2.26ghz or 2.53ghz for Logic Pro?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by raynerrayner, Mar 25, 2010.

  1. raynerrayner macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Location:
    East Yorkshire, UK
    #1
    Hi guys

    I'm a Windows user finally taking the plunge(ie quitting games) and moving onto a Mac proper for music production purposes. I am planning to get an MBP 13" for portability purposes and I was also thinking of using Logic Pro on it.

    Now i've read a couple of threads on people comparing specs for logic pro but I am still a little(read: very) confused. Does Logic use a lot of processor speed or is RAM more important? Given that both models will have 4GB RAM to even the odds, will the 2.26ghz suffice or is there a significant difference which i will see in the 2.53ghz?

    I'll be mostly doing about 8-12 tracks per project at any one time, minimal plug-ins as I have effect processors for those, if it helps in giving an idea of the workload i'll be putting on the mac.

    Difference in price would be about £100, and I'll be using the education discount. Of course music production would not be its primary use, but I get the idea that it's one of the more taxing tasks that i'd have a chance to throw at it, the others being word processing, email, web and youtube.

    Sorry if it's a bit lengthy, just had the burning question, getting a little pissed with reason on the pc, hoping my next purchase will spare me the latency and 'hangyness' I am getting on this.
     
  2. belvdr macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    #2
    If it's a relatively inexpensive upgrade for you, go for the 2.53, but I don't think the extra 270 Mhz is going to mean all that much.
     
  3. vant macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
  4. Icaras macrumors 603

    Icaras

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Location:
    California, United States
    #4
    I'm a Logic user and I'm on the 2.26 13" MBP, and I agree with the above two posters. The increase in CPU is very marginal and the $300 price jump is also a rip off in my opinion.

    That said, I am a little regretful for not getting the 2.53, just because you can't upgrade the CPU but RAM can always be added. The essential difference in your situation though, is for 8-12 track projects, I think you should be fine with the 2.26. Adding RAM will allow you to have more audio in your project. I tend to use a lot of software instruments, so the slight bump in the CPU still could have helped me, but that's simply my reason for the slight regret.

    Still though, the 2.53 is a rip off for what Apple charges. It really does matter if you don't mind paying up for the upgrade.
     
  5. Steve Jobs. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
  6. Hellishness macrumors 65816

    Hellishness

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    #6
    correct me if im wrong, but i don't think its reasonable to ever be able to tell the difference between 2.26 and 2.53 on the 13"
     
  7. Raje macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    #7
    Personally I feel that right now both are ripoffs. If you can wait for the refresh do so. If you can't wait the 2.26ghz should be fine.
     
  8. Icaras macrumors 603

    Icaras

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Location:
    California, United States
    #8
    Ha, actually, yes, this is the real truth. For how long we've had to wait, I had almost forgotten that new Macbook Pros are even coming at all :D
     
  9. noodle654 macrumors 68020

    noodle654

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    Location:
    Never Ender
    #9
    In all honesty, as a Logic user myself, I went for (at the time) the 15" because of the screen real-estate. The 13" is too small, and if you are using that as the monitor all the time, it is gonna suck big time. As for performance, the upgrade to the 2.53GHz is minimal and overpriced. At this point, don't get the base 15", it is a waste of money at $1700 with a 2.53GHz proc and a lousy integrated 9400M. Looking into the future, Logic may eventually support OpenCL, and with the 9400M, you will get no performance increase. I would honestly wait for the next update, as I believe it will be the week after the iPad (dont hold me to this). If you honestly cant wait, or just dont want to, I would get the 2.26GHz, then buy 8GB RAM, a large monitor, external mouse/keyboard.
     
  10. Kyleptrsn1 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    #10
    First off, I want to say Hi! This is my first post here though I've been reading for months now.

    I have the 13" 2.26 model and i use it to run Logic Express. I usually have between 10 and 15 tracks going with digital effects on at least half if not more of the tracks. When I first got it the 2 gigs of ram made it almost unbearable, but when I upgraded it to 4 gigs it's almost like a whole different computer.
    I agree with Noodle654 in that a 13" screen is almost unbearable when you're dealing with Logic. An external monitor/keyboard/mouse combination is the way to go with that.

    Good luck on your purchase. I have thoroughly enjoyed my Macbook Pro.
     
  11. raynerrayner thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Location:
    East Yorkshire, UK
    #11
    Hi there, thanks for so many replies!

    I am quite set on the 13" due to my need for portability, am not too keen on lugging around a 15incher, so there. An external monitor is what I've also considered if I were to find working on the 13" painful.

    So what I gather from the replies so far(and please correct me if I am wrong) is:
    Ram > processor speed in the context of using Logic

    I have been religiously following the refresh threads as well, and while I am prepared to wait, I get the impression that the 13inchers are going to get an i3 at best and I do wonder if there is going to be a significant difference between an i3 and say, the 2.26 c2d, having said that ram probably does more to help than processing speed. I don't think an i3 will greatly enhance my experience in my other day to day tasks, so I guess my logical course of action would be to just give apple these couple of weeks to get their act together, otherwise I believe I'll still be very satisfied with current line MBPs.

