2 or 2.2 quadcore for photoediting and browsing? Is the 1gb vram worth the the few hundred bucks more? Thankssss guysss was hoping to pick one up next week. Or isit advisable to wait for a possible design overhaul next year?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
2.0ghz or 2.2 ghz
- Thread starter quadcoreguy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You aren't going to notice the difference for photo editing or browsing really.
What do you use for editing?
http://www.macworld.com/article/157893/2011/02/2011macbookpro_benchmarks.html
pretty insignificant.
What do you use for editing?
http://www.macworld.com/article/157893/2011/02/2011macbookpro_benchmarks.html
pretty insignificant.
in this theory it looks like the top 13" model will be faster for most users than the 2.0 15"
Thanks for looking into this, but I don't game much, or at all. But I might edit loads of photo, not really intensive but is the 2.0ghz enough ? Thannks
Since no one brought it up, I will.
What program are you using for photo editing? Are we talking simple jpegs or raw images?
The gpu actually matters more than ever than before vs cpu & ghz...
Operating systems and graphic programs and etc rely more on a good gpu for smooth workload than before.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What program are you using for photo editing? Are we talking simple jpegs or raw images?
The gpu actually matters more than ever than before vs cpu & ghz...
Operating systems and graphic programs and etc rely more on a good gpu for smooth workload than before.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm just using iPhoto and so far no problems on my 2011 2.0 15". Runs very fast and smooth. I don't game so the base 15" is working very well for me.
I have the same question es quadcoreguy. I'm buying a macbook pro to replace an early 2006 imac (core duo) as main computer, planning to buy an external monitor later. I am a photographer and I am going to use it with photoshop and photo mechanic, and I mean a lot, lot of raws. Doing some 720p video editing as well (imovie and final cut).
Of course the high-end 15" would be better, but assuming that at the moment that is too expensive for me and that I was working, even with some difficulties, with a 5years old mac, do you think the 15 2.0 is going to be enough for me?
Thanks.
Of course the high-end 15" would be better, but assuming that at the moment that is too expensive for me and that I was working, even with some difficulties, with a 5years old mac, do you think the 15 2.0 is going to be enough for me?
Thanks.
I would recommend the high end MBP. You would gain more from it then the other user from the sound of things in the long run.
Are you opposed to selling you iMac? Some stores like SimplyMac and MacSuperstore give decent tradein credits. Or better yet - craiglist it. You can also go to Best Buy and get it on a 18 months interest free and get best buy reward zone coupons back.
Or maybe just wait a few to save the extra money to buy it?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you are only doing photo-editing within applications such as Aperture, Lightroom, Photoshop, or the like, then the 2.0Ghz will be more than sufficient for your needs. Your tasks will never be noticable between the two processors...not models. What I mean by models is that most visitors to this site are confusing the baseline 2.0 to the high-end 2.2, and thinking that the difference in .2Ghz is really going to make the difference. The true variation between the "models" is the higher-end graphics card that would benefit gamers.
The items that you should consider would be an upgrade to 8GB of RAM and an SSD.
I would be using aperture or iphoto to edit pics 
. Mostly jpeg,sometimes raw I'm not sure if it's worth upgrading to a higher end gpuu thankss
. Mostly jpeg,sometimes raw I'm not sure if it's worth upgrading to a higher end gpuu thankss 
I would be using aperture or iphoto to edit pics
This is slightly OT, but if you're editing photos, I highly recommend the hi-res option on the 15". The extra space for toolbars, etc in PS has been great. Unless the lower res gets you by until you get an external.
I use my 26" IPS monitor for checking my work before sending to print. Or when I have a heavy load. Before I hardly used my laptop display outside of at school, but the extra screen space combined with improved battery life of my early 2008 model has me using it everywhere now. I know my wife is glad that I'm not stuck in the office all day now!
As for the GPU, I think with Open CL there will be some good reasons to have a better GPU. Apps that in the future can take advantage of it can potentially really speed things up. My decision on that was 3 parts gaming, 7 parts future proofing for Open CL.
