SR MBP v. non-SR MBP

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by TopRawman, Nov 14, 2007.

  1. TopRawman macrumors newbie

    TopRawman

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    #1
    I'm on the fence between a refurb non-SR MBP 2.16 (1499) or a refurb SR MBP 2.2 (1699) but would like to hear from any users who have experience with both machines that can testify on the difference in performance. I'll mainly be doing image and video editing with the MBP.

    Another issue between the two models include the non-LCD screen v. LCD screen, which I hear have had a "yellowing" problem. Discoloring or power savings aside, is there a big difference visually between the two?

    This "Crack"Book Pro dilemma has me :confused:, so thanks in advance to you Apple (err, Mac?) guru's!
     
  2. scaredpoet macrumors 604

    scaredpoet

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    #2
    If you're not gaming or doing 3-D modeling on it, then the non SR MBP should be fine.

    I have a non SR MBP (2.33GHz) that I got just before the SR's were released, and a coworker got a SR 2.4 MBP just after the release. Other than this, the specs are similar: 2GB of RAM, 200GB HD.

    Honestly, we've not seen a difference in performance between the two, except that I've had fewer problems with mine than he's had with his. I certainly don't regret my decision not to wait. :)
     
  3. TopRawman thread starter macrumors newbie

    TopRawman

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    #3
    Good to hear! Not gaming on it at all unless it comes with minesweeper or solitaire. But I'll be working with Adobe CS3 and FCP. Starting to lean towards saving $200 bucks. So the non-LCD screen hasn't been an issue with your particular MBP?
     
  4. scaredpoet macrumors 604

    scaredpoet

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    #4
    You mean non LED screen? No, it hasn't been an issue for me, though I do have AppleCare in case it ever becomes an issue. Since you're buying this as a refurb, you might want to just go ahead and get Applecare with it, just to be on the safe side.
     
  5. bntz313 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    #5
    I also have the 2.33 and its a beast. I too was in the same position to get the 2.33 or 2.4 17incher I figured that having maxed out at 3gb would be enough, I dont play games and I work with CS3 creative suite everyday for school and it does just fine. The only lag I ever see is when I do extrude&bevel effect on something that is rather large
     
  6. InLikeALion macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Location:
    Greener places than I used to live
    #6
    I'd recommend the SR MBP. The extra $200 now will allow you to get 4GB of ram eventually - which will be usefull to your video editing and photoshopping. PS can use 4 GB of mem before paging out to hard disk. If you don't tax it that much at first, when you DO start hitting that wall and have the ability to buy more ram, the initial investment will have been well worth it. By the time 10.6 or at least .7 come out, 3GB will not seem like that much anymore.

    This is not to mention the improvements in the SR chipset - not just the processor clock and ram caps are different.
     
  7. TopRawman thread starter macrumors newbie

    TopRawman

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    #7
    Yes, LED :D

    Good to hear from a CS3 user about the performance. Do any of you use FCP? I plan on getting the AppleCare before my initial 1-year warranty for sure. Now all I have to do is wake up at 2am to snatch a unit before everyone else gobbles them up.
     
  8. TopRawman thread starter macrumors newbie

    TopRawman

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    #8
    That's true about the advantages of the SR, which is why this has been a tough decision for me. Then I consider the issues that the SR-MBP LED screens have had and would hate to have discoloration, especially while working with photos. But that's why I'd like to know from people that have used both systems to see if the performance boost is worth $200.
     
  9. goranius macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    #9
    You should definitely go for the SR.
    Just think about it, for $200 more you'll get
    - LED
    - 800 MHz FSB
    - 4GB RAM max
    - nVidia
    Sounds like a bargain to me...:cool:
     
  10. jnc macrumors 68020

    jnc

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Location:
    Nunya, Business TX
    #10
    Don't the non SR MBPs have the archaic ATi card that's been there since the initial Jan 2006 Core Duo lineup?

    With only $200 separating the two, the faster speed, better graphics card, LED-backlit screen and newer chipset, I'd go for the Santa Rosa.
     
  11. je1ani macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    #11
    The 2.2 Macbook Pro on the refurb IS NOT an SR notebook...
     
  12. jnc macrumors 68020

    jnc

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Location:
    Nunya, Business TX
    #12
    What is it then? It can only be the "Santa Rosa" MacBook Pros - they're the only Pro line Macs with a 2.2GHz configuration.

    Or are you just being picky for no reason about the term "Santa Rosa"?
     
  13. KingYaba macrumors 68040

    KingYaba

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Location:
    Up the irons
    #13
    The 2.2 ghz Core 2 Duo Macbook Pro is indeed a Santa Rosa machine.
     

Share This Page