Macbook Pro 2.2 128 vs 2.4 256

88Keys

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jul 10, 2007
135
62
Greetings everyone. I would like to first start off by saying that I'm sure this topic has been beat to death. But I just need a few opinions.

I know 200mhz isn't much of an increase in speed, but for a music engineering student using protools and logic with assorted plugins really tax the system. My question is will I actually notice a difference in the processing power ? I am also somewhat of an indie film maker, so would I need the 256MB ram for video editing apps ?

I'm thinking something like this, using my edu discount to go for the 2.2 128MB version and a 20 or 23 inch display or just the 2.4 256MB version. :confused:

Thanks!
 

e.magnusson

macrumors member
Apr 15, 2007
72
0
Lethbridge, Alberta
Well, I personally think that with 200 extra MHz you probably won't notice any difference in speed. As for the graphics card, these are really powerful graphics card alone, so if your doing some film making you'll be fine, I survive making film on my Core Duo MacBook for over a year so with the graphics you have now you'll be fine. Also, you can always order new parts (more ram, bigger HD etc.) if it doesn't fit your needs. Hope that helped.
 

Multimedia

macrumors 603
Jul 27, 2001
5,212
0
Santa Cruz CA, Silicon Beach
Motion Will Like 256MB Video

Remember Motion uses video card ram so the 256 would be preferred. Also note that it is 200 x 2 or 400MHz almost half a GHz 10% faster not only 200MHz. For Film work you want all the power you can buy. I vote for the 2.4 GHz model plus a 24" Dell 2407WFP @ only $500 refurb from their outlet store. You definitely want to add two 2GB sticks for a total of 4GB of ram right away for only an additional $150 from a third party.

4.4GHz vs 4.8GHz
 

88Keys

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jul 10, 2007
135
62
Thanks you two for your wealthy replies.

e.magnusson What apps are you using ? If you dont mind me asking of course.


Multimedia Thanks for your reply. I've been considering this decision very carefully. Since I am on a student budget I cant afford the 2.4 and an external display. So I'd just have to go with the 2.4.

Guess I will make my decision sometime tonight.

Thanks
 

yrchern

macrumors member
Jun 14, 2007
54
0
Actually I notice something weird with 2.2GHz MPB.

I installed Boot Camp and Windows XP the first week I got my MBP(it was removed 3 days later :p ), and Windows XP told me I have a video card w/ 256MB RAM.

2 or 3 days ago, I was reading http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303124 and trying some of them including Apple Hardware Test (Press D during startup - Start up in Apple Hardware Test (AHT), if the Install DVD 1 is in the computer.) AHT shows that I have 256MB video ram on my MPB.

However, it only shows 128MB in OS X System Profiler.

I'm interesting why the results are different from different programs.
 

iW00t

macrumors 68040
Nov 7, 2006
3,286
0
Defenders of Apple Guild
The fact that you need to ask means you do not have the money, or you would rather use the money on something else.

I bought the 2.4 for the extra headroom, but really, paying 25% more for under 10% increase in performance, it is seriously your call.

Music Engineering sounds very nice as a title, but you need no more than a Macbook to get your job done. Either machine will fit you nicely.
 

88Keys

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jul 10, 2007
135
62
Music Engineering sounds very nice as a title, but you need no more than a Macbook to get your job done. Either machine will fit you nicely.
I agree either will fit me nicely, but I seriously doubt a macbook would be enough to do what I do.

But really I guess this question isnt really about processing speed, more about the extra graphics ram being worth it. I probably just end up going for the 2.2 and an external monitor, since the only time I'd use the macbook pro for film stuff is during field recordings and of course between sessions.
 

EvryDayImShufln

macrumors 65816
Sep 18, 2006
1,092
1
I agree either will fit me nicely, but I seriously doubt a macbook would be enough to do what I do.

But really I guess this question isnt really about processing speed, more about the extra graphics ram being worth it. I probably just end up going for the 2.2 and an external monitor, since the only time I'd use the macbook pro for film stuff is during field recordings and of course between sessions.
I honestly THINK that a better decision would be to get the low end one with a faster 7200 rpm hard drive. I may be wrong, but in my MBP the limiting factor really does seem to be the 160gig 5400rpm hard drive in terms of many things. I'd go for the 2.2ghz + biggest 7200rpm hard drive apple offers.

Please somebody correct me if I'm wrong about this because I don't want to offer a wrong solution
 

sxl95

macrumors member
Nov 7, 2006
45
0
Actually I notice something weird with 2.2GHz MPB.

