I'm looking into getting a new macbook pro, and am trying to decide between the base model, or upgrading to the 2.8 ghz. I'll be buying a new hard drive and RAM from another, cheaper, source to get a total of 4gb RAM. So, what should i do? Is the 2.8 that much better?
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.
Is the 2.8ghz That useful in new MBP's?
- Thread starter jfull15
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No. There's not a noticeable real world difference in speed between the 2.5 and 2.8 GHz processors. The 4 GB of RAM will give you loads more usefulness than a 2.8 GHz processor will in the MBP. Just so you know, the 2.5 GHz model comes standard with 4 GBs of RAM (at least that's what I'm deducing you're looking at from what you said).
In simple terms? Probably not. Unless you're doing intensive work, you're never going to notice the difference. Especially not for $300. Save you money for your Hard Drive, Ram, and maybe a nice External Storage Solution or Display.
The base MBP model is 2.4Ghz and comes with 2 GB memory standard. I'm pretty sure that's what he's talking about.
Ah whoops. Yes, that's what I was referring to.
And here's a little bit more info,
right now I have a 2.8ghz 24" iMac with 4gig ram - and use it for CS3, Final Cut Studio, and then misc. tasks
I have no idea if I'd want to do that with the Pro or not, but according to the Macworld benchmarks, there's a noticeable difference.
I also want the laptop to last awhile. I'm short on cash, but if it's necessary willing to lay down the money.
so, is it still worth it? go all out or save?
i say just get the 2.4 model and go to another source and buy a 2x2gb set of RAM for it, you can use the rest of the cash for a better harddrive or other accessories or programs
2.4, 2.5, or 2.8 GHz will all offer you a comparable level of performance and will all last to around the same age, the benchmarks may go up as the models increase, but the difference is negligible in real life. Unless you're constantly bumping up against the limits of a processor, I wouldn't really recommend going with the next step up... but that's just me speaking. Personally, I go with the highest I can afford because it makes the computer feel psychologically faster to me (tell me that didn't sound crazy) even if in reality I have no base to judge my perception on and there really isn't a difference made in 90% of my general computing tasks. So basically, unless you're like me, just go for the base model and upgrade your hard drive and RAM.
I was using CS4 on MBP (2.4gHz Unibody) attached to the new 24-inch LED and was extremely impressed. I had a 1920x1200 wallpaper that I was manipulating and the only pause (3 seconds ... no beachball mind you) was when I applied three stylize masks at once.
Obviously, when ripping DVD's in Handbrake the 2.4gHz will take 50 minutes while the 2.8gHz takes 41 minutes.
Obviously, when ripping DVD's in Handbrake the 2.4gHz will take 50 minutes while the 2.8gHz takes 41 minutes.
Forgive me for looking stupid, but what is the difference between 3MB Cache and 6MB cache? What does that mean? What performance would improve? Is it worth the extra $300?