Penryn MBP or Current 15" Base Model Unibody?

[blairh]

What I have:

MBP Penryn 2.4 Ghz, 2 GB, 200 HD, Matte.

What I'm looking at:

Unibody 15" MBP 2.53 Ghz, 4 GB, 250 HD, Glossy.

Love the new trackpads on the MBP, not sure how I'll like the glossy screen.

Would be doing some video work down the road (Canon HV40). Please tell me the difference between the performance of these graphics cards and lastly which one you would opt for. Thanks.

 

[cluthz]

The Penryn MBP have a much better graphics card than the 2.53GHz 15-inch Unibody. In games and 3D application the Penryn will be twice as fast.

Upgrading the Penryn with 4GB RAM and a 500GB HD (or a fast SSD) would be much better value for money.

When it comes to CPU intensive stuff you won't notice much difference from the 2.53GHz compared to the 2.4GHz.

As far as i know the 2.4GHz have larger cache than the 2.53GHz and could be faster in some tasks as well.

 

[cube]

March 2009 2.66 or 2.93

 

[blairh]

I don't play games or use 3D applications. Would I get better performance out of the Penryn MBP during video editing?

 

[cluthz]

I don't play games or use 3D applications. Would I get better performance out of the Penryn MBP during video editing?

Depends.

If you are only clipping etc you won't notice the difference, but if you do effects, like f.ex Motion the penryn with 8600 gfx will smoke the 9400 card in the unibody.

http://barefeats.com/mbpp12.html

Compares 9400 vs 9600 in macbook pro. (9600 is roughly 20% faster than the 8600)

 

[noodle654]

Like others have said, keep your Penryn. First off, the 2.53GHz 15" is a total waste of money. A $1700 laptop with integrated 9400m graphics?? The 8600m is much much better than the 9400. You will a very very small speed increase (CPU wise), but that is about it. Just check this out....

 

[nigameash]

unless you are planning on getting the 2.8ghz 15" with 512mb 9600, the new unibody ones come nowhere close to the santa rosa/penryn in terms of graphic performance + you get a matte screen

 

[feelthefire]

As far as i know the 2.4GHz have larger cache than the 2.53GHz and could be faster in some tasks as well.

2.4 GHz has 3MB cache, all the 2.53 have 6MB cache.

 

[cluthz]

2.4 GHz has 3MB cache, all the 2.53 have 6MB cache.

The new 2.53GHz has 3mb according to: http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/specs.html

My old 2.2GHz MBP has 4 mb cache.

Might be that the penryn was shipped with 3mb cache as the first MBP with less than 4mb, but I thought the unibodt 2.4GHz was the first with nerfed cache.

 

[zedsdead]

You are not going to notice a difference with the video cards for just editing HDV. It only comes into play if you plan to work with Color or Motion or play some video games.

I say get the new one, largely because of the Glass Trackpad and Amazing Battery.

Edit: Didn't realize you had one already. You are not going to notice any major differences besides the battery life and trackpad, which is great, but not worth an upgrade yet. I say wait until either the next revision or save up for a higher end 15" where you can get some nice gains in processor speed, not to mention that there are also rumors that the Matte Display will return as an option to the 15" Macbook Pro's.

 

[blairh]

I gotta ask this question then: why did Apple release a base model MBP's with weaker graphics performance vs. my Penryn which was the base model version before the Unibody was unveiled?

 

[cube]

They lowered the prices.

 

[aaquib]

I gotta ask this question then: why did Apple release a base model MBP's with weaker graphics performance vs. my Penryn which was the base model version before the Unibody was unveiled?

The $1999 model is still there, but to get the price down by $300, they removed the 9600GT.