POLL: 13" MBP - 2.26 v 2.53 - which are you?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by stevearm, Aug 31, 2009.


If you have a new 13" MBP, which model did you go for?

  1. 2.26GHz

    85 vote(s)
  2. 2.53GHz

    41 vote(s)
  1. stevearm macrumors 6502a

    Nov 15, 2007
    I'm going to be getting a 13" MBP in the coming weeks, and am a bit torn over which model to get. So I thought I'd put a poll up as I'm curious what the majority of people went for.

    Those who've tried both, is there a noticeable difference?
  2. macchiato2009 macrumors 65816

    Aug 14, 2009
    for me, the price does not justify the difference in processor performance (about 10%)

    i decided to pay for the 2.26 and buy extra ram and a SSD by myself
  3. xlii macrumors 68000


    Sep 19, 2006
    Millis, Massachusetts
    The biggest difference is the price. You pay a premium for that extra 10% of CPU clock speed... which doesn't even come close to adding another 10% of performance to your running app.

    The 2.26 13" mbp plus the student discount plus the free iPod Touch is a steal of a deal.
  4. bolen macrumors 6502


    Jul 22, 2008
    Voted 2.26GHz.

    Spend the difference on a decent Intel SSD and you'll be noticing a whole world of difference. :)
  5. stevearm thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Nov 15, 2007
    I'd love a SSD hard disk but I'd rather not open my laptop up and mess around with it. And the Apple SSD's are way too expensive.

    Thing is, it's not exactly a huge leap in terms of cost, £110. What would the extra 10% of CPU speed actually do? Opening applications quicker? That sort of thing?
  6. pesc macrumors regular

    Jan 20, 2006
    It could, in the best case, speed some encoding you do from 30 seconds to 27.

    For opening apps quicker or having a more "snappy feel", the 10% extra CPU buys you nothing. Installing more RAM or an SSD can make a huge improvement.

    SSDs are a bit expensive now but will become cheaper soon. Opening your laptop and installing RAM and SSD is actually quite easy. If you don't want to do it yourself, buy the RAM/SSD at an Apple shop and let them do it for you.

    I'm not sure, but wouldn't the faster CPU run hotter? Drain the battery faster?
  7. Carl Abudephane, Aug 31, 2009
    Last edited: May 6, 2012
  8. Doju macrumors 68000

    Jun 16, 2008
    I went for the 2.53GHz.

    In Canada, it was like $300 more. It would cost me $70 CAD for the RAM, $56 for the HDD, and then I was basically paying only $180 more for a third of 1GHz increase. Seemed worthwhile to me.

    You can always upgrade the RAM, HDD, etc. down the line, but the processor you're stuck with. Might as well go big in the beginning.

    Plus, I could have gone with an Intel SSD or something from the price savings, but with the max being 160GB for a lot of money, I'll hold out for the 300GB coming in Q1 2010 likely for the same price or cheaper. That way when it comes out I won't be punching myself for spending half a thousand dollars for an SSD made obsolete four months from purchase.

    SSDs aren't quite worth it yet, IMO.

    Above all, though, before this 13" MBP I had 2.4GHz MacBook Unibody (solely upgrade from 2.0->2.4 for the backlit keyboard) and I couldn't see myself downgrading.
  9. Shaduu macrumors 6502a


    Jan 31, 2007
    I sprung for the 2.26GHz 'cause, as others have said, the extra 270MHz will go by pretty much unnoticed by most users, myself included.

    I've just spent the money saved on an Up-to-Date Snow Leopard disk, 4GB RAM from Crucial and I'll probably be getting a 320GB HDD from Amazon in the next couple of weeks.

