2.2 SR or previous 2.33... What's Faster???

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by GanleyBurger, Jun 27, 2007.

  1. GanleyBurger macrumors regular

    GanleyBurger

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    #1
    .

    Before you say, "Dumb question," is the MBP SR 2.2 processor faster than the previous 2.33? due to any other factors???

    I honestly tried to do a search, couldn't find info.

    Will Leopard like the SR 2.2 better???

    Thanks.
     
  2. MRU macrumors demi-god

    MRU

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2005
    Location:
    Other
    #2
    The boost from the gpu in the SR basically balances out the boost from the 2.33 over 2.2 in the previous MBP

    So the reality is there is very little difference.

    I upgraded and got my new SR MBP yesterday from a 2ghz Core Duo, and to be perfectly honest - other than the screen brightness which is much brighter on the SR in comparison, there is really next to no major difference for me, working on Photoshop CS3, Painter X, Illustrator CS3 etc.

    I'm sure leopard will scream on both the 2.33 and 2.2 mbp's. I'd say go with gut instict.
     
  3. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #3
    The CPU MHz difference isn't much, the FSB difference likely a nod towards the SR machine.

    But the biggest performance boost over a couple/few years will likely be the ability to use an extra GB of RAM in the new machine.
     
  4. chex macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 17, 2007
    #4
    the 2.33 CPU is faster.

    in real world terms the SR computer will be faster even thought the CPU is slightly slower - it can address 4GB of RAM and has a faster FSB.
     
  5. crazzyeddie macrumors 68030

    crazzyeddie

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    Florida, USA
  6. Adamo macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    #6
    "Will Leopard like the SR 2.2 better???"

    I think the answer is 'who knows?'.

    2.2 or 2.33, I would bet you wouldn't see the difference anyway.
     
  7. GanleyBurger thread starter macrumors regular

    GanleyBurger

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    #7
    .

    OP

    Basically, the high end 2.33 Referb 17" is now the same price as the new SR middle 2.4 15".

    I thought about going with the 2.2 SR 15", but have now found out that...

    Leopard 64 bit will want or need the SR platform (2.2 or 2.4).

    Also, 128 Vram in the lower 15" is probably not enough to run a 27" or 30" monitor. Apple and OWC say a big monitor will need the 256 vram.

    I would love to buy a big monitor eventually.

    Well, I guess that's it. I'm buying a 15" 2.4 SR MBP with 256 vram.

    Time to save up for a monitor!!!:D
     
  8. Jiddick ExRex macrumors 65816

    Jiddick ExRex

    Joined:
    May 14, 2006
    Location:
    Roskilde, DK
    #8
    A correction: most 27" monitors has a resolution of 1920 x 1200 and should have no more problems than any other 24" or 23" monitor. The 30" monitor on the other hand rns 25xx pixels that should benefit from the extra vram, but since the graphics cards still supports it, I wouldn't worry about it.
     

Share This Page