$500 more for MBP 2.4 & 256 vram... Worth it?

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by GanleyBurger, Jun 27, 2007.

  1. GanleyBurger macrumors regular

    GanleyBurger

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    #1
    .

    Ready to walk in and buy a MBP today...:D :D :D

    If I get the 2.2 128 vram 15" MBP... I can afford to buy 4 gigs of Ram and a 200 gig 7200 RPM drive from OWC.

    For light music recording and virtual instruments, should the 128 vram be enough???

    Or is the 2.4 256 vram worth the extra $500???:eek: :eek:
     
  2. overcast macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    #2
    Video Ram doesn't have anything to do with light music recording and virtual instruments.
     
  3. pablol macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    Berlin
    #3
    Check out Barefeats.com. He did an analysis of the video RAM difference and found it negligable. Basically the extra $500 is not worth the small speed bump and video RAM. The 2.2 is where it's at. Just get the 160GB 7200 RPM drive.
     
  4. Jessy macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2006
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    #4
    Indeed. I think you'd be ok with 128 BYTES.
     
  5. GanleyBurger thread starter macrumors regular

    GanleyBurger

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    #5
    .

    Hitachi has a 200 gig 7200 rpm

    Seagate has a 160 200 gig 7200 rpm

    Opinion on maker?
     
  6. SavageLLama77 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    #6
    The website says that the 256VRAM may "help" with duel display mode with a 30'' Display. Keyword being "help". What does this mean? If I never play any complex video games and never any professional video applications. How would the 256VRAM help me? Anyone, feel free to answer this as well. Thanks.
     
  7. GanleyBurger thread starter macrumors regular

    GanleyBurger

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    #7
    .

    OP

    It is funny to me that Apple made the options 2.2 and 2.4, when the top was 2.33 in the last generation.
     
  8. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #8
    Those are the only Socket P processors available.
     
  9. MikeyTree macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    #9
    Bear in mind that in MBPs the hard drives are not considered user replacable, so if you swap it out yourself that would technically void your warranty.
     
  10. dextertangocci macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    #10
    As far as I know, that's only of you break something. Just like with the mac mini. Apple says you can replace RAM etc, but if you break something, your warranty is void.
     
  11. GanleyBurger thread starter macrumors regular

    GanleyBurger

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    #11
    OP

    I would pay an Apple Certified place to install it.:D

    Another question:

    Would the current 2.2 be better for upcoming Leopard than the older 2.33??? Is there a post???
     
  12. Zwhaler macrumors 603

    Zwhaler

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    #12
    In some ways, yes. For example, the 2.2 C2D uses the Santa Rosa chipset, which means that it can adress 64bits of memory, or 4 Gigs. But other than that, the 2.33 is indeed a faster computer (not quite as good of a GPU though)
     
  13. Erasmus macrumors 68030

    Erasmus

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Location:
    Hiding from Omnius in Australia
    #13
    The latest BareFeats results (in CPU intensive apps) have the 2.2 beating the 2.33.

    http://www.barefeats.com/rosa02.html

    I'm pretty sure the extra 128MB of VRAM will only be useful to you if you want to play today's and tomorrow's games. If you have no intention of using the MBP for games, (or maybe extremely large (being over 128MB) CAD files) then the 256MB GPU will not give you much benefit.
     
  14. GanleyBurger thread starter macrumors regular

    GanleyBurger

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    #14
    OP

    So...

    according to your input, and a few calls to Apple and OWC today...

    The 2.33 is fine (a Refurb), but Leopard will really want the Santa Rosa Chip (2.2 or 2.4) for 64 bit applications.

    Also, in terms of Vram, if I ever want to purchase a 27" or 30" monitor for the MBP, I really need to go with the 256 V-Ram version, whereas the lower 15" only has 128vram.

    Sounds like I need to go with the SR 2.4 with 256 Vram, upgrade to 4 gigs of Ram through OWC, and save-up for when Seagate releases a 200 gig 7200 RPM drive. Or get the Hitachi 200 7200 rpm drive.

    If it's not that fast now, with continued updates to drivers and then Leopard, etc., plus the Ram and the faster Hard drive, the laptop may see even more speed.

    Word from OWC is that Ram (all manufacturers) is going to see huge price increases next week. Global economy stuff. I may order tomorrow.

    Thanks, all...:) :) :)
     
  15. JFreak macrumors 68040

    JFreak

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    Tampere, Finland
    #15
    Wake up, guys. During the days of 30-incher introduction 128MB was TOP-OF-THE-LINE so it is clearly not *required* to have 256MB VRAM to use it. 3 years ago 64MB video memory was considered "great" for a laptop. Surely the video memory demands have not quadrupled within that time frame. While it is true that more memory is always a good thing, this video memory debate has quickly become nonsense.

    (this comment comes from a guy that long time ago was excited about 512KB Trident that was user-upgradeable to a whopping whole megabyte... but that was about 15 years ago.)
     
  16. GroundLoop macrumors 68000

    GroundLoop

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2003
    #16
    This is true. But, you also have to remember that the complexity of graphics and texture sizes are now greater than they were 2-3 years ago. For the stated purpose, I would say that the 128MB of VRAM is fine. But, if you introduce bootcamp and the desire for windows gaming, then it is a different story. Playing 3D games on a 20-30" monitor with eat through VRAM fairly quickly.

    Hickman
     
  17. overcast macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    #17
    This post has nothing to do with playing games. You certainly aren't going to be playing todays or tomorrows games with 128 or even 256mb of VRAM on a 30" monitor. Especially on the cards they are attached to.
     

Share This Page