    In my opinion, the 2.53GHz is actually a bad purchase when you consider the upgrades you can acquire from third parties for the price difference.
  10. phixiuz macrumors regular

    Aug 25, 2009
    The 2.26 and with the money saved I bought myself an Intel X-25M SSD. That'll be waaaaay more noticeable than a tiny 260Mhz increase on the CPU.
  11. Z06jerry macrumors regular

    Feb 2, 2008
    Ontario, Canada
  12. NC MacGuy macrumors 603

    NC MacGuy

    Feb 9, 2005
    The good side of the grass.
    What he said. Bought the X 25 160GB model.
  13. macchiato2009 macrumors 65816

    Aug 14, 2009
    i just ordered my X25 SSD 80 Gb

    the difference in price covers this purchase ;)
  14. stevearm thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Nov 15, 2007
    But out of curiosity, what would the extra MHz actually do? I'm not hugely computer literate...

    RAM is for for example, opening 20 documents in photoshop at the same time and not having it lag.

    HD/SSD is for accessing files

    CPU does what exactly, just perform calculations quicker, meaning the whole maching will run faster?
  15. airplaneman macrumors 6502a

    Jun 8, 2009
    SSD will give you the most improvements in app opening speeds.
  16. NC MacGuy macrumors 603

    NC MacGuy

    Feb 9, 2005
    The good side of the grass.
    In theory.

    You only use 10-40% of your processor 80% of the time. So for regular tasks you'll see very little if any difference. Large intensive tasks such as CS rendering or HandBraking you'll see the ≤10% processor speed increase.
  17. airplaneman macrumors 6502a

    Jun 8, 2009
    :)What he says ^^ :D.
  18. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem


    Feb 19, 2005
    It is widely published that the real world benefit of a processor with only ~.3 ghz difference is a waste of money. You're better suited investing in a faster HDD or an SSD at this point. I would not waste my money on a 2.53 MBP. I'm thinking of selling my Air for a MBP, with that it'll have the SSD and it will be the "low end" model. Even with an 8-core MP I can tell you that rarely do I use more than 40% of the processing power on that these days.
  19. zw-gator macrumors 6502a


    Oct 23, 2005
    The difference after tax (for me) was ~$375

    4GB of RAM after tax and shipping (on sale) is about $80

    A 500GB HD is about $90-$100

    Send the rest on AppleCare
  20. macchiato2009 macrumors 65816

    Aug 14, 2009
    you're definitely right

    I totally forgot about AppleCare !!

    for those who don't want SSD, having a bigger HD + extra RAM and AppleCare represents the premium between 2.26 and 2.53
  21. ki2594 macrumors 6502a

    Apr 12, 2008
    Carmel, IN.
    I got the 2.53. I needed to get straight working into photoshop and soon to be Final Cut so i thought i should just go with whats stocked in with 4GB and the bigger hard drive. I don't plan on getting an SSD until there a lot cheaper at 256GB or whatever. I'll probably buy an SSD when the next OS launches, or in 2 years, whichever comes first.
  22. vant macrumors 65816

    Jul 1, 2009
    $180 for .27GHz is the biggest waste of money I've ever heard.

    The fact that the P8400 and the P8700 both retails in the public marketplace for the same price of $225 shows that the P8700 is used by Apple as a marketing ploy.

    Add to the fact that 3rd party RAM/HD is almost always faster and you have a bad deal.

    You are essentially giving Apple at least $200 in gross profit (on top of the profit of the 2.26) if you go with the 2.53.
  23. michael.lauden macrumors 68020


    Dec 25, 2008
    idk about you guys but i'm the 2.0.

    just kidding.

    who wouldn't get the 2.53. the small difference in processing power can and WILL have a huge increase on your day to day computing.
  24. vant macrumors 65816

    Jul 1, 2009
    Huge? How so?

    I don't mind the 2.53 crowd, they're paying extra $ to keep the 2.26 prices down ;) If we only had one SKU, it'd probably be $200 more to get a MBP13.
  25. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem


    Feb 19, 2005
    Who wouldn't? Those who understand there more to adding additional ram and a faster HDD than there is to that minor speed bump.

Share This Page