I installed Boot Camp and Windows XP the first week I got my MBP(it was removed 3 days later :p ), and Windows XP told me I have a video card w/ 256MB RAM.

2 or 3 days ago, I was reading http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303124 and trying some of them including Apple Hardware Test (Press D during startup - Start up in Apple Hardware Test (AHT), if the Install DVD 1 is in the computer.) AHT shows that I have 256MB video ram on my MPB.

However, it only shows 128MB in OS X System Profiler.

I'm interesting why the results are different from different programs.
Same thing for me when I tried the Hardware test. Haven't tried Bootcamp yet. I wonder if the machine physically has 256mb, or if it is a glitch.

-Sam
 

Jamiephofe

macrumors member
Jun 24, 2007
89
0
South Yorkshire
I'm in the same situation as you. I'm a sound engineering student who will be using a MBP for Pro Tools and Logic.

Provided you arn't using any seriously high end plugins then I'm sure the 2.2 machine will be more than powerful enough. The higher end video card won't benefit you at all for music production, so I guess it depends on how serious you are with movie production.

Get the 7200rpm HD either way though...
 

mach

macrumors regular
Jun 5, 2007
103
5
Same thing for me when I tried the Hardware test. Haven't tried Bootcamp yet. I wonder if the machine physically has 256mb, or if it is a glitch.

-Sam
I remember reading something about this. I'm pretty sure it has 256MB to begin with and Apple just doesn't allow it to access all 256MB. When looking at the 8600M GT specs on nvidia's website it lists it with up to 512MB configurations, which suggests Apple is just stunting their performance in the MBPs.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_8600M.html
 

NJuul

macrumors 6502
Mar 15, 2006
492
0
Boston
Same thing for me when I tried the Hardware test. Haven't tried Bootcamp yet. I wonder if the machine physically has 256mb, or if it is a glitch.

-Sam
According to Apple, it's an error with the Apple Hardware Test. (linky)
Of course it may still be that Apple simply put the same card into both the 2.2 and the 2.4 mbp, and then use software to reduce the amount of VRAM available on the low end machine.
 

XheartcoreboyX

macrumors 6502a
Jul 3, 2007
753
0
According to Apple, it's an error with the Apple Hardware Test. (linky)
Of course it may still be that Apple simply put the same card into both the 2.2 and the 2.4 mbp, and then use software to reduce the amount of VRAM available on the low end machine.
:eek::eek: and why would they want to put a good 256vcard in the cheaper model?? what would be their point??
 

BigPrince

macrumors 68020
Dec 27, 2006
2,052
105
Not to Hi-Jack...but if there really is a 256 in the 2.2, then thats pretty sick of Apple.

A simple firmware could probably achieve activating the other 128 mb.
 

BornAgainMac

macrumors 603
Feb 4, 2004
6,391
3,293
Florida Resident
Not to Hi-Jack...but if there really is a 256 in the 2.2, then thats pretty sick of Apple.

A simple firmware could probably achieve activating the other 128 mb.
That reminds me of the Intel 486SX vs 486DX trick many years ago. The same CPU when manufactured but functionality was disabled at the processor level. This was all done for marketing reasons.


And today doesn't matter now if you have the 25 Mhz SX version or the 33 Mhz DX version that cost $1,000 more. But back then that extra 8 Mhz and math co-processor would matter to some people for their word processing and spreadsheet needs.
 

NJuul

macrumors 6502
Mar 15, 2006
492
0
Boston
:eek::eek: and why would they want to put a good 256vcard in the cheaper model?? what would be their point??
If there are no 128 models. I haven't seen anyone else selling 128mb versions of the nvidia 8600 GT cards.
It could also be that they got a killer deal on say a million 256 cards. It is usually cheaper to buy a very large amount of one type of stuff. To differentiate the mbp models they could use software to cripple the cards in the low-end models.
Note that I'm not saying this is what Apple is doing, it's just a possible explanation for why AHT and Windows report that the mbp 2.2 is equipped with a 256mb card.
 

Zel

macrumors regular
Jul 7, 2007
172
0
That reminds me of the Intel 486SX vs 486SX trick many years ago. The same CPU when manufactured but functionality was disabled at the processor level. This was all done for marketing reasons.


And today doesn't matter now if you have the 25 Mhz SX version or the 33 Mhz DX version that cost $1,000 more. But back then that extra 8 Mhz and math co-processor would matter to some people for their word processing and spreadsheet needs.

