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

Santa Rosa/LED - really a big deal in a MBP?

zub3qin

zub3qin

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Apr 10, 2007
1,315
4
We all expect LED and Santa Rosa chip set in the new MBP.


1) Santa Rosa would have made a far greater impact to the MB, no? To this novice, it seems that it would have improved graphics (but MBP doesn't need it) and it allows more RAM (is more than 3 GB ram important to the average user?)

2) Is LED really that big a deal to the average user? Seems more expensive, and more "environmentally green" but I am not a photo editor who needs super precise colors- and the old displays seemed fine, no?

3) Is there any compelling reason to not get the current MBP (at a discount of course) once the newest one is released on Tues?
 
zub3qin said:
We all expect LED and Santa Rosa chip set in the new MBP.


1) Santa Rosa would have made a far greater impact to the MB, no? To this novice, it seems that it would have improved graphics (but MBP doesn't need it) and it allows more RAM (is more than 3 GB ram important to the average user?)

2) Is LED really that big a deal to the average user? Seems more expensive, and more "environmentally green" but I am not a photo editor who needs super precise colors- and the old displays seemed fine, no?
Click to expand...

The Macbook Pro isn't for the "average user", the Macbook is. Pros might need more than 3GB of ram, Macbook users probably won't. Also, the LED backlight will improve battery life.
 
zub3qin said:
We all expect LED and Santa Rosa chip set in the new MBP...

3) Is there any compelling reason to not get the current MBP (at a discount of course) once the newest one is released on Tues?
Click to expand...

Not wishing to play Devil's advocate, but although certainly the majority opinion expects these features to be defintitely added to the new machines, some posters have been a little more cautious. In any case, we're unlikely have to wait much longer to see...

As for your last question, it all depends on what Apple actually unveils.
 
1) You're right.
2) It won't help with colours. It may provide a more even backlight and help you save battery life. Heck, the new LED backlights may not even be as bright as the old backlights. Who knows until they're released, right?

3) I'd rather take a $300 discount over a Santa Rosa MBP.....unless the LED screens are reported to be a lot better than the old ones. If not, then forget it.
 
I want 4 gigs of ram for HDV editing and compositing. Thats the only reason I care about Santa Rosa.
 
Presumably there will be an updated graphics card, as I don't see how they can keep one over 1-1/2 years old. So, does that mean anything to you? If you don't play the latest games, then probably not.
 
What I am most interested in seeing in action with Santa Rosa is the fact that the FSB on SR is 800MHz as compared to 533MHz on the Napa platform. That represents a 50% improvement in FSB speed. This is non-trivial! I'm thinking this will be quite noticable with equivalent processor speeds when comparing the two.

Sure, the MB would see a dramatic difference with the much improved graphics subsystem and the MB's will see this eventually, but I think a 50% improvement in FSB should appear on the flagship/Pro laptop first.

LED - I can't wait to see this technology in action and based on all of the grumbing here on MR about the MBP screens, I sure it will be most welcome.

I simply cannot wait to see a rev'd MBP with either or both of these technologies. Of course the "turbo memory" and a case update would be awesome too. 4GB of RAM will not be a biggie to me right now, but in 3 years with 10.6 or 10.7, who knows, we may need it!

Peace out Napoleon! ;)
 
Santa Rosa doesn't bring noticable improvements in performance. It gives more RAM and better power management, but thats it...

I am more interested if the new Displays will be better.
 
My MBP bus is happily running at 667MHz.... ;)

Squonk said:
What I am most interested in seeing in action with Santa Rosa is the fact that the FSB on SR is 800MHz as compared to 533MHz on the Napa platform. That represents a 50% improvement in FSB speed. This is non-trivial! I'm thinking this will be quite noticable with equivalent processor speeds when comparing the two.

Sure, the MB would see a dramatic difference with the much improved graphics subsystem and the MB's will see this eventually, but I think a 50% improvement in FSB should appear on the flagship/Pro laptop first.

LED - I can't wait to see this technology in action and based on all of the grumbing here on MR about the MBP screens, I sure it will be most welcome.

I simply cannot wait to see a rev'd MBP with either or both of these technologies. Of course the "turbo memory" and a case update would be awesome too. 4GB of RAM will not be a biggie to me right now, but in 3 years with 10.6 or 10.7, who knows, we may need it!

Peace out Napoleon! ;)
Click to expand...
 
zub3qin said:
We all expect LED and Santa Rosa chip set in the new MBP.


1) Santa Rosa would have made a far greater impact to the MB, no? To this novice, it seems that it would have improved graphics (but MBP doesn't need it) and it allows more RAM (is more than 3 GB ram important to the average user?)

2) Is LED really that big a deal to the average user? Seems more expensive, and more "environmentally green" but I am not a photo editor who needs super precise colors- and the old displays seemed fine, no?

3) Is there any compelling reason to not get the current MBP (at a discount of course) once the newest one is released on Tues?
Click to expand...


### for #1...imo, yes...much bigger deal for MB than MBP. I use *Pro* apps and would love the 4gigs of RAM, but until 2gb RAM chips go WAY down in price, no thank you.
#2...I agree with comments above...we'll have to wait and see, but I'm not expecting much regarding LEDs...and in my case (needing a 17" MBP), it's unlikely they will be used in the 17" MBP. Their potential in improving battery life is substantial though.
#3...Well, no imo cuz I just bought one. :) My suggestion is to get a refurbished unit via Apple store or the $150 rebate via Amazon...but for $150, *I* would probably just get the new one.

Also...be VERY happy you aren't in Prague (like me) where a 17" MBP costs the equivalent of $4000. U.S. Dollars or in London for $3800. (1900 pounds). I have a friend coming from the US with my MBP as I type....

