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

update or not?

B

bludevil

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Feb 25, 2007
7
0
Hi I have a white macbook late 2007 and I'm thinking to replace it with the macbook pro 13", the basic model. I mainly use Aperture 3 working with raw files, and I'd like it to be more reactive, without any slowing down. Now with 4 giga of ram it's not so fluent. I saw in the activity monitor that page-out is about 1 giga, so I think I need more ram.
Given that I would have 1066 ddr3 ram instead of 667 ddr2, and 2.4Ghz cpu instead of 2.2, what I have doubts on is: will I have real benefits buying the macbook pro? Or there will not be a significant performance?
Thank you for your help!
 
I would wait till next year as 13" should get iX CPU then. If you upgraded now, it wouldn't be a big upgrade
 
If you need speed now, max out RAM. Wait until next year when the 13" moves up from CoreDuo to get more years out of a new machine.

? fellow Dukie
 
eawmp1 said:
If you need speed now, max out RAM. Wait until next year when the 13" moves up from CoreDuo to get more years out of a new machine.

? fellow Dukie
Click to expand...

4 giga is the max for my actual macbook! So you think cpu are going to change in 13" too...
 
bludevil said:
4 giga is the max for my actual macbook! So you think cpu are going to change in 13" too...
Click to expand...

Its got too, intel is going to stop producing the C2D chipsets, the question is what will apple use, i3 or the i5. My guess is the i3
 
I hope they'll let us choose between an i3 and an i5. Because all that matters then is just pricing. The i3 and i5 have around the same TDP which equates to similar heat output, and design-wise, there shouldn't be much of a problem. The turbo boost features found in i5 sure looks better as compared to an i3 without it. Yeah and I agree with the rest of the members. If you can hold out until next year till sandy bridge comes out, you might just be in for other surprises, probably lightpeak, which intel will be more than happy for it to roll out as soon as possible. USB 3.0 is fat hope, intel's not gonna make a chipset that supports it until 2012 at least, and its only unless apple decides not to use an intel chipset, which is unlikely.
 
Perdification said:
Hey guys, just take a look at this article: http://www.appleinsider.com/article...s_sandy_bridge_cpus_sooner_than_expected.html

Seems to suggest that the MBP 13' isn't gonna get sandy...
Click to expand...

That's based on nothing. They are just assuming that Apple will do as they did with Arrandale. One important point that they are missing is the fact that C2Ds will be EOLed fairly soon.

BTW, that article made me laugh. Apple wasn't the first one to use Nehalem in 2009, they were the first one to use Nehalem Xeons. There is a big difference. First Nehalems came in November 2008 and many, if not all manufacturers used them before Apple.

So much crap on the net...
 
My advice is that if you REALLY want the 13", then wait. If not, get the 15" now. :)

In April I had a 17" white iMac - the last consumer model of it available; 2.0GHz Core2Duo, 3GB RAM, etc. I sold it and bought the new 13" MBP. From the day I bought it, I was never really pleased with its performance, but it was OK. The last straw for me was when I borrowed my sister's 2008 unibody Macbook (with nearly the same specs, BTW) and it was just as fast as my almost-brand-new 2010 MBP. So I sold it and bought my 15" i7.

The 15" MBP costs a lot more, but its worth IMHO. If you really want a 13", I say wait wait wait. :)
 
Hellhammer said:
That's based on nothing. They are just assuming that Apple will do as they did with Arrandale. One important point that they are missing is the fact that C2Ds will be EOLed fairly soon.

BTW, that article made me laugh. Apple wasn't the first one to use Nehalem in 2009, they were the first one to use Nehalem Xeons. There is a big difference. First Nehalems came in November 2008 and many, if not all manufacturers used them before Apple.

So much crap on the net...
Click to expand...

Phew, thanks pal, you just assuaged all my fears of the 13' not having an iX chip.
 
js81 said:
My advice is that if you REALLY want the 13", then wait. If not, get the 15" now. :)

In April I had a 17" white iMac - the last consumer model of it available; 2.0GHz Core2Duo, 3GB RAM, etc. I sold it and bought the new 13" MBP. From the day I bought it, I was never really pleased with its performance, but it was OK. The last straw for me was when I borrowed my sister's 2008 unibody Macbook (with nearly the same specs, BTW) and it was just as fast as my almost-brand-new 2010 MBP. So I sold it and bought my 15" i7.

The 15" MBP costs a lot more, but its worth IMHO. If you really want a 13", I say wait wait wait. :)
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more. That's what I've been advising others to do. Wait if you can, cos the MBP 13' gotta get sandy bridge or at least a core iX sooner or later. Either that or buy the 15', cos at least you're getting 2010 architecture. Spread it to the world!
 
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