2.3ghz Quad vs BTO 2.2ghz Quad - worth upgrading??

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by whitedragon101, Feb 24, 2011.

  1. whitedragon101 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
  2. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #2
    No. Any speed bump questions that can be asked have been asked and the answers is typically a resounding no.
     
  3. wct097 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2010
    #3
    More than just a MHz bump I think. IIRC, that takes you from a 6mb cache to a 8mb cache. Still not sure if it's worth it, but certainly something to think about. If they offer the 2.3 for ~$150 more, I may take it.
     
  4. ChronoIMG macrumors regular

    ChronoIMG

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #4
    Yeah I think the upgrade price is what may make the difference for me. Point of reference, Intel lists "$568.00" for the i7 2.3hz with 8MB cache and "$378.00" for the i7 2.2ghz with 6MB cache. A difference of $190 so we'll see what Apple winds up charging.
     
  5. whitedragon101 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    #5
    Where?

    The specs have only been out today and I can't find any threads talking about the 2.3ghz BTO .
     
  6. aCondor macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Location:
    United States
    #6
    He means speed bumps in general have not been worth it.
     
  7. whitedragon101 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    #7
    I thought that might be the case, but thought it unlikely as its a rather strange thing to condemn speed bumps in general. Sometimes they are worth it, sometimes not. Its very specific to the chip being compared and the amount of increase.
     
  8. wct097 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2010
    #8
    $225 option under the discount store. I'm leaning against it, but I haven't submitted my order yet.
     
  9. ChronoIMG macrumors regular

    ChronoIMG

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #9
    In this case, I'm going to vote no on the value of the 2.2 vs the 2.3.
     
  10. lesyork macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2011
    #10
    I was considering the 2.8 i7 in the last gen models, but £200 (yes, we get ripped off in the UK - $340+) for a 0.1GHz increase + 2MB extra cache on these?

    I'll put it towards my RAM and SSD, thanks :)
     
  11. axu539 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2010
    #11
    I'm placing my order within the next 10 minutes. I'm leaning against the 2.3 since the processor increase is really only about 4%. The price increase on the other hand is $250... That's quite a chunk of cash for 4%. Sure the cache increase is nice, but with the 4% increase, it's not $250 nice.
     
  12. bilg macrumors member

    bilg

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2011
    #12
    not getting the 2.3 ...that money will be gladly spent on a crucial realssd c300 :D
    THEN we'll see who's mbp is faster ;)
     
  13. wct097 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2010
    #13
    I elected not to go with the 2.3ghz option. Given my reasoning for purchasing an Apple (iOS development), I'll put that money towards an appropriate iOS device.
     
  14. ChronoIMG macrumors regular

    ChronoIMG

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #14
    Any ideas on when we'd see these on our doorstops with the fastest shipping option? I'd like to have it by 3/4 as I leave on business 3/7.
     
  15. Tibits macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    #15
    With $18 2-3 day shipping I was quoted a delivery range of 2/28-3/4. I also need it prior to a 3/5 trip.
     
  16. wct097 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2010
    #16
    I ordered, BTO, with the free shipping option and it stated that I should receive it between 3/1 and 3/7.
     
  17. lukec macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 28, 2008
    #17
    100 Ghz Difference ?

    Although it may seem that the speed difference is only 100Mhz, don't forget that it's 100Mhz on each core, so that makes 400Mhz.

    Luke
     
  18. smetvid macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    #18
    Which still equals the same 4% at best performance gain. Not worth it. In 3 years both 2.2 and 2.3 will seem equally slow and you will want to upgrade anyway. 2.3 only gives bragging rights.
     
  19. starmelts macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2011
    #19
    Does that make a big difference in say rendering time for videos?
     
  20. smetvid macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    #20
    Not at all. A 1 hour render will take an extra 2.4 minutes. A very small amount compared to 60 minutes.

    2.2 = 62:24
    2.3 = 60:00

    That is of course assuming the software is capable of using the max extra 4% of speed. Chances are it may be an even smaller amount.
     

Share This Page