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 there a difference between 2.4ghz and 2.5ghz?
- Thread starter Heather56
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
100 MHz, which you will not notice surfing the web or even CPU intensive stuff.
And since you ask, I doubt you need it.
And it will not last longer because of 100 MHz more.
Just spend the money on RAM, not from Apple though.
And since you ask, I doubt you need it.
And it will not last longer because of 100 MHz more.
Just spend the money on RAM, not from Apple though.
Nothing, just that 8 GB RAM cost 200 USD from Apple, while you can get 8 GB RAM from Newegg or Crucial for less than 50 USD, while you keep your original RAM, though Apple keeps that 4 GB RAM, if you upgrade to 8 GB.
For 200 USD you can get 16 GB RAM nowadays via Newegg.
Yes, and yes:
But you may not need it, or what are your computational needs for your Mac?
There isn't much of a difference at all. Even the difference between the 2.2 and the 2.4 is not substantial.
----------
The higher end pros, i.e. the early 2011 2.2 and 2.3, and the late 2011 2.4 and 2.5 will actually take up to 32GB when the 16GB sticks become available. They should anyway. But as of right now, everything supports 16GB
----------
The higher end pros, i.e. the early 2011 2.2 and 2.3, and the late 2011 2.4 and 2.5 will actually take up to 32GB when the 16GB sticks become available. They should anyway. But as of right now, everything supports 16GB
I would be buying one right now, so it would support 32GB or not yet?
----------
Nothing to extensive, just normal stuff, surfing the web, school work, photoshop etc. I was just thinking about it for later if I needed to upgrade it if it started to get slower.
It does support 32GB, but since there are no 16GB DIMM's available right now, that point is somewhat moot. Eventually the 16GB Chips will come out.
-For the tasks you mentioned 8GB would be more than enough. Chances are you won't even need 16GB for quite some time with those tasks.
May I ask why your looking at such a high spec'd machine for such minimal tasks?
I have 8Gb in my MBP. It is possible to take it to 16GB when the modules become available as posted above, but 8 is fine for most tasks....I use my Pro in recording studio environment, and it performs perfectly.
Having said that, I may well buy 2 16GB sticks when they come out.
Having said that, I may well buy 2 16GB sticks when they come out.
I thought the ghz difference was 400mhz total across the board, whether its 1, 2, or 4 cores active (the 2.4 vs 2.5) including turbo boost? I could be wrong but you have 100mhz per core more for 4 cores on each level of turbo/cores actively in use.
Also to the point of the 2.5ghz lasting longer (not physically but running new apps and such), by the time the next and best comes out and the apps that use the new hardware (~sometime after ivy bridge), both the 2.4 and 2.5 probably both will be obsolete.
Also to the point of the 2.5ghz lasting longer (not physically but running new apps and such), by the time the next and best comes out and the apps that use the new hardware (~sometime after ivy bridge), both the 2.4 and 2.5 probably both will be obsolete.
Last edited:
But there are 8 GB modules already available, getting you 16 GB of RAM for less than 200 USD, or 200 leather-bound pounds I guess.
Yes, it's pretty much. £ for buck here. I'm not in a rush to do it, but I'm about to dedicate a lot of my MBPs time to doing some folding. I will use my MBA for transporting files to and from the studio....I normally edit rough cuts on the Pro prior to transfer to my iMac, but since I got my Air, carting the 17" beast around is no fun!
.
----------
Are you saying that after ivy bridge comes out these current machines will be obsolete? That couldn't be further from the truth. The current Lineup of MBP's should last the average user at least 4 years.
----------
Are you saying that after ivy bridge comes out these current machines will be obsolete? That couldn't be further from the truth. The current Lineup of MBP's should last the average user at least 4 years.
Yes sometime after ivy bridge.
Edit: I see what you are saying, I wasn't clear although technically they will be obsolete sometime, and that will be after ivy bridge. I didn't mean when ivy bridge is available but after ivy bridges 4 year cycle, even then its "sometime" and maybe not right when the stuff after ivy is made available.
Edit: I see what you are saying, I wasn't clear although technically they will be obsolete sometime, and that will be after ivy bridge. I didn't mean when ivy bridge is available but after ivy bridges 4 year cycle, even then its "sometime" and maybe not right when the stuff after ivy is made available.