Good luck!
 
Squonk said:
That's right! What was I thinking....duh. OK, so SR represents a 20% faster FSB - noticable, but not earth shattering...
Click to expand...

I reckon the mooted power saving functions will be the only thing vaguely interesting, including what, if anything, Apple do with Robson.

Apple need to use higher quality LCD panels in the MBPs. Whether that includes LED backlights or not, they need to be an improvement. Santa Rosa makes diddly squat difference to that.
 
drlunanerd said:
I reckon the mooted power saving functions will be the only thing vaguely interesting, including what, if anything, Apple do with Robson.

Apple need to use higher quality LCD panels in the MBPs. Whether that includes LED backlights or not, they need to be an improvement. Santa Rosa makes diddly squat difference to that.
Click to expand...

Seems to me the only compelling reason to get the MBP is if they do a whole design change. The guts of the system don't seem to be need changing.
 
SR will probably see a boost to 2.4Ghz processor for the MBP and provide a slightly longer battery life. Given that everyone uses their MBP differently expect to see a lot of whining over battery life if SR is added to MBPs.

I don't see MBPs getting 4GB ram at all. For current software out there 3GB is more than enough on a laptop and Apple do have the desktop Macs to handle all those video editors and so forth out there.

LED, maybe, Steve did mention it but a lot of people were expecting big things for the last revision of the MacBook which never happened. What would be really cool is if the iMac came with LED.
 
Bern said:
I don't see MBPs getting 4GB ram at all. For current software out there 3GB is more than enough on a laptop and Apple do have the desktop Macs to handle all those video editors and so forth out there.
Click to expand...
What do you mean you don't see the MBPs getting 4GB of RAM? That's not a feature that Apple dictates, that's a feature of the chipset. SR supports 4GBs, so if the MBP gets it (duh), then the MBP will support 4GBs of RAM.
 
The SR MBP will be an all round, better machine.
The biggest improvement should be to its graphics card. The 8600M GT or the HD 2600 offer far better performnce per watt than the X1600, and are of course far more powerful.
Other than the graphics card, the SR MBP should be more upgradeable. It should end up getting a user replaceable hard drive, so you should be able to jam at least 4GB of 800MHz RAM in there, once the prices are a little closer to Earth than Jupiter. In a few years, shove in a 512GB Flash HDD, and seriously improve your battery life and read speeds.
Turbo Memory will hopefully be added, and used by 10.4.10, if not, then it will be used by Leopard.
Dynamic Acceleration should increase the speed of badly threaded apps dramatically. Think close to 40%.
The Santa Rosa platform improves battery life on its own, add to that LED backlit screens, and we could be looking at real battery lives of close to 4 hours. With minimal usage of course.
So, it depends on what you want to use it for. If you play games, definitely wait. If not, it doesn't matter so much.
We'll see whether its worth it in a few days, eh?

And people weren't really expecting big things for the Macbook. All it needed was the Santa Rosa chipset, which would have come with the X3100 integrated graphics. But Apple decided not to, to make the Macbook more affordable. And now we look back, imagine if the MB had gotten SR, in relation to its standing with the MBP!
No doubt Apple is getting rid of its surplus Napa stock in the MBs so it can use their limited supply of SR in the MBPs.
 
xfiftyfour said:
What do you mean you don't see the MBPs getting 4GB of RAM? That's not a feature that Apple dictates, that's a feature of the chipset. SR supports 4GBs, so if the MBP gets it (duh), then the MBP will support 4GBs of RAM.
Click to expand...

And people here expected Apple to update the integrated graphics in the MacBook as well... DUH!
 
Bern said:
....
I don't see MBPs getting 4GB ram at all. For current software out there 3GB is more than enough on a laptop and Apple do have the desktop Macs to handle all those video editors and so forth out there.

...
Click to expand...


Err what about programmers or people that run many programs at once....
 
If the MBP gets an update on Tuesday, it will include Santa Rosa. If the MBP is not going to get Santa Rosa, it won't get an update. Simple as that.
 
Abstract said:
It won't help with colours. It may provide a more even backlight and help you save battery life. Heck, the new LED backlights may not even be as bright as the old backlights. Who knows until they're released, right?
Click to expand...

Wrong. The LED Backlights are 30% brighter than the current backlights in the MacBook Pros.
 
BigPrince said:
Err what about programmers or people that run many programs at once....
Click to expand...

You mean people like me who have a MBP 2.33Ghz 3GB ram running PS CS3, Illustrator CS3 and Flash CS3 all at the same time whilst plugged into my external monitor? :rolleyes:
 
Bern said:
And people here expected Apple to update the integrated graphics in the MacBook as well... DUH!
Click to expand...
No, people HOPED for an update. However, they disregarded the fact that an update to the graphics card would require SR, which Apple is going to introduce into the pro machine first.

The MBP getting SR is MUCH different than the MB getting an updated card - if only after looking at the current line up. Apple has positioned themselves to introduce 2.2/2.4Ghz SR machines here in the next couple of weeks, as it would be just plain stupid to leave SR out and keep the Ghz the same across the MB and the MBP line.
 
Erasmus said:
The SR MBP will be an all round, better machine.

(snip)

No doubt Apple is getting rid of its surplus Napa stock in the MBs so it can use their limited supply of SR in the MBPs.
Click to expand...

Agreed that the MBP will be all around better.

What motherboard is in the MBP currently as the MB has Napa? Thus the confussion in my earlier post about the FSB speed on the current MBP...
 
Squonk said:
Agreed that the MBP will be all around better.

What motherboard is in the MBP currently as the MB has Napa? Thus the confussion in my earlier post about the FSB speed on the current MBP...
Click to expand...

All Napa. iMac, MBP, MB, MM.
I believe.
 
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