35w T series vs 25w P series MBP.

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Grokgod, Nov 22, 2008.

  1. Grokgod macrumors 6502a


    Feb 26, 2002
    Deep within the heart of madness!
    I am trying to decide between the 2.4 and 2.53 of the new MBPs. Now I have read several reviews that said that the 2.4 has a P8600 vs. the MBP 2.53 with a T9400. So the 2.4 has a 25W TDP whereas the 2.53 has 35, a full 10 watts more.

    Also I am trying to understand if the additional Vram in the 2.53 is actually being used, I assume that it's useful during video editing etc.

    I Use the computer for mostly two purposes.
    Scripting, which I perfer the coolest to the touch laptop possible and therefore assume that 25w would be great!

    Video Editing where the additional VRAM would proof very useful.

    The question is does the additional Watts of the 35W 2.53 use a constant load of 35W and produce far more heat or is it negligible.

    My previous Macbook was a 35w chip and was fine but that was a plastic case and tends to reduce heat.

    Also concerned about the 6MB L2 cache which I know makes a significant difference.

    Anyone out there with a 2.4 unit to relate the heat issue and how it could compare to the 2.53?

    Also think that there is a new 2.53 25W chip to arrive soon and I think that would be a super option.
    the P9500 is a 2.53 chip at 25W, tasty.

    I would love the 25W cpu with 512 vram and the 6mb cache.

    ANy advise is well appreciated.

  2. 7even macrumors 6502a

    Jan 11, 2008
    The TDP figures are usually "worst case scenario" numbers - 100% load, etc. - and even then, I don't think there's actually a 10W difference between them. The 2.53 might consume a few more watts, but at the same time it does perform slightly better and thus it heats up for shorter periods of time, so it's moot.

    If you can afford it and know you can use the full power, go for the 2.53. The 2.4 heats up pretty well, and I imagine the 2.53 could run a few degrees hotter when stressed.
  3. iToaster macrumors 68000


    May 3, 2007
    In front of my MacBook Pro
    I'd imagine the 2.4 GHz to be cooler than the 2.5, my thoughts being that it is a little slower and thus doesn't use as much energy as quickly. The additional VRAM does absolutely nothing for video editing. More VRAM is really pretty much only useful when playing games as it primarily holds data for the video card to use, ie, not video to be encoded, that is done by the processor and the video is held in the system RAM.
  4. Kaupa macrumors regular

    Apr 16, 2008
    I cant imagine any scenario in which the 512vram make any difference! it would help on a faster gpu like 9800mgt or 8800mgt, but the 9600mgt is to weak to take advantage of more ram. sure playing in high resolution there maybe some more fps, but what do 1-2fps more help in unplayable fps regions?
    i just can imagine some older games taking benefit, but i think that should be no reason to get the 2.53 version. Ram, CPU and bigger HDD are the main reasons to get it if needed!
  5. Grokgod thread starter macrumors 6502a


    Feb 26, 2002
    Deep within the heart of madness!
    Wouldn't the 512 Vram be very useful in working with Final Cut or Motion?
    Doesn't it offload the rendering to the GPU during Motion work or does it all go to RAM?

    I heard that the next OSX version will offload to GPU of course thats rumors.

    SO does the 35W TDP a ranking that must be chosen, is there no 28 watts or 30, that can be used to tell the draw or potential heat use?

    I mean if the 35W is not really 35W then does it only use the potential of 35W when it's need at a full load?

    I read that the 25W is the new standard for laptops, is it possible for a quite upgrade to the 25W 2.52 at christmas?
  6. J the Ninja macrumors 68000

    Jul 14, 2008
    TDP is something of a ranking for the heat envelope. It basically means "This processor needs a heatsink for the 35w class". The 2.53 will be hotter, simply because more clocks = more power though the chip in a given time period. It's voltage is probably also higher, plus there is the bigger cache burning more power. I wouldn't get my hopes of for an update. The best you can hope for is a change in the stepping for the T9400, which would likely be implemented as a running change to the line. Meaning you wouldn't know about it or be able to ask for the updated chip. (That's how it's done with retail procs. Places like Newegg even say things like "We cannot guarantee you will get a particular stepping of a processor.")
  7. Ampidire macrumors 6502


    Feb 1, 2007
    the VRAM would be more useful if the GPU was 256-bit bus rather than 128-bit bus, as in, able to actually use the VRAM quickly.
  8. Grokgod thread starter macrumors 6502a


    Feb 26, 2002
    Deep within the heart of madness!
    SO if the L2 6MB cache also add more heat then does the additional Vram of the 512 when you are using it add heat?

    The default is the 256 mode setting.

    Obviously the .13 of the 2.53 is of little consequence, especially if the additional Vram is of little use in most situations other than game, and I do not play games.

    Then is it wise to say that the heat issues out weigh the meager gains from the higher end configuration.
  9. Pressure macrumors 68040


    May 30, 2006
    If an application can use the frame buffer there will be no problem using it all. Some games run better with a larger frame buffer for textures as an example on this.

    This is entirely wrong. The memory bandwidth and the size of the frame buffer is not directly a benchmark of how quick a graphic card can use the frame buffer.

Share This Page