2.4 GHz of early 2008 or 2.0GHz of 2009???

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by moiraia, May 5, 2009.

  1. moiraia macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    #1
    Hello my friends,

    Recently my macbook early 2008 series, 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo, 2GB Ram, 160GB hard disk, broke, because of another person. So, that person now wants to buy to me another macbook equivalent to mine. It is hard to find in my country a macbook exactly the same with mine, because the new series have come up.

    The problem is that the new macbook with 2.4GHz processor is very expensive but on the other hand they told us in a store that the 2.4 GHz processor of early 2008 series is equivalent to the 2.0 GHz of the 2009 series. Is this true? I doubt it, because i think it is the same processor, core to duo, so i guess that 2.4 GHz runs faster than 2.0Ghz. But, i would like to hear your opinion about it. Thank you very much :)
     
  2. seattle macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    #2
    I looked in to this a while ago and I think the older processor was still a little faster although the new graphics on the newer MacBook are much better. So I guess it depends on what software you use and it you need more processor power or graphics speed.
     
  3. moiraia thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    #3
    thank you very much, i did the same thought, but the people in that store made me be not so sure about it. thank you very much.
     
  4. seattle macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    #4
    Your welcome.

    I found the old info about the different processors.

    "The T8300 (Older MacBook 2.4) is faster than the P7350 (New MacBook 2.0) while the P7350 is cooler and has better battery life. The thermal design power of the P7350 is 25w vs. 35w of the T8300.

    If you are running applications that are CPU dependant, like maths, video photo and sound editing, coding and decoding the T8300 will be about 10% faster.

    With 3d gaming, surfing, office, music and video playing it will be very hard to notice any difference."


    Link:

    http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=283349
     
  5. moiraia thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
  6. Beanlok macrumors regular

    Beanlok

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2008
    #6
    The new macbooks employ processors with greater bus speeds/caches which speeds them up. I would say the unibody 2.0 is a better machine than a 2.4 early 08 white book. Not just because of the processor but the design is wayy better, and the ram is also much faster. I would have to say the 2.4 would beat the new 2.0 just barely (not noticeably) Get a unibody!
     
  7. Knolly macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2007
    #7
    What you were told is correct.

    The current 2.0 is better than or equal to a year-old 2.4. You can say that the 2.4 is FASTER, because its clockspeed is faster, hence the larger number, but the 2.0 will be better/make your computer faster.

    So... yeah, the 2.4 is faster in definition only, the 2.0 is faster in use.
     
  8. relativist macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    #8
    I have both, I'm going to be selling the 2.4, when it's back from repair from Apple. I like the 2.0 much better, one other plus to the 9400m is that it can handle 800MHz Ram. The thing about the aluminum Macbooks is they don't have firewire. It's really hard to say what's equivalent, because a lot depends on how you use it. One of the reason's I went with the 2.0 is because the low price for upgrading the RAM for DDR2, and because I wanted to continue to use the accessories I bought for my Macbook.
     

Share This Page