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

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by zub3qin, Jun 2, 2007.

  1. zub3qin macrumors 65816

    zub3qin

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    #1
    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?
     
  2. vintagetobes macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 4, 2007
    #2
    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.
     
  3. Igantius macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    #3
    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.
     
  4. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #4
    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.
     
  5. zioxide macrumors 603

    zioxide

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    #5
    I want 4 gigs of ram for HDV editing and compositing. Thats the only reason I care about Santa Rosa.
     
  6. macjonny1 macrumors 6502a

    macjonny1

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    #6
    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.
     
  7. Squonk macrumors 65816

    Squonk

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    #7
    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! ;)
     
  8. petvas macrumors 601

    petvas

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2006
    Location:
    Mannheim, Germany
    #8
    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.
     
  9. drlunanerd macrumors 65816

    drlunanerd

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    UK
    #9
    My MBP bus is happily running at 667MHz.... ;)

     
  10. jaduffy108 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    #10

    ### 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!
     
  11. Squonk macrumors 65816

    Squonk

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    #11
    That's right! What was I thinking....duh. OK, so SR represents a 20% faster FSB - noticable, but not earth shattering...
     
  12. drlunanerd macrumors 65816

    drlunanerd

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    UK
    #12
    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.
     
  13. zub3qin thread starter macrumors 65816

    zub3qin

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    #13
    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.
     
  14. Bern macrumors 68000

    Bern

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Location:
    Australia
    #14
    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.
     
  15. xfiftyfour macrumors 68030

    xfiftyfour

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Location:
    Clemson, SC
    #15
    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.
     
  16. Erasmus macrumors 68030

    Erasmus

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Location:
    Hiding from Omnius in Australia
    #16
    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.
     
  17. Bern macrumors 68000

    Bern

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Location:
    Australia
    #17
    And people here expected Apple to update the integrated graphics in the MacBook as well... DUH!
     
  18. BigPrince macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    #18

    Err what about programmers or people that run many programs at once....
     
  19. Erasmus macrumors 68030

    Erasmus

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Location:
    Hiding from Omnius in Australia
    #19
    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.
     
  20. iTim314 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Location:
    U.S.
    #20
    Wrong. The LED Backlights are 30% brighter than the current backlights in the MacBook Pros.
     
  21. BigPrince macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    #21
    woot thats my new story and im sticking to it.
     
  22. Bern macrumors 68000

    Bern

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Location:
    Australia
    #22
    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:
     
  23. xfiftyfour macrumors 68030

    xfiftyfour

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Location:
    Clemson, SC
    #23
    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.
     
  24. Squonk macrumors 65816

    Squonk

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    #24
    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...
     
  25. Erasmus macrumors 68030

    Erasmus

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Location:
    Hiding from Omnius in Australia
    #25
    All Napa. iMac, MBP, MB, MM.
    I believe.
     

Share This Page