It is, but only because it is that much better. Do you need that extra power? I couldn't tell you. The way I like to look at computer purchases is that the more money you put into it, the longer the amount of time before you are either upgrading or replacing it. The same goes here. Given that the issue isn't as much between 200 MHz more per core times four, my guess is that the 6490M in should be sufficient for what you are doing. Personally, I'm upset that for the same amount of money, we're getting an inferior dedicated GPU than what we had in the lowest end Mid 2010 15" MacBook Pro and that to get the all around improvement from last year, one needs to get the higher-end model. But don't let that influence your purchase, it's an irrational quibble I have with the current lower-end model, it's still a fantastic machine that will still do your bidding just fine, I'm sure.
Short answer: Yes.
Long answer: Yes, but the 2.2 GHz version with its better video card would be better, for gaming if you're a gamer and for OpenCL if you are not. Either way, the lower-end is still a vast upgrade from that iMac. I'm currently in the process of making the same jump, though, as you can tell from the comps listed in my sig, I'm picking up a few others along the way.
But given that, and the fact that I will likely need the duration of this refresh to save for the remainder of the cost of a higher-end 15" MacBook Pro, I'll likely be waiting until the next refresh.
Yeah I have an external at home so I'll probably hook it up to get more screen estate I'll most probably get the base model, the extra could be used to get msoffice and the VGA adapter hehe thanks guys
I'll most probably get the base model, the extra could be used to get msoffice and the VGA adapter hehe thanks guys I got the 2.0 for audio production, which IME is a bit more demanding than photo work.
But the way I figure it is this....
Buy the 2.0. It's $400 less than the 2.2.
When the Late 2011 or Early 2012 models come out, i suspect the base model will outperform the current 2.2ghz.
Now, if you sell your 2011, surely you'll lose no more than $400 (that would be selling it for $1400). Then you buy the newer base. You end up with an even faster option than the 2.2, a fresh warranty, new computer, and you've not spent a penny more. In fact your resale value should lose you less than $400 so you might come out ahead.
In the meantime I don't consider the 2ghz a compromise at all unless you NEED a gaming card. You might even find the 2.0 is serving you just fine and dandy and you'll have no desire to upgrade at all.
I'm getting to love my 2ghz a lot, and I'm very pleased I chose it over the 2.2.
But the way I figure it is this....
Buy the 2.0. It's $400 less than the 2.2.
When the Late 2011 or Early 2012 models come out, i suspect the base model will outperform the current 2.2ghz.
Now, if you sell your 2011, surely you'll lose no more than $400 (that would be selling it for $1400). Then you buy the newer base. You end up with an even faster option than the 2.2, a fresh warranty, new computer, and you've not spent a penny more. In fact your resale value should lose you less than $400 so you might come out ahead.
In the meantime I don't consider the 2ghz a compromise at all unless you NEED a gaming card. You might even find the 2.0 is serving you just fine and dandy and you'll have no desire to upgrade at all.
I'm getting to love my 2ghz a lot, and I'm very pleased I chose it over the 2.2.
Last edited:
Photoshop uses the GPU for a lot of things but basically the 2.0 model is lightyears ahead of your old machine. I'm a photographer and I'm writing this on the 2.0 MBP with 8GB ram. Bridge does previews as fast as the HD can write, Photoshop works like a dream on large files. I'm very, VERY happy.
The only thing the 2.2GHz model will be noticeably better in is the number of photos you can have open at the same time and still maintain nice zoom quality and inertial panning. These things are GPU based features.
8GB RAM, HQ display and an SSD are much more important, in that order.
At the moment I have to manually switch the discrete GPU off when I'm on battery power because I'm getting just over 2h battery life when it's on.
The only thing the 2.2GHz model will be noticeably better in is the number of photos you can have open at the same time and still maintain nice zoom quality and inertial panning. These things are GPU based features.
8GB RAM, HQ display and an SSD are much more important, in that order.
At the moment I have to manually switch the discrete GPU off when I'm on battery power because I'm getting just over 2h battery life when it's on.
That's what I use to switch it manually. I want to be aware of which GPU I'm using. Great little thing but a bit buggy the icon keeps disappearing from my menu bar and it doesn't work with growl even though it's set up to do so.