MacBook Pro lines

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by ks-man, Jan 5, 2008.

  1. ks-man macrumors 6502a

    Sep 25, 2007
    I'm comparing the two 15" MBP configurations and trying to understand the $500 difference. I basically see there are only 3 differences:

    1) 2.2GHZ vs. 2.4GHZ
    2) 120GB HD vs. 160GB HD
    3) Ge Force 128MB SDRAM vs. GeForce 256MB SDRAM

    Is there some other reason why the mid-level line is an extra $500? The HD upgrade is at most $75 (that is what Apple charges) and the 2.2 to 2.4GHZ would have a minimal impact as well.

    Is it really worth paying all the extra money for an extra 128MB of SDRAM? Do you also get something else or does it drastically impact performance?

    Any thoughts would be appreciated. BTW, I know a lot may change after Jan 15th, but I'm still trying to understand the current differences. Thanks.
  2. SubaruNation555 macrumors 6502

    Dec 3, 2007
    Arlington, VA USA
    For people rendering/encoding video or doing other CPU intensive things then the extra 200MHz might be worth it. The middle level model also gives you an option for a 2.6GHz processor. Also, if you are into gaming then the extra 128MB of VRAM might be worth it also.

    I don't do much video (just photos) and don't game so I was more than happy with the base model. It all depends on what you need the computer for.
  3. fs454 macrumors 68000

    Dec 7, 2007
    Los Angeles / Boston
    It isn't SDRAM, by the way. It's GDDR3.

    Either way, the minor differences can be needed by some, but honestly, I have the middle one, and my friend has the base, and we can't tell the difference. We're both gaming on generally the same settings, too.
  4. jamesybsu macrumors regular

    Jun 12, 2007
    If you can afford go for it, if not save your 500 bucks and buy some nice accessories to go with your beautiful MBP :)
  5. ks-man thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Sep 25, 2007
    I can afford it, but it is seeming like it is more of a waste of money. I don't want to spend $500 unless there is a tangible difference in the system. It adds 25% to the cost but it sounds like the improvement is 5-10% or less in performance.

    That doesn't seem to add up. It sounds like Apple knows that some people will just get the higher line just to say they have something better and is way overcharging for that right. The same way they way overcharge for memory.
  6. nikhsub1 macrumors 68020


    Jun 19, 2007
    mmmm... jessica.'s beer...
    You got it, those ARE the differences. The ONLY thing out of those 3 that YOU can change is the HD, the CPU and GPU you can not. Apple has put a price of $500 on the 200Mhz in CPU speed, 40GB of HD space and 128MB of video RAM. If you could buy and install all 3 of those yourself you could certainly do it WAY cheaper than $500, but remember, you are dealing with Apple after all. I mean, they charge what, $700 for 4GB of RAM in the MBP when you can buy it online for less than $100.
  7. heatmiser macrumors 68020

    Dec 6, 2007
    It sounds like it's working with you :^)

    Seriously, if you have to debate this much over it, you don't need it. I'd say more, but in the end, you'll have to decide for yourself. Personally, I'd save that $500 for something worthwhile. In one year, $500 will buy you a PC laptop that's faster than either the 2.2 or the 2.4.
  8. ks-man thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Sep 25, 2007
    Luckily I own Apple stock and it seems like it is working with many others as well. :p
  9. jnc macrumors 68020


    Jan 7, 2007
    Nunya, Business TX
    The extra 128MB interests me, should I ever decide to take up gaming on the MBP.

    I'd never get a 360 (again) so I could only play Bioshock, COD 4, Orange Box, Guitar Hero 3 and Gears of War (the titles I'm currently interested in) on a computer. Plus there's upcoming stuff like Left 4 Dead and Duke Nukem Forever. Wow six out of seven shooting games... who says PC gaming doesn't have variety?!

    Anyway, if I knew these would run fine on the 2.2 I'd probably just go for that. I'm hoping the new MBPs have 256mb and 2.4 as standard which'd just make the decision a lot easier.
  10. MarkMS macrumors 6502a

    Aug 30, 2006
    I own some AAPL as well. :D

    But the thing you have to ask yourself is do you need the extra 200MHz or a 256MB video card? Unless you are doing some intensive video work or gaming (Boot Camping Vista with Crysis?!), I would just go with the base model. 2.2GHz and a 128MB video card is more than adequate for photography and basic video encoding. Just upgrade RAM to 4GB and it'll become a speed demon.

    I'm looking to upgrade my 2.0GHz CD MBP soon (about a 1.5 years old now) and no doubt I'm most likely going to go with the base model MBP. I have plenty of external storage, and I don't do much gaming or video work. I do work with RAW files for photography, but that's just a hobby of mine. A RAM upgrade is all I would need.

    So no. To me it's not worth the $500 unless I needed to squeeze every drop of power the MBP had. Even then, I would just opt for a Mac Pro or even an iMac. Just use that extra money for a RAM upgrade, external storage, and a shield to cover the keyboard from dust and oils from the fingers.
  11. cubedweller macrumors 6502

    Nov 25, 2007
  12. jamesybsu macrumors regular

    Jun 12, 2007
    Well thats usually a good option if money is an issue, but its not here, so I would buy brand new. I think a good summary for this is if you do things like renderings or other things that like more power, then it might be worth it. I use my 2.2 MBP to render projects, along with the CS3 suite and it works great. My roomate has the 2.4 MBP and it might perform just a hair better, but I am not convinced its worth the 500 bucks, save that money and buy some RAM (just not from apple :) )

Share This Page