macbook vs macbook pro for graphic design

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by agnespie, Mar 28, 2008.

  1. agnespie macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    #1
    would a new macbook with 2.4 ghz and 2 GB ram be sufficient to load all sorts of graphic programs like photoshop, corel painter, and illustrator, without any slowness? or would one recommend getting a macbook pro?

    I understand macbook only comes with a 13" inch screen, so we'll still decide whether a 13" would be good enough, based on my boyfriend's own opinion.

    but right now I just want to focus on internal specs.
     
  2. iMpathetic macrumors 68030

    iMpathetic

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Location:
    IMBY
    #2
    Some people are still using 1.5GHz PowerPC Powerbooks for graphic design. As long as you don't try to recreate the Earth, you'll be fine, from a CPU/speed perspective.

    Graphics cards may provide some trouble, but as long as you don't game or anything, you should be fine.
     
  3. Tallest Skil macrumors P6

    Tallest Skil

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #3
    The MacBook has integrated graphics. The MacBook Pro has a dedicated chip.

    You can probably weigh the benefits from there.
     
  4. Cave Man macrumors 604

    Cave Man

    #4
    Yes, I do all those now on a Mac Mini, and it's less of a machine than a MB. Plus, with the savings over a MBP, you could buy a nice 24" S-IPS display (1920x1200) and bluetooth keyboard and mouse, and still have some money left over.
     
  5. Killyp macrumors 68040

    Killyp

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    #5
    The MacBook Pro's display will help things a lot.

    The MacBook should run it plenty fast enough though, but if you can afford the MacBook Pro - go for it, without hesitation...

    Oh and don't double post, it's against the forum rules...
     
  6. agnespie thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    #6
    I'm not too familiar with areas like that: chips and integrated graphics. I just know basics like speeds and RAM and that kind of stuff. I heard about the chip thing and was wondering if it really makes a difference.

    he's just doing graphic design/drawing with a pen tablet. not any video editing or games.
     
  7. Thetics macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    #7
    as stated before, the only issue that will arise is screen size, 13 inch is quite small (even on my 15" macbook pro, working with photoshop, etc gets tough, all the tools, windows, etc take up a lot of screen real estate) I would recommend (ideally) a macbook pro + external display. but you should be fine even with a Macbook + external display.
     
  8. bluedoggiant macrumors 68030

    bluedoggiant

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    MD & ATL,GA
    #8
    The MacBook has an integrated graphics chip that shares 144MB from the main memory, and its quite bad, but good for everyday use, not gaming.


    The MacBook Pro has a dedicated graphics chip, with up to 512MB dedicated memory, and its a very fast chip.


    So the MacBook Pro wins by miles, and right now, thats one of the only things that differentiates the macbook and macbook pro.
     
  9. iMpathetic macrumors 68030

    iMpathetic

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Location:
    IMBY
    #9
    On the other hand, for what the OP says she's doing, graphics muscle probably doesn't matter that much.
     
  10. SFStateStudent macrumors 604

    SFStateStudent

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    Location:
    San Francisco California, USA
    #10
    I work with InDesignCS...

    PhotoshopCS, IllustratorCS (more InDesignCS now), iDVD, iMovie, FCP-HD, and have no problem whatsoever with the size of the screen. In fact, it's nice to be able to work on a project in between classes or during the BART Train commute to and from campus. Not sure why anyone would spend the extra money on 2" of screen, when 13.3" is just fine for some of us. Save your money and check out the MB 2.4 Penryn 250GB, it just might be what you're looking for. :cool:
     
  11. illidian macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2008
    Location:
    Cincinnati, OH
    #11
    The MB will work just fine, like the others have mentioned.

    But you may prefer the larger screen of the MBP. Or, like Cave Man and Thetics suggested, going with the MB + a larger external screen may fit your needs even better [for less].
     
  12. chrisbeebops macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    #12
    The Macbook Pro's dedicated graphics helps mainly with 3D graphics acceleration in applications which support it (3D modeling, games, etc.). If your applications do not require 3D acceleration, you will see virtually no difference between the Macbook Pro's dedicated and the Macbook's integrated graphics.

    Your graphics design applications are 2D applications. You will see a larger performance boost by spending your money on more RAM and a faster Hard Drive.

