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

Request of 2.8Ghz Mid-2009 owners

I was in the applestore today, and ran geekbench and noted this. Along with 1.5gbit sata im not happy
seriously thinking of cancelling now.
 
Wow...ever day a new thread shows up that makes me want to wait for the next refresh even more...so sad :(
 
I posted this in another thread no too long ago but I'll say it here too. Apple may have not used the P9700 simply because Intel doesn't make it for what Apple needs. Apple uses ball grid array processors and Intel doesn't make the P9700 in the package just yet. Intel does make it in a pin grid array and that's what pretty much every other laptop manufacturer uses.
 
Sneakz said:
I posted this in another thread no too long ago but I'll say it here too. Apple may have not used the P9700 simply because Intel doesn't make it for what Apple needs. Apple uses ball grid array processors and Intel doesn't make the P9700 in the package just yet. Intel does make it in a pin grid array and that's what pretty much every other laptop manufacturer uses.
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity, how do you know that Apple uses the BGA over the PGA?
 
Apple solders their processors directly to the motherboards. It decreases the height that a socket would have (maybe 2-3mm). BGA packages are whats used to directly solder to a motherboard.
 
No, its the fastest mobile processor from Intel. Its just that it's a 35W processor so don't expect excellent battery life when CPU usage is near 100% compared to a P series processor.
 
Sneakz said:
No, its the fastest mobile processor from Intel. Its just that it's a 35W processor so don't expect excellent battery life when CPU usage is near 100%.
Click to expand...

imthekuni said:
Just draws more power T = 35W while P = 25W
Click to expand...

So will the 17 MBP still get its claimed 8 hours of battery life?

Or will simply choosing this processor knock it down? And if so, by how much?

Does intel have a 25 W 3.06 processor?
 
NovemberWhiskey said:
Hmm thanks. I guess I shouldn't feel too bad about getting the 3.06 ghz processor then.
Click to expand...

The speed boost is negligible between 2.8 and 3.06 for most purposes. You wll probably notice the decrease in battery life with the 3.06 (but since they are using the T serioes 2.80 processors I guess you shouldn't feel guility) when running it at 100%

So pretty much they are using the T9600 (2.80 35W) and T9900 (3.06 35W)
 
I'm getting a MBP for college, and I can't justify the 3.06, as much as I've always wanted to have a processor over 3GHz :rolleyes:. Oh, and before anyone tells me the 2.8 is overkill, it's not for me. Music creation is one of the few tasks that milks a processor for all it's worth. I can max out my current 2.4 iMac fairly easily with a couple instances of Omnisphere.
 
imthekuni said:
You wll probably notice the decrease in battery life with the 3.06
Click to expand...
2.8 and 3.06 will get the same battery life. They have the same power consumption. If anything, the 3.06 would have better battery life because a task that put the 2.8 at 100% full load will draw 35W but the same task which puts the 3.06 at 90% load will draw maybe around 31W. Get what I'm saying?
 
mike1123 said:
I'm getting a MBP for college, and I can't justify the 3.06, as much as I've always wanted to have a processor over 3GHz :rolleyes:. Oh, and before anyone tells me the 2.8 is overkill, it's not for me. Music creation is one of the few tasks that milks a processor for all it's worth. I can max out my current 2.4 iMac fairly easily with a couple instances of Omnisphere.
Click to expand...
Same here, I can't justify it but I want it so much. 3.06GHz is straight up geek bragging rights :D
 
Sneakz said:
2.8 and 3.06 will get the same battery life. They have the same power consumption. If anything, the 3.06 would have better battery life because a task that put the 2.8 at 100% full load will draw 35W but the same task which puts the 3.06 at 90% load will draw maybe around 31W. Get what I'm saying?
Click to expand...

That makes absolute sense, don't know why I didn't figure that one out :p
 
The T9600 is really nice. it's damn fast. My macbook is cold to the touch 95% of the time. It's running at 40-43C at normal usage (surfing web, pandora, email sync, youtube, etc). Under as close to full laod as I can get it the CPU gets ~65C. The bottom is warm but not anything I can't put the back of my hand on.
 
nws0291 said:
The T9600 is really nice. it's damn fast. My macbook is cold to the touch 95% of the time. It's running at 40-43C at normal usage (surfing web, pandora, email sync, youtube, etc). Under as close to full laod as I can get it the CPU gets ~65C. The bottom is warm but not anything I can't put the back of my hand on.
Click to expand...

thanks for the great info! Was also wondering if the temp stay constant at idle? or does it creep up, fans kick in until cooled, then start that cycle over again?

Any way you could monitor the rpms during those tasks you just described?

appreciate your help on this. My current laptop goes through a really annoying fan/cooling cycle and gets kinda loud.

thanks so much

Dan
 
imthekuni said:
Wow...ever day a new thread shows up that makes me want to wait for the next refresh even more...so sad :(
Click to expand...

+1. I was seriously considering upgrading with this most recent refresh. I think I'll be waiting until early next year now though, just to see if I can't get something even shinier and faster :D
 
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