MacBook 2.16GHz vs. 2.2GHz

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by ChicagoDude, Jan 23, 2008.

  1. ChicagoDude macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    #1
    I am looking at buying a MacBook Refurb; (I am new to Macs)

    I am looking to use it for general business purposes, some light web design, nothing too high end.


    Refurbished MacBook 2.16GHz Intel Core 2 Duo - Black
    13.3-inch glossy widescreen display
    1GB memory / 160GB hard drive
    8x SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW) Built-in iSight camera
    Original price: $1,499.00
    Your price: $1,249.00


    <OR>

    Refurbished MacBook 2.2GHz Intel Core 2 Duo - Black
    13.3-inch glossy widescreen display
    1GB memory / 160GB hard drive
    8x SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW) Built-in iSight camera
    Original price: $1,499.00
    Your price: $1,299.00


    Do you think the extra 0.04 GHz is worth the $50?

    I don't think I can add to refurb; however are there any other recommendations for this? Very much appreciate the advice.

    Thanks!
     
  2. Scarlet Fever macrumors 68040

    Scarlet Fever

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2005
    Location:
    Bookshop!
    #2
    You might as well go for the 2.2GHz model. At the very least, it might get you $50 more should you decide to resell it. And 2.2GHz sounds better than 2.16GHz :)
     
  3. KingYaba macrumors 68040

    KingYaba

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Location:
    Up the irons
    #3
    It's worth the $50 because you can put in 4 GB of memory.
     
  4. vendettabass macrumors 6502a

    vendettabass

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Location:
    Seoul, South Korea
    #4
    and those 2.2ghz's are the santa rosa macbooks? with the X1300 graphics too?

    I'd go for the 2.2!
     
  5. Batt macrumors 65816

    Batt

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Location:
    Syracuse, NY
    #5
    It's worth the $50 - IF - you put in 4GB of memory.
     
  6. psychofreak Retired

    psychofreak

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #6
    Plus you get iTunes controls (and Exposé and Dashboard buttons) on the F keys with the 2.2 :)
     
  7. capitanbuzo macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    #7
    Yes it is worth it. $50 for .04ghz is not worth it but the ability to use 4GB of RAM is worth it.
     
  8. MarlboroLite macrumors 6502a

    MarlboroLite

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Location:
    the 13 colonies
    #8
    Absolutely worth it. As everyone else has said, you can put 4GB RAM in it, the graphics card is significantly better, AND the computer runs cooler.
     
  9. heatmiser macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    #9
    No one has mentioned this, so I will: If you want to have the option of running Tiger (instead of being locked into Leopard), get the 2.16 laptop; it's the last Tiger-compatible Macbook available. I've got one, and I'm still running Tiger, with no desire to move to Leopard.
     
  10. David G. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Location:
    Alaska
    #10
    And it weighs .1 lbs less.
     
  11. Badandy macrumors 68040

    Badandy

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Location:
    Terminus
  12. eXan macrumors 601

    eXan

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Location:
    Russia
    #12
    2.2 GHz:

    - slightly faster CPU (2.2 GHz vs 2.16 GHz)
    - faster FSB (800MHz vs 667 mHz)
    - ability to install 4 GB of RAM (vs 3 GB limit on 2.16)
    - faster graphics (X3100 vs GMA950)
    - runs cooler
    - probably slightly better battery life
    - weights slightly less
    - media control buttons on F keys

    You decide if its worth extra 50$ to you ;)
     
  13. taylorwilsdon macrumors 68000

    taylorwilsdon

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #13
    Better graphics, longer battery, more future proof. For $50. Are you seriously thinking of the cheaper one?
     
  14. QCassidy352 macrumors G3

    QCassidy352

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #14
    Yup, that post covers it very well. The 2.2 is by FAR the better choice.
     
  15. CP1091 macrumors regular

    CP1091

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    #15
    That would be the main reason for me!
     
  16. heatmiser macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    #16
    Keep in mind it's actually an 8gb limit; 4gb sticks just aren't on the market yet. But if you're planning to futureproof via memory, the extra gigpspace may come in handy.
     
  17. dringkor macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    #17
    Note that the refurb page on the Apple website lists the 2.2GHz white Macbook as having the GMA950 graphics chipset and the 667MHz FSB, which I'm betting is a mistake on their part (since the one I ordered should be here on Friday). A guy on another forum ordered the same thing and has received an e-receipt from Apple with the serial number, and he said he looked it up on Apple's support site and it is indeed the Santa Rosa Macbook with the X3100 chipset and 800MHz FSB.

    Just thought I'd throw that out there.
     
  18. TimJim macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
  19. iCeFuSiOn macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    #19
    Definitely go with the 2.2 GHz. It's worth it because of the enhanced graphics capabilities and the Santa Rosa chipset which will allow you to install 4GB of RAM later on if you so desire.
     
  20. tjcampbell macrumors 6502a

    tjcampbell

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Location:
    Vancouver
  21. ChicagoDude thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    #21
    Thanks for all the responses and advice. The 2.2 has been ordered!
     
  22. QCassidy352 macrumors G3

    QCassidy352

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #22
    congrats! you're going to love it!
     
  23. iSovereign macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2007
    #23
    why would you say that?
     
  24. eXan macrumors 601

    eXan

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Location:
    Russia
    #24
    He haven't tried Leopard yet :cool:
     
  25. macdim macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #25
    You should.
     

Share This Page