Not quite... what happens with high technology is that the company makes as many of the high end chips as they can, but many of them are damaged in some way, they come off the assembly line defective, and instead of throwing them away, they can turn off the broken functionality and sell it as a slower or less featurefull chip.

If, and only IF, all MBP's have the 256MB vram, then I think there's a high chance they bought a bunch of defective units and disabled the damaged parts, leaving half of the vram intact.

This is very common with processors, Intel or AMD make one kind of chip and sell them at the speed they can perform at, often you can buy a slower chip and overclock it flawlessly because they only thought it was damaged.

Basically, IF there really is 256mb vram, and you turn it on through some kind of firmware hack, chances are it will be defective and cause video artifacts or a kernel panic.

--
Besides, shouldn't we have seen it when the machine was taken apart? One of them should physically display twice as many little black squares around the logic board.
 

jdechko

macrumors 601
Jul 1, 2004
4,095
219
But back then that extra 8 Mhz and math co-processor would matter to some people for their word processing and spreadsheet needs.
I remember getting a math co-processor in our 386. :) Chuck Yeager's Air Combat was awesome after that. Good times.

Besides, shouldn't we have seen it when the machine was taken apart? One of them should physically display twice as many little black squares around the logic board.
Not necessarily. Remember that there are 128MB Modules, 256MB Modules, 512 MB modules, etc. NVidia would probably just use 1 module of whatever size.
 

L3X

macrumors 6502a
Oct 18, 2006
511
0
Chesapeake, VA
Greetings everyone. I would like to first start off by saying that I'm sure this topic has been beat to death. But I just need a few opinions.

I know 200mhz isn't much of an increase in speed, but for a music engineering student using protools and logic with assorted plugins really tax the system. My question is will I actually notice a difference in the processing power ? I am also somewhat of an indie film maker, so would I need the 256MB ram for video editing apps ?

I'm thinking something like this, using my edu discount to go for the 2.2 128MB version and a 20 or 23 inch display or just the 2.4 256MB version. :confused:

Thanks!
back on topic:

the 2.2 will be bangin for music and film. Get 4 GBs of memory though from OWC, or some other reputable company. You can find links on this board.

Someone mentioned Motion using a lot of vram and this is true. However, if you're just an indie film maker and money is an issue, than the 2.4 probably isn't worth it. Just depends on how serious you are about film and using Motion. Shake and Maya would both use a lot of vram.
 

BlueArctos

macrumors member
Jun 17, 2007
89
0
I'm thinking something like this, using my edu discount to go for the 2.2 128MB version and a 20 or 23 inch display or just the 2.4 256MB version. :confused:
1.) How long do you plan on using this computer?
2.) Would your financial limitations be relaxed if you waited a month?

An ideal 10% increase in processing power and roughly 10% increase in video card performance is, as others have indicated, only beneficial if you truly believe you'll be utilizing the additional power.

That said, if I were in your position (especially as someone who appreciates things like Motion when it comes to video editing), I'd hold out and save more to get the best on the market. Then again, I only purchase a new machine once every few years.

ALSO - http://www.barefeats.com/rosa03.html
 

Multimedia

macrumors 603
Jul 27, 2001
5,212
0
Santa Cruz CA, Silicon Beach
They Likely Go Refurb Next Month Too

1.) How long do you plan on using this computer?
2.) Would your financial limitations be relaxed if you waited a month?

An ideal 10% increase in processing power and roughly 10% increase in video card performance is, as others have indicated, only beneficial if you truly believe you'll be utilizing the additional power.

That said, if I were in your position (especially as someone who appreciates things like Motion when it comes to video editing), I'd hold out and save more to get the best on the market. Then again, I only purchase a new machine once every few years.

ALSO - http://www.barefeats.com/rosa03.html
And if you can wait until next month, the 2.4GHz 15" model will likely enter the refurbished store for $2199.
 

aliquis-

macrumors 6502a
May 20, 2007
680
0
For monitors may I suggest:

LG 2000C (IPS-panel) if you for some reason prefer 4:3.
Nec 20WGX2Pro (S-IPS-panel) if you are a gamer or want a glossy screen.
Samsung 215TW (S-PVA-panel, LTM210M2) if you aren't a gamer.

The samsung got the same panel as a 21" Eizo, of course the Eizos might be better but they also cost more, the Samsung is quite cheap and have had good reviews except it got some input lag and I doubt you want that for games.
IPS are said to have less input lag than PVA and MVA and they are supposed to have the best colors (but in the review I read on the Samsung the reviewer thought it where better than the Nec.)

In some photos it have looked like there is some backlight bleeding on the Samsung so you might want to look out for that.