MBP i7 2.3 over 2.2

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by fantismo, Sep 3, 2011.

  1. fantismo macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2009
    #1
    Hi there

    I'm using ableton live and lots of processor intensive soft synths.. would i see a marked improvement with the 2.3 over the 2.2 do you think?
     
  2. jimmie32 macrumors member

    jimmie32

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2011
    Location:
    Beijing, CN
    #2
    Just 100MHz won't really give you a lot of performance boost. To be honest, the 2720QM (2.2) is more cost-effective than 2820QM (2.3). Maybe there's placebo effect if you get the 2.3, but really it isn't noticeable unless you run processor intensive things on it 24/7, then you /might/ see a small performance boost.

    Not marked.
     
  3. DeadPixel217 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2011
    #3
    I have the 2.3Ghz i7, I wouldn't recommend getting the 100Mhz upgrade unless you do a lot of hardcore work. Video encoding, photo editing and stuff. Otherwise you'd be wise to get the 2.2 and save a little money :)
     
  4. bolen macrumors 6502

    bolen

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Location:
    Sweden
  5. DeadPixel217 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2011
    #5
    A very good idea. I got the 7200rpm 500Gb over the standard 750Gb and to be honest I haven't noticed a massive amount of difference. SSD is the way forward :)
     
  6. XandeR803 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    #6
    I'm not sure what kind of usage environment you will be in but I have the 2.3 in a live production environment. As others have pointed out, it may only be 5-10% for things like video encoding, but when you're driving several projection screens while having to re-encode a video that is to be shown in a few minutes, every second counts.

    And as someone else pointed out, no matter what you do, +1 for the SSD.
     
  7. randomrazr macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2011
    #7
    did u not bother looking this thread that has beenposted seveeral times already?

    anyways, the 100mhz difference wont be noticable unless u do extensive graphic application stuff

    put that money towards ram or SSD or something along those lines, u get better benefits.
     
  8. shardey macrumors 6502a

    shardey

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    #8
    Turbo boost on single, dual and the quad core is 100mhz more too. The 8mb l3 cache vs 6mb. I agree it isn't worth it, but if you have the money then why not get that and a ssd
     
  9. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #9
    Some apps would be significantly helped by the larger cache. YMMV.
     
  10. Young Spade macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Location:
    Tallahassee, Florida
    #10
    C'mon, you know nobody with a redundant, easily answerable question by Google or search (which would give them the info they asked and MORE, FASTER) actually does just that.

    I suggested this months ago, but they should have online quizes here that happen maybe, once a month for frequent users and once at the start of an online account (over the FAQs, guides, etc.) to cut down on redundancy.
     
  11. danpass macrumors 68020

    danpass

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    #11
    a refurb i7 is just $70 more than a new i5.

    Just got my refurb i7, working great
     
  12. shardey macrumors 6502a

    shardey

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    #12
    That and they also should make a rule where you have to perform at least 10 searches in order to post a thread. Then after that, about 5 searches per new thread.
     
  13. DWBurke811 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Location:
    Boca Raton, FL
    #13
    and this has exactly nothing to do with what he's asking.




    if you have the money, and you're getting an SSD and upgrading the RAM in addition to the 2.3, why not get it?
     
  14. Young Spade macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Location:
    Tallahassee, Florida
    #14
    Because you have to wonder if spending the money is justified, in this case, many times, if not 90percent of the time it isn't.

    That's why he posted here, to get opinions from people who won't just suggest "get it because you can", as that is never the "right" option.
     
  15. bniu macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    #15
    My big ole ego made me get the 2.3. On refurb, it was a difference of $220. When the mbp arrived, I fired it up and found 8gigs of ram already installed in it, a pleasant surprise. Consider Apple ram upgrade would be $200, 2.3 over 2.2 for $20, well worth it!
     
  16. 2hvy4grvty macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    #16
    Which?

    I hope you understand how cache works before making a response.
     

Share This Page