Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MBP 2.4 vs MBP 2.5? or wait?

H

hoangcong

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 10, 2008
43
0
hi everybody,

I am into digital photography, using mostly photoshop and occasionally final cut pro.
I also like to create website so I would look for something that can run photoshop and dreamweaver at the same time smoothly.
I would also like something that can do the above things + running another OS (windows xp) or burning a dvd.

The price gap is huge between the base 2.4 model and the 2.5.
I was just wondering which one would be more fit for me?

I was also wondering whether it'd be good waiting for the new mbp and get the new mbp base model then since my budget is tight (i think my patience can be witheld till late july =\ )

Thanks for your help!
 
The differences between the 2.4 MB and the 2.5 MBP include:

  • Integrated (Very Porr) Graphics vs. Dedicated
  • Plastic vs. Aluminum Casing
  • 13.3" Glossy Screen vs. 15" Glossy OR Matte Screen
  • LCD Screen, no backlighting vs. LED Screen with Backlighting
  • No Multi-Touch vs. Having Multi-Touch

The importance is roughly in that order as well. If you aren't running 3D graphics, that even becomes a moot point as well.
 
illidian said:
The differences between the 2.4 MB and the 2.5 MBP include:

  • Integrated (Very Porr) Graphics vs. Dedicated
  • Plastic vs. Aluminum Casing
  • 13.3" Glossy Screen vs. 15" Glossy OR Matte Screen
  • LCD Screen, no backlighting vs. LED Screen with Backlighting
  • No Multi-Touch vs. Having Multi-Touch

The importance is roughly in that order as well. If you aren't running 3D graphics, that even becomes a moot point as well.
Click to expand...


read the op. hes deciding between 2.4 MBP or a 2.5 MBP


op, disregard the previous post as he was comparing a macbook to a mbp

as far as differences, save the money and get the 2.4....you wont notice a difference and if there is one, it is slight
 
illidian said:
The differences between the 2.4 MB and the 2.5 MBP include:

  • Integrated (Very Porr) Graphics vs. Dedicated
  • Plastic vs. Aluminum Casing
  • 13.3" Glossy Screen vs. 15" Glossy OR Matte Screen
  • LCD Screen, no backlighting vs. LED Screen with Backlighting
  • No Multi-Touch vs. Having Multi-Touch

The importance is roughly in that order as well. If you aren't running 3D graphics, that even becomes a moot point as well.
Click to expand...

Sorry i think you misread lol
I was either looking for the mb pro 2.4 or the mb pro 2.5 of course i wouldnt get an integrated graphics :D
 
dukebound85 said:
read the op. hes deciding between 2.4 MBP or a 2.5 MBP


op, disregard the previous post as he was comparing a macbook to a mbp

as far as differences, save the money and get the 2.4....you wont notice a difference and if there is one, it is slight
Click to expand...

Thanks :)
I think i will get 2.4 with 4gb ram upgrade but im still pondering if i should wait for the new mbp.. ive been readin horror stories of people on this forums that have been waiting for months :D
 
dukebound85 said:
no you dont lose waranty as it is user replaceable. only thing that i might let apple upgrade on a mbp is the hd as thats not user replaceable (it is on mb though fyi)
Click to expand...

lol, you are really pushing me toward the mbp dukebound85, but mbt silver allu is so sexy :D
 
dukebound85 said:
for the needs you listed though, a mb would be more than enough. just get a secondary monitor and youd save a bundle


just another thought though
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but IMO a macbook would not be nearly enough for him. Do you really think that a macbook has enough GPU power to run photoshop, and dreamweaver at the same time. It's barely enough for photoshop alone, and it's painfully slow just running photoshop.

Don
 
I own the new MacBook Pro 2.4 and added 4gb of 3rd party ram

First of all, and this is just my opinion but I've used both the 2.4 and the 2.5 and can honestly say the 2.5 is much more responsive for everything. Dont know if its because of the extra level 2 cache?

I honestly would of got the 2.5 model if I knew better.

I added 3rd party 4gb ram and it was easy to install and was much cheaper than apple. 2gb is usable for daily things and photoshop for *average users* So there's no rush for 4gb of ram straight away.

Save and just get the 2.5

My 2c

cheers
 
irontony said:
I own the new MacBook Pro 2.4 and added 4gb of 3rd party ram

First of all, and this is just my opinion but I've used both the 2.4 and the 2.5 and can honestly say the 2.5 is much more responsive for everything. Dont know if its because of the extra level 2 cache?
Click to expand...