Last edited:
I would really never need that high of GB I was just curious if you were talking about the current ones when you mentioned their capabilities.
----------
how long are you talking for it becoming obsolete?
I don't know but theres a general time line here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IntelProcessorRoadmap-3.svg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IntelProcessorRoadmap-3.svg
If you're buying now, it'll be obsolete in about 3 months. Ivy Bridge processors will being coming out in early April. Current MBP's have Sandy Bridge processors. Ivy Bridge will be the predecessor to Sandy Bridge. Honestly, no matter if you buy your MBP when they refresh or not, you're never going to have a brand new non-obsolete machine for long.
I wouldn't want to buy one when it first came out, better to wait until any problems are worked out. I guess that wasn't the right question, since I'm not expecting to have the newest technology, I was just wondering how long most macbooks last people.
Though OBSOLETE ≠ UNUSABLE, as many seem to understand somehow.
I have a C2D iMac from 2007 and a C2D MBP from 2009 and they still fare quite good with editing and composing HD footage, though the render times are sometimes quite long.
----------
Many people still use their G4 PowerBooks and iBooks, many more still use their 2006/2007 MacBooks and MacBook Pros.
That doesn't mean, they can't fail (my iBook did, though warranty gave me a free repair), but every machine has to fail some time, some sooner, some later.
I have a C2D iMac from 2007 and a C2D MBP from 2009 and they still fare quite good with editing and composing HD footage, though the render times are sometimes quite long.
----------
Many people still use their G4 PowerBooks and iBooks, many more still use their 2006/2007 MacBooks and MacBook Pros.
That doesn't mean, they can't fail (my iBook did, though warranty gave me a free repair), but every machine has to fail some time, some sooner, some later.
sure is.
its a .1ghz difference.
this is all common sense. if you have to ask, you dont need that much ram in a laptop. i upgraded to 8gb from owc.
refreshments happen almost every 6 months it seems. i bought my mbp in mid october 2011, sure enough right after i buy it they put a new one out. you can expect another new one about the same time this year.
its a .1ghz difference.
this is all common sense. if you have to ask, you dont need that much ram in a laptop. i upgraded to 8gb from owc.
refreshments happen almost every 6 months it seems. i bought my mbp in mid october 2011, sure enough right after i buy it they put a new one out. you can expect another new one about the same time this year.
Obsolete, in the sense that newer technology will be available, will happen in half a year. This is the case with most computers and electronics.
Unable to run new versions of current programs?
In about 2 years a lack of speed will be noticeable - new machines will be about twice as fast. With some upgrades (RAM + SSD) it should easily be usable for 4-5 years.
Based on past development, after 4-5 years Apple will stop supporting the platform, i.e. new versions of OSX won't run and old versions won't be updated. The average smartphone and tablet will be more powerful by that time
edit: Concerning Ivy Bridge, the latest rumors are that the CPUs will run at 2.6 - 2.9 GHz. Since the chip architecture is the same, the CPU performance will not increase by more than 10-20%. Other benefits of the new CPU will be the power usage and a faster integrated GPU, which isn't such a big deal for the 15'' and 17'' machines, since they have dedicated graphics anyways.
when apple goes problem solving, an entire new OS comes out.
if i can own a pc laptop and desktop for about 2 years im sure i can make an apple last just as long if not longer. its all about how you take care of it. like its been said above, the components will be outdated almost every 6 months, so if you need something faster for new apps and programs that come out, a computer will only last you that long.
my suggestion. bite the bullet. you wont be sorry. now is as good of a time to buy a mac than any other.
Damn, that was the sarcastic reply I was planning.
I've done some comparisons/benchmarks between a 2009 MBP, a 2011 MBA i7 and a 2011 Mini Quad (same CPU as early 2011 15")
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1293809/
The fact is that most users won't notice the difference in CPU power between the ULV dual core in the MBA and the Quad Core in a MBP, never mind the difference between 2.4 and 2.5 quad core chips.
Not everyone needs cars that can do 180 MPH; 150 MPH is good enough for most of us.