15" Macbook Pro differences?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by krazykongo, Mar 10, 2008.

  1. krazykongo macrumors newbie

    Mar 10, 2008

    Im looking to buy a macbook pro 15" but not sure which variant to get.

    Ive been looking at the 2.4Ghz and the 2.5Ghz, which have the 8600 256mb and 8600 512mb GPUs respectively.

    Can anybody tell me if the differences between these two models justify a £300 price difference?

    Im leaning towards the 2.5Ghz because if im going to drop over a grand on something which i will most probably use everyday, then an extra £300 isnt so bad. BUT (a very big BUT), obviously if you guys and girls ;) really think theres not a discernable difference then i would be happy to save some money.

    Im a Creative Product Design student and will be using Creative Suite 3 mostly as well as CAD packages (e.g. rhino - which i will run on xp). Also, the usual internet browsing, media etc...

    Does anybody have experience with using the higher education student discount?

    how much discount did you get?

    thanks for your help ( and please be nice, its my first post :) )
  2. joefinan macrumors 6502a

    Sep 14, 2007
    Kingston-Upon-Thames, UK
    Hi and welcome

    I went for the 2.5 and I don't use such processor-hungry applications. The other big difference is that the 2.4 only has 3MB of on-chip cache, where as the 2.5 has 6MB. That and the extra .1GHz and double the graphics card all adds up to a slightly more capable machine and, I think, it's worth the extra.

    Just don't upgrade the RAM - if you want to get more RAM order it from someone like Crucial and put it in yourself. Apple charge a fortune!
  3. krazykongo thread starter macrumors newbie

    Mar 10, 2008
    thanks for the prompt reply

    I think ive made my mind up about not getting the 2.4ghz version now BUT ive opened another door and standing there is the 17" version.

    what do you think about the 2.5Ghz 15" and 17"?
  4. Salty Pirate macrumors 6502

    Salty Pirate

    Oct 5, 2005
    kansas city
    I went for the base model 2.4. I had a SR 15" 2.4 before, and this new unit is faster. Honestly, if nobody told me it had less cache, I would have never noticed. This notebook is plenty fast. Use your extra money to max out the RAM at 4GB (aftermarket) and upgrade the disk.

    The extra cache, 100 more MHz, and video ram are honestly not that big a deal unless you are really pushing the machine via photo/video/sound production or other high end need.

    Look at these benchmarks at the bottom of the page:


    you decide if the extra money is worth a few seconds.

    Also, you can order off the apple education store to get the discount or you need a college ID to get the student discount at an apple store.
  5. joefinan macrumors 6502a

    Sep 14, 2007
    Kingston-Upon-Thames, UK
    For me it then just comes down to size. A 17" seems a little too big to really be a truly portable notebook - it's a bit too big to slip into a backpack etc.

    When I went down the 17" route it seemed to make more sense for me to get an iMac and a Macbook. Similar money as the 17" and then you get the power and the portability (just in two different boxes) and a lovely big 20" screen on the iMac.

    In the end I opted for the 15" cos I figured I'd probably use the desktop very rarely (I love sitting at the dining table watching TV and staring out the window as I type, but didn't want an iMac on there!)

    There you go - that's my opinion...

    Oh, and don't forget that the LED LCD on the 17" is a BTO option.

Share This Page