I went for the 2.5 MBP in the end, not because its 0.1Ghz faster than the 2.4, but because is have 6Mb of L2 cache instead of the the 3Gb of L2 cache in the 2.4 MBP, this can actually make quite a big difference to real-world speeds.
With the 2.5 MBP you also get 512Mb instead of 256Mg VRAM for graphics, though I don't think this makes much difference in practice. I'm still happy I went for the 2.5 over the 2.4, despite the extra cost. I think it would be hard to justify the 2.6 MBP model, though, as you already get the increased L2 cache in the 2.5
 
Cache adds 0 to 10% depending on the app. Not worth the cost.

Read that given buss limitations on the graphics card, it cannot effectively use the extra VRAM. not worth the cost.

Spend $50 for the HDD upgrade from 160gb to 250gb though.

Get a really nice computer for $2,050, save $450.
 
Dmac77 said:
I'm sorry, but IMO a macbook would not be nearly enough for him. Do you really think that a macbook has enough GPU power to run photoshop, and dreamweaver at the same time. It's barely enough for photoshop alone, and it's painfully slow just running photoshop.

Don
Click to expand...

Ummm, you do know that having a dedicated graphics card does nothing for 2D graphics?

A MacBook 2.4 can run Photoshop and Dreamweaver just as well as any other 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo machine.
 
illidian said:
Ummm, you do know that having a dedicated graphics card does nothing for 2D graphics?

A MacBook 2.4 can run Photoshop and Dreamweaver just as well as any other 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo machine.
Click to expand...

I was looking to play some games from time to times like the sims2 or age of empire 3 something similar to that but not too computer hungry.
Would the 2d graphics handle that on XP os while running Mac os?
 
I have a month old 2.4 MB with 4GB of ram. It is amazing and the screen
is very nice.

Imo 75% of MBP users didn't need them really. You just get into the
tech spec buyer syndrome.
 
hoangcong said:
I was looking to play some games from time to times like the sims2 or age of empire 3 something similar to that but not too computer hungry.
Would the 2d graphics handle that on XP os while running Mac os?
Click to expand...

You sound confused. I was replying only to Dmac77's post, which is full of inaccurate information.

I don't know the exact capabilities of the x3100, but The Sims 2 an old game (released in 2004). I'm going to guess, based on no factual evidence, that a MacBook would run The Sims 2 because of its age and doesn't appear to be very graphics-intense to me. Age of Empires 3 is newer (2005) and while the screen shots don't look like it is too intense, it may be with all the units and such on screen at once. I'd guess that it would run well enough for you to play, but you may have to turn down all the graphics and still experience a bit of lag. Hopefully someone else can come in and verify more for you.
 
thank you all for the useful feedbacks!
This should be my first mac so I don't want to mess up that is why i am a bit confused... (the one i used in uni for media production amazed me that is why i am hooked on mac now)
Hopefully I'll decided soon :p
 
mankar4 said:
probably won't see an update till august. 2.5 makes no difference over 2.4.
Click to expand...

dukebound85 said:
as far as differences, save the money and get the 2.4....you wont notice a difference and if there is one, it is slight
Click to expand...

Where do you get these "makes no difference" assumptions from? They're certainly not based in reality, that's for sure.

The difference is not just 0.1 Ghz. The difference is in the CPU cache. 3 Mb on the 2.4 vs. 6 MB on the 2.5.

That's a *huge* difference, particularly when it comes to tasks like photo editing. It will be immediately noticeable with the very image you edit in Photoshop. Anyone who says otherwise has never actually compared the two (i.e. they're full of BS) and has no grasp on the relationship between hardware and performance.

Don't believe me? Go google up some benchmarks - doesn't even have to be laptop benchmarks, PC benchmarks will prove the point. Now find the numbers for a 3 MB CPU and compare them to a 6 MB CPU of similar clock speed. The difference is not slight.

Personally, I wouldn't even consider the 2.4. It's a waste of money when for $500 more, you can double your CPU cache (on top of the other upgraded bits). If you're set on the 2.4, you might as well save a few bucks and drop down to a regular Macbook 2.4 - it's the exact same CPU!! IMO, the only reason to get the MBP over the Macbook is for the 6 MB CPU (and discreet gfx, if you need that).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back