Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

barefeats

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jul 6, 2000
1,058
19
If you are trying to decide between the 2.53GHz MBP and the 2.8GHz MBP, consider this factoid:
When running 3D accelerated games, the 2.8 is 32% faster on average even though the CPU cores are only running 11% faster.

That's an average of multiple games at high settings at both 1280x800 and 1440x900.

So if you are a hard core laptop gamer, the 11% price premium on the 2.8GHz is worth it.

On the other hand, if you only run CPU intensive apps, you'll see a 11% gain that matches the 11% price differential.

I haven't tested Core Image intensive apps yet but will report back in a few days.
 
I've done careful benchmarking. I have more tests I'm running this morning. will post the results on BareFeats.com Monday morning.

If I have time today, I'll post sooner.
 
Would be great to see some tests between the 2.53 GHz and the 2.8 GHz.

Especially if there is a big difference between thermal and battery life.
 
Interesting! One thing that worries me about the 2.8 Ghz might get hotter then the 2.53. Can you also add heat output measurements in your testing as well?
 
whats the battery difference between the two? I'm currently trying to decide between the 2.53 and the 2.8. I want the 2.8 because I figure it'll be a little more "futureproof", but I'm worried by the fact that the 2.8 can't be returned if there's a defect (especially being that the closest apple store is 4.5 hours away).
 
Interesting! One thing that worries me about the 2.8 Ghz might get hotter then the 2.53. Can you also add heat output measurements in your testing as well?

Thanks for the feedback. I'll be sure to measure internal and external temps during heavy testing. Battery life may have to come in a follow-up article so I can set up a "slow death" test later next week.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.