    PS. I've also read some random comment about how the current line MBPs are very solid and stable, and we wouldn't know if the next gen MBPs would carry some inherent problems like the 8400-type problems. Opinions on that anyone?
     
  12. Icaras macrumors 603

    Icaras

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Location:
    California, United States
    #12
    In the context of lots of audio usage, yea. If you're going to be recording lots of audio takes and work with gigabytes of samples and audio files, then RAM > processor.

    But processor speed is important too, as the better processor you have, the more software synths and effects you can well...process.

    See it all really depends on the type of audio work that you do.

    But yea, the whole argument is really unimportant anyway, considering the machine you're looking at. You're just not going to feel the difference going from 2.26 to 2.53, like everyone else has already stated.
     
  13. zachplaysguitar macrumors 6502

    zachplaysguitar

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    #13
    This is incorrect, as the 9400m does support OpenCL.

    To the OP, I have the 2.53 with 4gigs. Logic almost never stutters or appears slow, and as others are posting there is minimal difference between the 2.53 and 2.26.

    The biggest thing here is it is impossible to do anything involved on the 13 inch screen. It's fine for quick stuff but doing any serious work requires a larger external monitor. Problem is each component in Logic is very large and on the 13 you'll really only be able to look at one thing at once. If you open the mixer, the entire arrange window is covered. Having the browser open covers about half of the arrange window... etc.

    My advice would be to save a few bucks and get the 2.26 and use that cash to buy an external monitor.
     
  14. raynerrayner thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Location:
    East Yorkshire, UK
    #14
    Zach: Makes sense, seems like a good idea when I want to watch movies from the bed as well :D i've got a keyboard and mouse already so it's no problem hooking everything up.

    What are some monitors that anyone can recommend that has a good value/performance balance? Something in the region of 21-22" perhaps? I've been using a laptop for the past 4 years and am currently clueless about monitors.
     
  15. zachplaysguitar macrumors 6502

    zachplaysguitar

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    #15
    It all depends on how much you want to spend. The Dell UltraSharps are quite nice, but a little pricey.

    I use an Acer H233H. It's 23", not the best panel by a long shot, but I think it looks alright and since I'm not a photo/film editor it being as accurate as possible wasn't an issue for me. It was around $200 last December. It feels GIANT coming from the 13" screen.
     
  16. raynerrayner thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Location:
    East Yorkshire, UK
    #16
    I'm in England, so not sure about how the prices translate over the atlantic. I'd be satisfied with something below £100, since like you I do not place much value on colours being super accurate or something, just need it to be decent and not too shabby.
     
  17. zeemeerman2 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2010
    #17
    For monitors, I got a nice database here of possible monitors. it's in Dutch, though, and in euros. (100 pounds is 111 euros, so it can match a bit close to pounds).

    http://tweakers.net/pricewatch/cat/344/monitoren.html

    Google Translated to English:
    http://translate.google.com/transla...pricewatch/cat/344/monitoren.html&sl=nl&tl=en
    At the right side, you can add filters to narrow your searches.
    The only things that aren't translated are:
    - Toon alle keuzes (meaning: Show all choices)
    - Toon alle filters (meaning: Show all filters)

    Click on the prices to see online shops that sell the monitor needed. It's mostly in Holland only (sometimes also other countries), but it gives you an idea of the price and product.

    Hope it can help.
     
  18. gwsat macrumors 68000

    gwsat

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2008
    Location:
    Tulsa
    #18
    I post to add my agreement to what seems to be the consensus here, which seems to be that (1) the difference in performance between the 2.26Ghz and 2.53Ghz CPUs will be very small, so (2) the better choice would be to buy the 2.26Ghz version of the MBP.
     
  19. ADMProducer macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    #19
    Proof that using smart language doesn't make you smart.

    I smell a contradiction there, or at least someone not paying attention.
     
  20. gwsat macrumors 68000

    gwsat

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2008
    Location:
    Tulsa
    #20
    I think your post stems from a misunderstanding of what I meant by the word, "consensus." To insure that there is no misunderstanding, though, let me rephrase and restate the point I made in my earlier post: I reviewed those posts to this thread in which a poster expressed an opinion, one way or the other, about the question asked in the thread title. By my count 9, posters concluded that the faster processor was not worth its price in improved performance, while only 2 expressed a contrary conclusion.
     
  21. vant macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    #21
    Yes but you listed that 2.53 is the better buy?
     
  22. gwsat macrumors 68000

    gwsat

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2008
    Location:
    Tulsa
    #22
    Thanks for the heads up. As noted in my last post, I do agree with most other posters here that the 2.26Ghz machine is the better buy. I have corrected my initial post.
     
  23. ADMProducer macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    #23
    Well done for realising your mistake. That was the gripe I had.


    I also know what consensus means, thanks.
     
  24. gwsat macrumors 68000

    gwsat

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2008
    Location:
    Tulsa
    #24
    Yeah, I realized that you knew what "consensus" meant just as soon as you pointed out the mistake I had made in my original post. Fat fingers keep getting in my way. :)
     

Share This Page