Hell NO: Base MBP has 3 MB of L2 memory. They can keep it!

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Full of Win, Feb 26, 2008.

  1. Full of Win macrumors 68030

    Full of Win

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2007
    Location:
    Ask Apple
  2. bamaworks macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    Location:
    Lexington, KY
    #2
    Better pony up for the 6MB then. Or just not buy it at all. Maybe you should email Steve Jobs and tell him to completely change his hardware profile so he can fit your supposed 'needs'? Or better yet, maybe you can get a free macbook pro for your mental anguish?:rolleyes:
     
  3. zepharus macrumors 6502a

    zepharus

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    #3
    I find it not only comical, but a little facist how they "entice" people to the midrange of a product line.

    The fact of the matter is people that any business that offers tiered products of the same model, DO NOT want you purchasing the base model of the line. It simply exists to make you want the mid range, which is the target product.

    If they get a few suckers to buy the high end then that is icing on thier cake.

    You have to understand marketing and business in general...
     
  4. squeeks macrumors 68040

    squeeks

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Location:
    Florida
  5. Full of Win thread starter macrumors 68030

    Full of Win

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2007
    Location:
    Ask Apple
    #5
    To me a 25% reduction in the memory, and an extra 500$ to get to the next level is a big deal.
     
  6. squeeks macrumors 68040

    squeeks

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Location:
    Florida
    #6
    you get more for your 500 than you did before, you also get a larger harddrive now
     
  7. bamaworks macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    Location:
    Lexington, KY
    #7
    Yes, to you. Good thing the world doesn't revolve around any single individual, or companies like AAPL would never get anything done. They'd be fully redesigning every 6 months like you'd prefer. You already have an MBP (judging by your post) so get good use out of it and stop being so greedy.
     
  8. andrewdale macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    #8
    I ordered!

    2.5GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
    MacBook Pro 15-inch Widescreen Display
    2GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB
    200GB Serial ATA @ 7200 rpm
    SuperDrive 8X (DVD+/-R DL/DVD+/-RW/CD-RW)
    Backlit Keyboard/Mac OS - U.S. English
    Accessory Kit
     
  9. bamaworks macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    Location:
    Lexington, KY
    #9
    Enjoy! You lucky dog.... (grumbles).
     
  10. Gunga Din macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Location:
    Old Trafford
    #10
    Good pickup. I didnt notice this right away, thx for posting. Seems a bit sneaky of Apple to do this.
     
  11. slybeans macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2008
    Location:
    England
  12. zepharus macrumors 6502a

    zepharus

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    #12
    Its about getting a cheaper price from Intel on processors... and it is sneaky..
     
  13. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #14
    I can see this person walking into a GM dealer and saying the same thing ... 4/6 cylinder, manual seats/windows on the BASE model -- stick it GM.
     
  14. Full of Win thread starter macrumors 68030

    Full of Win

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2007
    Location:
    Ask Apple
    #15
    I would not say a thing if we could do a CPU only upgrade, but how they have it linked to the GPU and HD upgrade as well is crap. It like a car maker only offering automatic with the leather package upgrade.

    It not an issue of cheapness but one of me being asked to do other upgrades that I do not need or want
     
  15. DocSmitty macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Location:
    Lincoln, NE
    #16
    Or you could look on the bright side, getting a bump to 2.4Ghz in a faster, more efficient processor at the cost of 1mb L2 cache, at the same price.

    Of course manufacturers have upgrade "packages." They want you to buy all the upgrades rather than just one. It was the same way on the previous revision, don't see why anyone would expect it to change. Yes, I'm a little surprised that the base model doesn't come with the 2.5 but I can cope ;)
     
  16. wipeout33 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Location:
    Los Angeles
  17. Coolnat2004 macrumors 6502

    Coolnat2004

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    #18
    Well, my PowerBook has 512KB in its L2 cache. No biggie.
     
  18. Robg54 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    #19
    Wait, so this is a downgrade of a facet of the base model?

    The older version came with 4 MB?

    What exactly does l2 cache do?

    Worst case scenario the old edition are now $500 off:)
     
  19. EvryDayImShufln macrumors 65816

    EvryDayImShufln

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #20
    No the old editions are NOT 500$ off because the old editions came with 4MB of L2 cache.

    And the OP is complaining because they took something away from the old base model. I fully agree with him: the higher models are not worth it for some people (like me) because you pay 25% more and get maybe 10% in performance. I hope apple didn't widen the gap too much by dropping the L2 cache. We'll find out when benchmarks are out I guess.
     
  20. cmaier macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #21

    Cache memory is much faster to read and write to than your main memory. So, when you are running a program, if it can keep all the data in the cache, it will run much faster than if it has to constantly sit around and wait for main memory to produce the data it wants. When reading main memory, typically the cpu has to just sit around and wait because it takes so long that the processor runs out of other work to do. The bigger the cache the better. A 25% reduction can make a noticeable dent in performance, depending on what you are doing.
     
  21. Robg54 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    #22
    Calm down, dude. I didn't say they were $500 off because of the cache. That doesn't even make sense.

    I was saying if you are buying the base model and thi g the old mid range model is better, then you can get it cheaper than you can get the current base model.

    Also, thankx for the info Cmaier.
     
  22. Batt macrumors 65816

    Batt

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Location:
    Syracuse, NY
    #23
    Aaaand . . . here we go! Reasons for all the waiters to now wait for the next great thing! I love this place!
     
  23. menthol moose macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2006
    #24
    The slight difference between 3MB cache and 4MB cache between the 2.4Ghz and 2.5Ghz processors is so minimal that it won't affect you at all in modern applications, unless you're running Photoshop with something like less than a gig of RAM, which really shouldn't come up.

    This is like the uproar that's going to pop up when people realize the base model only has 256MB of graphics RAM. It won't matter anyways, because 256MB of RAM is more than enough to drive a monitor at 1440x900.

    The new base model will perform as well if not better than the old mid-range MacBook Pro, and guess what? It's $500 cheaper. Have fun spending a ton more money for a very small increase in features. If I were buying one, the base model would be fine with me.

    EDIT: Oh, but don't think I'm perfectly happy with them, however. Can anyone tell me whose smart decision it was to stop including the Apple Remote with both the MacBook Pro's and the MacBook's?
     
  24. EvryDayImShufln macrumors 65816

    EvryDayImShufln

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #25
    Oh ok, now THAT I would go for! Right now I'm completely undecided which product line to go with, and I'm (unfortunately) even considering some outside of apple.. although I'd much rather not go to Vista, ever. I think I might write up a little comparison in this section soon..
     

Share This Page