MacBook Help: 2.4ghz vs. 2.53ghz

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by benf490, Feb 5, 2011.

  1. benf490 macrumors newbie

    Feb 5, 2011
    Hey guys,

    I'm sure there a billion of these threads..but seriously i need help.

    This will be my first Apple computer (i know, i know) and I really want to make it count.

    Now, I don't have a lot of money to spend, and I'm opting for the refurbs, so here are my options:

    a 13.3in 2.4gHz MacBook pro with 4gb RAM, 256mb VRAM, and a 250gb HDD for $999


    a 13.3in 2.56gHz MacBook Pro with 4gb RAM, 256mb VRAM, and a 250gb HDD
    for $1150 (these are not in stock very often on the apple store, so it's lucky if i see it)

    Keep in mind, I have a TB of external storage so thats not really a problem when it comes to the storage ON the mac itself. What is concerning me is the processor. Both are dual core (splurging the extra 200-800 on an i3, i5, or i7 is not an option really) and I don't heavily video edit or game. Is the 150 bucks worth it for 130mhz extra? Should I even go up to the 2.66gHz for $1269 even (same specs, only 320gb hdd)? This is my first real (and exciting) experience purchasing a Mac and I just want something that I'll be happy with.

    I know that it's not recommended to buy a MacBook now with the upcoming release of Lion, but snow leopard rocks and even if I wanted to upgrade, I could just do it myself.

    Opinions? Thanks guys!
  2. Mik3F macrumors 6502

    Feb 3, 2011
    The processor upgrade is not really noticeable if you ask me. I would go with the cheaper option if it was me, could always spend the difference on 8gb ram from crucial or the likes
  3. darknite38 macrumors regular

    Nov 18, 2010
    The processor difference is hardly noticeable, plus you get a much better video card in the $999 one. Get the 2.4 ghz.
  4. aznguyen316 macrumors 68020


    Oct 1, 2008
    Tampa, FL
    I also wanted to mention this. OP, don't only look at the CPU speeds. The 2.4ghz is most likely the one with a 320m while the 2.53Ghz is not offered in this current gen, so it probably has the much weaker 9400m. I would take the slower processor and better GPU ANYDAY. The 320m is only offered with 2.4ghz or 2.66ghz processors. So yeah get the 2.4Ghz with 320m and save some money (and a better machine overall).
  5. aCondor macrumors 6502

    Oct 20, 2010
    United States
    With each dollar you increase speed by .05%. It's not worth it.

    And the reason why you should wait isn't the release of Lion - it is the refresh of the MBP. Likely to get rid of the C2Duo entirely. If you're low on cash... I would wait. The computer you are thinking of purchasing will drop in value considerably as soon as the new MBP's come out.
  6. crusader22 macrumors newbie

    Feb 4, 2011
    How noticeable is the difference between 2.4ghz and 2.66ghz ?
    Worth the extra $270?
  7. smallnshort247 macrumors 6502a


    Oct 23, 2010
    I had to face the same thing. I ended up going w/ a 2.4 15 inch MBP. I used the saved money to buy 8GB of crucial RAM and also upgrade to a 7200RPM 640GB hard drive. I'm very satisfied with my machine.
  8. newdeal macrumors 68020

    Oct 21, 2009

    2.4ghz for sure...10 hour battery life instead of 7 hour, far better video card, CPU differance is negligable and best of all cheaper...this is a no brainer for sure the 2.4ghz is the only option
  9. kutsushita, Feb 5, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2011

    kutsushita macrumors regular


    May 9, 2010
    op, make sure you shop around. a certified apple refurb is fine BUT you could just buy it new (i have OCD and i must have something new) for the same price from microcenter.

    they're only currently offering $100 off the bas MBP instead of the usual $200. still not a bad option imo.
  10. newdeal macrumors 68020

    Oct 21, 2009

    I wouldnt even get a refurb or a new one I would buy used...just picked up a 2.4ghz MBP for $1000 canadian with applecare (this computer goes for 1049 plus 13% tax on refurb store in canada, plus applecare I think is 279 plus 13% tax)
  11. Fubar1977 macrumors 6502a


    Jul 30, 2010
    North Yorkshire, UK
    Hell no, you just would not notice the difference under normal circumstances.
  12. adnoh macrumors 6502a


    Nov 14, 2010
  13. Raqem macrumors newbie

    Jan 16, 2011

    And I applaud you for coming here before making your first Mac purchase. I didn't, and I ended up buying a G5 iMac seven days before the Intel ones came out. It wasn't about having the latest and greatest. So much stuff became incompatible with my machine so fast...:(
  14. Mikey7c8 macrumors regular

    Sep 15, 2009
    Montreal, Canada
    Yep, I too would go the 2.4. If you want to spend extra $$ then save up for an SSD - you'll get far more improvement. :)
  15. Fubar1977 macrumors 6502a


    Jul 30, 2010
    North Yorkshire, UK
    100% agree. A far better use of the money.
  16. runofthedill macrumors member

    Dec 22, 2010
    yep, i agree. My buddy has a 2.53 and we both got ours on the same day and we ran a few tests and just couldn't see anything that warranted his purchase. He then threw the ssd in though and I cant even say how much faster his computer is to mine now.
  17. fibrizo macrumors 6502


    Jan 23, 2009
    You'll likely notice 0 difference between 2.4 and 2.66ghz, unless you're doing a long video encode. ie in encoding for 1 hour, you might finish in 55 mins on the 2.66ghz. In regular useage, the SSD will make a huge difference. So much so, that my current 1.6ghz mba 11 inch feels so much faster than my 2.4ghz 13inch current mbp... so much so that the macbook pro gets no use at all... and is used solely to sync itunes to my iphone.

Share This Page