Do you have a new santa rosa mbp??

Whats your mbp choice?


  • Total voters
    138

XheartcoreboyX

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jul 3, 2007
753
0
if you have one of the new 2.2/2.4 mbp,
*Tell us what and why you chose the lower end/or the higher end.;)
 

e.magnusson

macrumors member
Apr 15, 2007
72
0
Lethbridge, Alberta
Well, technically I don't have one, but I did order one. I ordered the 2.2 GHz one (the lower end) mainly because I didn't need a 17 inch screen because I'd be getting an external monitor, and I couldn't justify paying an extra 500$ (middle choice) for .2 GHz and a slightly bigger HD capacity. What I was thinking of doing anyway was upgrade the laptop as it becomes necessary (order an external hard drive, etc. )
 

Trepex

macrumors 6502a
Apr 5, 2007
622
0
Ottawa, Canada
I considered 200Mhz CPU increase to be insignificant, I'll barely use the 128MB of video RAM as it is, and I can always upgrade the hard drive some day or get a FW/eSata external if I really lack the space. Oh yeah, and the higher model was a ******** more money!
 

XheartcoreboyX

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jul 3, 2007
753
0
Well, technically I don't have one, but I did order one. I ordered the 2.2 GHz one (the lower end) mainly because I didn't need a 17 inch screen because I'd be getting an external monitor, and I couldn't justify paying an extra 500$ (middle choice) for .2 GHz and a slightly bigger HD capacity. What I was thinking of doing anyway was upgrade the laptop as it becomes necessary (order an external hard drive, etc. )
there 2 choices for the 15'' mbp : 2.2 & 2.4
1 choice for the 17'' mbp : 2.4 !!
 

Denali9

macrumors member
Jun 15, 2007
73
0
Sr 2.2

I have the 2.2 SR MBP. Love it and chose it because I could not justify the difference in price for the middle model and I did not need a bigger screen since I have a 22 inch at home. I did BTO and I have a glossy screen with 160 gig HD :)
 

Roguepirate

macrumors member
Jun 11, 2007
57
0
i got the 2.4 mainly cause it had a bigger HD and i figure the better graphics card would mean i could use the laptop for a longer period of time before performance becomes an issue and i have to get a new macbook pro. the 200mhz was a non issue, nobody is going to able to tell a 200mhz difference performance wise unless they hold their milliseconds in high regard.
 

XheartcoreboyX

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jul 3, 2007
753
0
i got the 2.4 mainly cause it had a bigger HD and i figure the better graphics card would mean i could use the laptop for a longer period of time before performance becomes an issue and i have to get a new macbook pro. the 200mhz was a non issue, nobody is going to able to tell a 200mhz difference performance wise unless they hold their milliseconds in high regard.
umm thats smart to keep your laptop powerful for long....but hey paid all the money just for the extra 40gig in HDD?! :eek: and heared that the 256 is just less than 10% better in graphics,true?
 

brewno

macrumors 6502
Jun 8, 2007
459
17
Montreal, Canada
I got the 2.2 because I thought the 2.4 was too much for almost no difference in speed. Got 4Gb of RAM for it, this thing is a beast. Using mostly for photography and WOW when I'm not at home (when I'm at home, I play on a PC with better video card).
Besides, I bought it in Chicago and there was no matte screen left for like over a week. I had to travel 100km to get this one, in a small city lost from the world. And it was the last matte screen too. It was hard to get one, but totally worth it.
 

aaron.lee2006

macrumors 65816
Feb 23, 2006
1,215
0
Ontario, Canada
2.2/128

Photographer, Graphic Designer and casual gamer on Windows.

Games include Counter-Strike Source, Counter-Strike 1.6, Counter-Strike Condition Zero, Day of Defeat Source, Half-Life 2 Deathmatch, Battlefield 2, Call of Duty 2.
 

XheartcoreboyX

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jul 3, 2007
753
0
2.2/128

Photographer, Graphic Designer and casual gamer on Windows.

Games include Counter-Strike Source, Counter-Strike 1.6, Counter-Strike Condition Zero, Day of Defeat Source, Half-Life 2 Deathmatch, Battlefield 2, Call of Duty 2.
so is the 128 vcard enough? is it working just fine for the graphic desiging and the 3D games??

I got the 2.2 because I thought the 2.4 was too much for almost no difference in speed. Got 4Gb of RAM for it, this thing is a beast. Using mostly for photography and WOW when I'm not at home (when I'm at home, I play on a PC with better video card).
Besides, I bought it in Chicago and there was no matte screen left for like over a week. I had to travel 100km to get this one, in a small city lost from the world. And it was the last matte screen too. It was hard to get one, but totally worth it.
well so isnt the 128vcard good enough for games??
and why did you so much want the matte screen?:eek:
 

Denali9

macrumors member
Jun 15, 2007
73
0
umm thats smart to keep your laptop powerful for long....but hey paid all the money just for the extra 40gig in HDD?! :eek: and heared that the 256 is just less than 10% better in graphics,true?
The VRAM is a highly debated issue, search the board. It's 10% on current games. It's more with motion, it may be a more substantial difference in the future with games, though I doubt it, vram does not make that big of a diff, just lower the screen resolution and it'll play fine, the GPU is important and they have the same one and hence they will become obsolete on most games at the same time.

