Any noticeable difference between 2 and 2.2 ghz procs.?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by CF Fighter, Jan 11, 2008.

  1. CF Fighter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2007
    #1
    Just like the title says is there any real difference between a 2 and 2.2 ghz proc. in the MB in Leopard? I'm slapping 4 GB ram in the MB when I order it next week and I know RAM sometimes makes the better difference than a .2 ghz proc. increase. All I'll be doing with it is using it to take notes, write papers, do itunes, maybe even try some Garageband remixing of NIN tracks.
     
  2. daneoni macrumors G4

    daneoni

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    #2
    For your uses RAM would be a better investment. A 2.0GHz dual core processor with 4MB L2 Cache over a 800MHz FSB is more than plenty. Add 4GB of RAM and you have one heck of a machine

    Keep in mind though that you can't burn DVDs on the 2.0GHz models
     
  3. CF Fighter thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2007
    #3
    Yea I've got no real desire to burn DVDs, I have one in my desktop and have never used it. I prefer to use USB Flash Drives for my file transport. I'm not a movie pirater or anything the few I do see are ones I either rent or make an effort to go see in the theater (usually on opening weekend).
     
  4. CANEHDN macrumors 6502a

    CANEHDN

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Location:
    Eagle Mountain, UT
    #4
    I agree. Adding the RAM and having a higher FSB will be more beneficial than 200MHz per core.
     
  5. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #5
    I'd like to see some objective evidence that this is true, but I agree the small difference in processor speed would make little perceptible difference in performance since everything else (drive, video, bus) remains the same.

    As for 4GB of RAM, this seems truly excessive for the described tasks, except possibly for GarageBand.
     
  6. saltyzoo macrumors 65816

    saltyzoo

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    #6
    Unless your cpu's are pegged at 100% most of the time a faster cpu won't do you a whole lot of good. Running normal application software, BUS / RAM / DISK will slow you down enough so that it will be completely unnoticeable. If a cpu test metric matters to you then the .2 is important.

    I've never understood why people are so fanatical about cpu speed while they run disks at 5400 rpm or bus speeds of 600MHZ. Blows my mind. It's like using a dragster to commute to work on back roads.

    If your cpu's aren't pegged at 100%, but you are waiting for something to happen, guess what? It's not the cpu that's your bottleneck.
     
  7. southbark macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2006
    #7
    I have a 2.33 mbp and i have no problems doing any of those things with just 2gbs of ram i can even play guitar hero 3 on it
     
  8. ashjamben macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    Location:
    Shanghai, China
    #8
    i was going to go for the 2Ghz macbook model. it was only when i visited the store to buy it it occured to me that for a extra £100 (i had student discount) i could get a machine with a better processor, 40GB bigger HDD and a Superdrive instead of Combodrive. I thought it was worth it, but i suppose its totally up to you. if you feel like the lower model is enough for your needs, and saving the money for RAM upgrades suits you then do that.
     

Share This Page