Help me decide on the 2.0 or 2.4 issue.

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by Davidkoh, Oct 17, 2008.

  1. Davidkoh macrumors 65816

    Aug 2, 2008

    I ordered the 2.0 MB a few days ago, but I started thinking of the 2.4 is worth the more money :). I live in Sweden so they charged me an amount equal to $1460 for the 2.0 + a be.ez case. If i were to call them and ask for the 2.4 instead they would add another $350 on that (the entry level MBP is $2210) this is all with a 10% student discount.

    What I am really worried about is that the 2.0 will be worse then my late 07 whitebook I had before with the 2.2 Ghz santa rosa. I'd feel bad paying almost $1500 for the 2.0 and it being worse off CPU wise then my old computer.

    What im mainly worried about is during some games and such, I do rarely do CPU intensive stuff otherwise. I compile a few scripts now and then for my programming things (which I do not care if it goes quicker though since when I compile many I just put it on before im eating and it takes 5 minutes max).

    Although I do unrar alot I wouldn't think it's worth paying more to knock off a few seconds on this :p

    What's important to me is that I do not like the computer being slow and such. And the game issue I allready stated.

    PS The backlit keyboard is only a "cool factor" for me (pretty big one though), I wouldn't have any real use of it because my eyes get strained if im in a dark room at a computer, so I always keep my lamps on.

    So, would I notice a big differences while playing games? Or should I rather upgrade to 4 Gb of memory later (costs $170) on the aftermarket. My experience tells me the memory will make a bigger difference, but what do you guys think? Any 2.0 owners who can game decent without problem.

    What I think about here is that the Nvidia GPU takes a bit of load from the CPU in the old one, resulting in more CPU power availiable, am I wrong?

    I watched the Gizmodo test of Spore and the MBP beat the MB even with the 9400m on, was this due to the MB being 2.4 and the MBP 2.53 or because the MB had 2 GB memory and the MBP 4 GB?

    Please give me some more info ;)
  2. Dybbuk macrumors 6502a

    Aug 8, 2006
    You won't notice much of a difference. This is more about whether or not you really want the backlight. I personally don't think it's worth the price increase unless you're doing some really CPU intensive stuff.
  3. Davidkoh thread starter macrumors 65816

    Aug 2, 2008
    I really want the backlight, but not enough to justify a $350 price tag, if it was $100 maybe. What im getting at is that the most important thing for me when paying the $1500 bucks is that I want to feel satisfied. Im just worried that i'll regret not having the extra 0.4 Ghz of CPU power.

    I seen it being a 15-20% difference in CPU intensive tasks, but I am not as updated about how much CPU the games today take as I was a few years ago :) Do games today usualy go over 80-90% CPU usage?
  4. Dybbuk macrumors 6502a

    Aug 8, 2006
    If you're really that concerned, get the 2.4. it sounds like if you get the 2.0 you'll be left feeling unsatisfied.
  5. Shivetya macrumors 65816

    Jan 16, 2008

    I rarely if ever look at my keyboard, so back lighting seems more of a gee-whiz feature than anything. I mean, if you have to constantly look at it to get the right keys something is wrong with it or you :p
  6. Davidkoh thread starter macrumors 65816

    Aug 2, 2008
    Well, i'll only be unsatisfied if I actually notice the computer lagging all the time :p I noticed it a bit with my old 2.2 Ghz santa rosa, but that was more a memory issue really, that only happened when I got huge page outs.

    Im thinking of investing the $350 the 2.4 would cost me into a desktop pc for heavier gaming and more CPU intensive tasks...

    I feel like im going to lose more when selling the 2.4 Ghz then the 2.0 one, I have to get $350 more when I sell the computer then I would with the 2.0, and most people do not really know the difference...

Share This Page