Now, you want to buy a MBP and can't decide? If you game or do video editing or have a decent cash flow, go for the 2.4.
 

MacDonaldsd

macrumors 65816
Sep 8, 2005
1,005
0
London , UK
Im in the "buy what you can afford" camp.

This thing has to last me a good few years so I choose the 2.4ghz model and had the BTO of the 7200rpm Hard Drive

Its beautiful and I have no regrets
 

brewno

macrumors 6502
Jun 8, 2007
459
17
Montreal, Canada
well so isnt the 128vcard good enough for games??
and why did you so much want the matte screen?:eek:
The card is great for games. Installed WoW on OSX, runs fine on all settings on high with no antialiasing, but will probably delete it and install it on a Windows partition as soon as Leopard gets out (I don't like using beta software, Im going to wait for bootcamp to be ready).
As for the screen:
Because I can't stand the glare. Specially if there's a lamp behind you. I went to the Apple Store several times to convince myself to get a Glossy, but once I got there, I clearly saw the matte screen was perfect. I use matte screen for my LCD monitor, I love it, and had no reason to get a glossy. I watch my DVDs on my TV, also divx movies, so movies are a rare thing on my computer. I use it mostly for photography so colors are less saturated and brilliant. Whenever I print my photos I also choose the matte paper, it's a preference... hehe.:p
 

Gymnut

macrumors 68000
Apr 18, 2003
1,848
3
Stock 15" 2.4GHz, although I did max our the ram via OWC. I would have opted for the faster hard drive but I needed my computer right now and wouldn't have been able to wait for a July/August delivery.
 

Kamera RAWr

macrumors 65816
May 15, 2007
1,022
0
Sitting on a rig somewhere
I bought the 2.4 17" hi-res. Mainly doing the basics, internet, email, etc... then also doing photography and video. Was hesitant at first about the 17" coming from the 15", but its grown on me and man am I glad I bought it :D
 

XheartcoreboyX

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jul 3, 2007
753
0
I bought the 2.4 17" hi-res. Mainly doing the basics, internet, email, etc... then also doing photography and video. Was hesitant at first about the 17" coming from the 15", but its grown on me and man am I glad I bought it :D
awesome the 17'' is great -but too big IMO- anyway glade your happy with it =D
 

UnclePaulie

macrumors regular
Apr 6, 2004
115
7
LA, CA
I just bought the 2.4 GHz 15" with a glossy screen yesterday. I don't really need the 256mb video card, but it's nice to know that my machine is more future-proof. Also, I will definitely make use of the 160GB HD and I didn't want to custom order one from apple with a bigger HD. I prefer going to the store and buying one in stock. The two stores I went to didn't have the 2.2 GHz model in stock anyway.
 

Alloye

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2007
657
0
Rocklin, CA
thats cool but didnt answer the why question...
why didnt you get the 2.2 GHZ and save the money?
Why?
  • 400MHz Faster CPU (200MHz per Core)
  • 40GB Larger Hard Drive
  • 128MB More VRAM
I always buy the most I can afford. It encourages me to keep the computer longer. Plus the higher specs often help at resale time. :)
 

PURCELL429

macrumors member
Jun 28, 2007
47
0
2.2...I just couldnt justify the extra 500 bucks for some extra vram....especially since the framerates arent that much different for any sort of games that i would play. Wish I had sprung for the bigger hard drive upgrade though...but i can do that later...or just get an external.
 

XheartcoreboyX

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jul 3, 2007
753
0
I just bought the 2.4 GHz 15" with a glossy screen yesterday. I don't really need the 256mb video card, but it's nice to know that my machine is more future-proof. Also, I will definitely make use of the 160GB HD and I didn't want to custom order one from apple with a bigger HD. I prefer going to the store and buying one in stock. The two stores I went to didn't have the 2.2 GHz model in stock anyway.
is the glossy screen annoying to work with in a sunny day? -too much light-

Why?
  • 400MHz Faster CPU (200MHz per Core)
  • 40GB Larger Hard Drive
  • 128MB More VRAM
I always buy the most I can afford. It encourages me to keep the computer longer. Plus the higher specs often help at resale time. :)
yup right,it will let you use it for longer time..it's spec will always be high in future.
 

Gandhi

macrumors regular
Jun 27, 2007
160
0
TX
I pruchased the 15" 2.4 glossy, 7200 rpm - IOW - topline 15" model. I keep my computers for 5 years or longer - so I buy the best out there. After ADC discount, I paid the equivalent of the 2.2 retail price :D

I still have a Thinkpad T20 I purchased in Fall 2000 and it is still working. I take care of my toys and make 'em last.