2.93ghz vs 2.66ghz on new 17" unibody mbp

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by 212rikanmofo, Jan 12, 2009.

  1. 212rikanmofo macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    #1
    I can't really decide if its really worth the extra $300 to upgrade to a 2.93ghz? I wil lbe using this as a main desktop replacement machine. I will be taking it with me to work everyday. I am a graphic designer so I use mostly the adobe creative suite apps and also do some photography, and edit movies as a hobby on the side using iMovie.

    Will there be a big and noticeable difference on the 2.93ghz vs. the 2.66ghz? I'm guessing it will be better since the 17" has a higher resolution screen, which means more pixels it needs to process. 1920x1200 instead of 1440x900 compared to the 15" unibody mbp.
     
  2. Next Tuesday macrumors 6502a

    Next Tuesday

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    Orlando,FL
    #2

    Its always a good idea to get the highest processor out at the time. Will future proof it .27 more.
     
  3. detz macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    #3
    What do you use it for? I doubt you will notice a difference at all. Put the $300 towards Ram and/or SSD for a more boost for your dollar.
     
  4. mBox macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2002
    #4
    If you have the cash go for it. I for one never see the jump at .3 or less in speed. I do a lot of 3D and Motion Design and those apps usually need Video and RAM power plus faster bus speeds.
    Ive learned this from MacPros and Uber expensive PC Workstations.
    Dont get me wrong, as a consumer looking at a personal MBP, Im fighting with the fear of the Quad coming out earlier than summer :p
    Ive tried to research the diff between current dual-core vs quad-core and havent found anything to support this.
     
  5. kastenbrust macrumors 68030

    kastenbrust

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    Location:
    North Korea
    #5
    Theres already threads about this but it boils down to if your really a pro or not. Video work, Flash and Photoshop will be aided by the faster processor, but for other uses save your money.
     
  6. sebasti macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2008
    #6
    I posted similar topic about 2.66 vs 2.93 which is still on the first page :p

    After thinking about the issue personally I decided to go with the 2.93. Everything looses value over the time and power comes obsolete. The processor is the one thing I can't upgrade (atleast easily) in future. Year from now there's no processor I could even install to old by-that-time antique motherboard.. however prices of ram and SSDs are likely to half where capasity will double.
     
  7. mBox macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2002
    #7
    good thought there :) $300 isnt so bad at the moment for the bump in speed. $1600 (CAD) for and extra 4GB however is hard to swallow :p If you can find a home for the existing 2x2GB DD3, then bumping it up to 8GB would make sense. I always find that if/when that ever happens I just end up buying the latest and greatest system :)
     
  8. jjahshik32 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    #8
    If your not going to upgrade for a while, then I'd say whats $300 dollars in the next 3-4 years anyway? Go ahead and do it!
     

Share This Page