poster above me said, spend the extra money on an SSD, and the machine will just fly.

 

[skaterbrah]

To OP:

Get the Base 2.0. Thats the same one I ordered, and its being delivered tomorrow. I'm a music producer that works HEAVY with Logic and all that, and going over the specs, the 2.0 will be more than enough. Dont waste money on the 2.2 unless you're an extreme 24/7 computer gamer who wants as much fps as possible.

 

[skiltrip]

Thanks. You folks just helped me save about $325 after taxes!