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

Older macbook pro purchase, questions on performance?

T

tivoboy

macrumors 601
Original poster
May 15, 2005
4,096
920
Howdy,

Well, after spending a GREAT deal of time with the new MBP late 2008, I have decided that I DON'T want to have to deal with the glassy screen. I really WANT to love it, and do, but I'll need this machine to be my daily driver and therefore, will need to maintain a MATTE LED LCD screen requirement.

So, in the marketplace of NEW but OLDER generation MBP, mid-2008, there are QUITE a few options.

2.4 200GB 256 graphic ram 1443$
2.5 250GB (most likely 7200) 512 graphic ram. 1643$
2.6 250GB (most likely 7200) 512 graphic ram. 1743$

Question is, these are about 100$ different from another.

WHAT amount of difference will the .1 in CPU offer? I haven't been able to find comparissons on barefeats or other sites.

and WHAT amount of speed performance will the extra 256MB of GPU RAM yield? For what applications? I do a fair amount of photo manipulation, but this is mostly going to be a workhorse, running fusion, mail, etc.

thanks SO much for any links or replies. I've been waiting too long to buy, and now that prices are so cheap, I have to pull the trigger soon.
 
The older MacBook Pros have faulty GPUs, there isn't a fixed GPU available yet as far as I know.
 
I've read it

I've read these threads, but it is an uncertainly whether one, A specific macbook pro has the problem. It appears that the 2.5 and 2.6 CPU models may NOT have the problem.

The other factor is, that it would be completely covered by APPLE, meaning one could get it either repaired or replaced, correct?
 
They are ALL faulty. It is a problem with the heat cycles that weakens and cracks the solder joints in the GPU. I just don't see why they change the solder... Anyway, yes Apple will cover it for 2 years unless you buy Apple Care which it will be 3 years. But that isn't any use since when they replace it, another bad one is put in meaning it will die as well. It's just a vicious circle because Nvidia want to cover their own butts!
 
so

So, are you saying that ALL late model macbook pro, are going to fail? I do'nt seem to see this happening with the current models we have running. I know it is an issue, but I thought it was a 5-10% failure rate as reported by nvidia and apple, and that they corrected the die problem and repairs completly fix the problem?
 
That's what they SAID but not the TRUTH. They all have the same die packaging so how can some be ok and some others not???
 
tivoboy said:
So, are you saying that ALL late model macbook pro, are going to fail? I do'nt seem to see this happening with the current models we have running. I know it is an issue, but I thought it was a 5-10% failure rate as reported by nvidia and apple, and that they corrected the die problem and repairs completly fix the problem?
Click to expand...

I'm fairly certain the problem is relatively rare. Given we're on a forum, though, the propensity is for negative experiences to be posted.
 
Quite rightly so, my MacBook Pro is 3 months old and it's experiencing gpu glitches, how do you explain that?
 
alrighty

Well, GPU issues aside, any comments on performance from anyone?
 
IMO I don't think the CPU differences are worth it, it all depends on the screen size you want. The middle one isn't worth it since the GPU is 128bit meaning it can't handle 512mb ram anyway, same for the 17". But if you want the 17" there is no choice. Thats why I got the 15" one. Hope that sort of makes sense :D

My MBP runs ultra cool with SMC Fan Control and I get glitches. I think mine may have the worse solder. BTW when was yours manufactured kgeier82? Mine was in April.
 
thanks

thanks,

what do you mean that the middle one is only 128bit? Is the lower one higher, or does it only utilize the 256mb ram on the GPU? I don't understand why apple would put a 512mb GPU in there without being able to utilize it?
 
tivoboy said:
thanks,

what do you mean that the middle one is only 128bit? Is the lower one higher, or does it only utilize the 256mb ram on the GPU? I don't understand why apple would put a 512mb GPU in there without being able to utilize it?
Click to expand...

The middle range one (2.5Ghz), all the 8600 gt are 128bit meaning they can only handle a certain amount of ram while maintaining performance which is 256mb. The 512mb one just will choke the 8600 making it slower but barely noticeable unless you are a gamer. I'm not an expert but this is what I read. I think the 512 one can also support higher resolutions.
 
All those machines are bargains. The graphics card will have extended warranty coverage so it should be a none issue. I was tempted to buy from macmall because they have all three models with $150 rebate. Those are new, not refurbished machines. I love my unibody MBP but can understand the matte display preference. I had the previous 2.4 model for ten days but exercised the right to return it and get the newer one. I was impressed by the previous models performance and would have been happy to keep it. I am a photographer and have loved the Powerbook/MBP series for many years.
 
lower end

I think I might tend toward the lower end model, saving the 200$ and putting that into RAM. I also have a nice 320gb 7200 drive lying around, waiting for a home.

With the extra savings, I'll have a lower resale price point and can unload it in a year and get the MATTE version of the UNIBODY macbook that apple sure as tooting better release!
 
the big difference between the 2.4 and higher ones is the cache, 2.4 has 3MB while the others should have 6. The 512 on the graphics card won't make a difference unless you do high-resolution 3D graphics.

as for a 7200RPM hard drive, I wouldn't put one in an older Pro since they don't dissipate heat as well as the new ones, and all a 7200RPM drive will do is create heat and suck battery life, with no big gain in performance unless you're regularly moving around or modifying really big files.
 
Get the 2.4/256 for $1443. You'd probably be hard pressed to see the difference in most normal use, and you can get stuff for the $2-300 saved.

I'm happy with my 2.2 SR MBP w/ a mere 128 mb GPU. Haven't had an issue yet with any, and I mean, any, graphics problems. It's a great machine. Enjoy it.
 
TheReef said:
How about an earlier model with the x1600, those didn't have issues did they?
Click to expand...

Nope, no known issues. I just picked up a 2.16 17" on eBay today :) I am going to MAX that one out with a 320gb 7200rpm drive and 4gb of ram (although it may only access 3gb of it, who cares). I doubt the model will be significantly slower than the current top of the line 17" and its under half the price :)
 
The trade off for the older ones with the x1600 gpu is that they don't have the led backlit display. But, they'd still be a good machine for a long time.. no doubt.
 
compared

comparing the 2.4 and 2.5 ghz, can anyone comment on what impact the 6MB cache would have compared to the 3MB cache.

I'm really leaning towards the 2.4, I mean it is nearly 200$ cheaper, I don't really need the HD space and the money saved could go towards RAM.

Any comments between these resellers? amazon (where I have bought often) maconnection and macmall. I have purchased from the latter two in the past, but not in the past year or more. I love amazon for this stuff, but both the others are TINY bit cheaper and offer freebies like fusion and parallels.

TNKU
 
Oh, that extra 100 MHz will be the difference will be like night and day. If you don't have it, things will be so slow you won't be able to bear it, but with it, your comp will be 100% futureproof and faster than you can imagine.
 
Sure, the 100 mhz difference is unimportant -- but the cache difference isn't. Depending on what kind of work you're doing, it can give you a boost.
 
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