    If you buy upgrades aftermarket, you can boost your ram to 4GB for $100. You can pick up a 200GB 7200rpm drive (better performance) or a 320GB 5400rpm drive (more storage space) for $150-200. Both components can be changed without too much hassle.

    If you are concerned about screen size, spend some of the left over $$ on a nice external monitor for when you are at your desk.
     
  13. mr. feeny macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    #13
    For loading the applications, that configured computer that you mentioned would be more than adequate. The visual quality would be substantially better via Macbook Pro, but if that's not the issue, the Macbook would be more than sufficient.
     
  14. Appleduder macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    #14
    I have used a pen tablet and have owned both a MB and MBP. I say go for a MBP. The screen on the MB in my opinion is pretty bad (viewing angle, brightness, seems washed out). The nice screen on the MBP and the extra screen space make it all the worth while using a pen tablet. Go for a refurb model also to save money
     
  15. PDE macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2005
    #15
    Also: the latest MBPs are much cooler and won't be running their fans all the time the way the macbook does. And as others say: if you get a good LCD (there seem to be quite a few lemons), the MBP LCD is better quality than the macbook's screen: better viewing angles and brighter.
     
  16. csista macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2007
    #16
    You can get 4gigs for the Macbook from crucial.com for only $100, so I would recommend upping to that for design work. I've come close to 2 gigs of use with just photoshop on a number of occasions.
     
  17. Jcoz macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2008
    #17

    Is the White Macbook the same configuration? Seems the only dif between it and the Black book is an overpriced Hard Drive....am I missing something else? Meaning the access to the HDD
     
  18. bluedoggiant macrumors 68030

    bluedoggiant

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    MD & ATL,GA
    #18
    nothing overpriced, just the 2.1ghz macbooks, apple lowered BTO prices a lot, but RAM is still expensive, but better than before.
     
  19. Jcoz macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2008
    #19
    The white Macbook that isnt the bottom level.....it's 200$ cheaper and has all the exact same specs...you can add the Blackbook HDD for 100$ (Hence my overpriced statement) Basically, you can have exactly the same machine in a white case for 100 dollars less.

    I think the white looks better anyways, I was just wondering if all the easy access comments about the Black hold true for all new Macbooks...and also was wondering if I just missed something in the specs that justifies spending an extra hundy...
     
  20. lazydesi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2006
    Location:
    Gr8 Adelaide
  21. illidian macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2008
    Location:
    Cincinnati, OH
    #21
    Yes, all the comments will translate over as long as they're about the performance of the machine. The guts of a white MacBook and a black one are the same if you choose the same configurations.

    You could do a search on the topic and come up with a million results, but it boils down to this: the white scratches easier and dirt spots eventually show up, while the black shows fingerprints and oil marks (from your hands, and this has been substantially improved with the latest MB update). Whichever looks better to you is the better choice.
     
  22. priller macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2007
    #22
    That is HD size is the only difference, you're paying extra for the colour. The black macbook is the only overpriced macbook.
     
  23. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #23
    Definitely, the glossy display isn't suitable on the MacBook as it won't display colours as naturally, which is essential. Also the display is probably too small, but as you've said you can decide that yourself ;).

    The lack of graphics card shouldn't be an issue though. And you could just use an external display if you needed the colours to be accurate.
     
  24. Jcoz macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2008
    #24
    Yah, I did search, right after I posted the last one. Read a ton of threads and watched you tube videos on how to change the hard drive and ram...forgot about the thread till now.

    As for my overpriced comment, I think its silly to charge more for the black book, but thats JMO.

    Finally came to a decision, (I need a desktop and laptop) I'm going to pick up the white 2.4 somewhere I dont have to pay tax, swap the HDD for a 200 GB 7200 rpm and switch to 4 gigs of ram. Will end up costing about 1550.00 USD total. Then I'll just drive the 17" Lcd I already have when I need a desktop, and I can wait patiently for a Montevina iMac with DDR3.

    Thanks, hadnt even thought of replacing the HD until I found this thread.
     
  25. illidian macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2008
    Location:
    Cincinnati, OH
    #25
    The black is almost a different plastic - it offers a completely different feel than the white. It may not be a big deal for some, but when you're already paying $1550, I'm not sure cutting what could be an important corner by saving $100 is not worth it.

    Try them both out before making a decision - you may find the different feel is worth it (or assure yourself that it's not).
     

Share This Page