hey guys just actually wondering if anyone to could tell me something that the apple.com website doesnt about the differences between teh two MBP. i currently have an 2.33 MBP i purchased about spring 07. Im looking to purchase and new MBP, preferably when snow leopard come out, after combing through the refurb section i noticed a 2.4 uni. then tried to compare it to the 2.53 model and im still at a cross road. any info would be great.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Diff between MBP 2.4 unibody to current MBP 2.53 unibody
- Thread starter kigru
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The 2.4GHz Macbook Pro was released on October 2008, it has a dedicated graphics card. The 2.53GHz Macbook Pro was released on June 2009 and has a integrated graphics chip, ability to have up to 8GB of RAM, 7 hour battery, SD card slot, etc.
Eh, keep your 2.33, put in 4 gigs of ram, and a larger, faster hard drive. You can do both for cheap, and it should make a night and day difference in how your machine handles in everyday use.
The only differences are that the 2.53ghz comes with 4Gb of ram and tops out at 8gb max. The 2.4ghz macbook tops out at 6gb unofficially. Besides that, the minor increase in speed, which is not noticable at all, and an sd card slot. Thats all.
Just to clarify, JamesGorman, while the Mid 2009 2.53 GHz MacBook Pro uses the same NVIDIA GeForce 9400M as the Late 2008 2.4 GHz MacBook Pro, the Late 2008 model also has a discrete GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT with 256MB of memory. I know that you said it has the same graphics as the unibody MacBooks, which is completely true, I just wanted to highlight the differences for the OP and try to avoid confusion.
Assuming that Snow Leopard is able to successfully use the GPU to enhance central processing tasks, which is one of its goals with the use of OpenCL, the 2.4 GHz model is in some ways a better performer. This is because the 900 MHz clock speed difference could very well be equalized by OpenCL and the 2.4 GHz model will certainly have higher graphical performance. However, I would argue that other than the OpenCL benefits, typical use will not benefit from having a dedicated GPU. Gaming and 3D modeling are basically all that would benefit from that. If you never get Snow Leopard, a 2.53 GHz computer will run faster than a 2.4 GHz computer no matter which video cards they have outside of any gaming or modeling application.
With that said, if there is no real chance of you doing much video gaming or other GPU intense activities, there is a chance that some day you might want to upgrade to 8 GB of RAM which the 2.4 cannot accommodate.
Also consider that the 2.4 GHz model has an ExpressCard/34 slot. This is something that some professionals (such as audio) might prefer to the SD card slot of the 2.53 GHz model. But if external sound cards, eSATA hard drives and the like are not something you would use, it might be more convenient to have a built in SD card reader.
The refurbished computer would likely have 2 GB of RAM, so you'll have to spend $65 on newegg.com to purchase the memory. Installation is pretty simple, but that does make the refurbished model either $65 more expensive or, if you don't upgrade, slower.
Lastly, the 2.4 GHz model has an access panel to a 5 hour lithium ion battery and the hard drive. While this makes it possible to switch batteries or hard drives without removing the 8 assembly screws, consider realistically if this is important. Most people do not ever get an extra battery, and when you do replace either the battery or hard drive it is painless on either model, so the 1000 cycle, 7 hour battery might be the better choice there.
Assuming that Snow Leopard is able to successfully use the GPU to enhance central processing tasks, which is one of its goals with the use of OpenCL, the 2.4 GHz model is in some ways a better performer. This is because the 900 MHz clock speed difference could very well be equalized by OpenCL and the 2.4 GHz model will certainly have higher graphical performance. However, I would argue that other than the OpenCL benefits, typical use will not benefit from having a dedicated GPU. Gaming and 3D modeling are basically all that would benefit from that. If you never get Snow Leopard, a 2.53 GHz computer will run faster than a 2.4 GHz computer no matter which video cards they have outside of any gaming or modeling application.
With that said, if there is no real chance of you doing much video gaming or other GPU intense activities, there is a chance that some day you might want to upgrade to 8 GB of RAM which the 2.4 cannot accommodate.
Also consider that the 2.4 GHz model has an ExpressCard/34 slot. This is something that some professionals (such as audio) might prefer to the SD card slot of the 2.53 GHz model. But if external sound cards, eSATA hard drives and the like are not something you would use, it might be more convenient to have a built in SD card reader.
The refurbished computer would likely have 2 GB of RAM, so you'll have to spend $65 on newegg.com to purchase the memory. Installation is pretty simple, but that does make the refurbished model either $65 more expensive or, if you don't upgrade, slower.
Lastly, the 2.4 GHz model has an access panel to a 5 hour lithium ion battery and the hard drive. While this makes it possible to switch batteries or hard drives without removing the 8 assembly screws, consider realistically if this is important. Most people do not ever get an extra battery, and when you do replace either the battery or hard drive it is painless on either model, so the 1000 cycle, 7 hour battery might be the better choice there.
I had MB 2.4 (upgraded to 4GB) and now have MBP 2.53. In terms of usability, the machines both feel peppy - no real difference in terms of overall responsiveness.
The 2.53 has a slightly better display, firewire and better battery life. The 2.4 battery life was very good though.
The 2.53 has a slightly better display, firewire and better battery life. The 2.4 battery life was very good though.
I did know that actually, I was referring to only the 13" models. I should have clarified.