What 15 Model: 2.4GHz or 2.53GHz?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by bmstrong, Feb 3, 2009.

  1. bmstrong macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    #1
    What 15" model do you guys recommend? The 2.4GHz or 2.53GHz? Is the extra price justified by the specs in the higher model? Or does the entry level 15" represent the better value?
     
  2. GGJstudios macrumors Westmere

    GGJstudios

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    #2
  3. webworks415 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    #3
    i dont think you will notice much difference between .13 mhz ...I bought the 2.4GHz model and i use an external hard drive so the hard drive space on the higher model isnt much of a factor. I also find 2GB of ram to be sufficient but I might upgrade in the future... As far as thr graphics card, the 256mb difference not an issue for me cause I dont do much graphic intense stuff like gaming
     
  4. kremer4 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Fairfax, VA
    #4
    Due not that the the 2.53Ghz comes with 6MB shared L2 cache and the 2.4Ghz comes with 3MB shared L2 cache.

    Depending on what your using the machine for the extra .13Ghz plus the extra 3MB shared cache can make a noticeable difference.
     
  5. J the Ninja macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2008
    #5
    Don't bother with the higher-end model. "Double the cache" may sound nice today, but it really won't make much difference in the long run. 4 years from now, both will just be some variant of slow. Except the 2.53 model makes you pay another $500. The vRAM gets you nowhere, shoving 512MB on that card is like installing 2GB of RAM in a 1.6Ghz Pentium 4 machine. It's pointless, anything that needs the RAM is going to be so bottlenecked by the processor, the extra RAM won't matter.

    4GB of RAM and 320GB HDD can be had from 3rd parties for about $170, far less than the $500 you're paying for two other fairly silly placebo upgrades.
     
  6. wonderbread57 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    #6
    Really inaccurate. A 2.53Ghz C2D is no slouch and in the case of playing most games the video card will be the bottle neck not the dual core c2d. Vram is REALLY valuable. Two years ago NVIDIA offered the 8800 GTX with 768MB vram and clock speeds were not what they are today and yet, the 768 proved insanely useful. I downgraded from the 768MB 8800 GTX to a 512MB 8800 GT and the slowdown was noticeable and this is with a 2.5ghz X2.

    Twice the cache is a big deal and so is the vram.
     
  7. eldy macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2009
    Location:
    The City
    #7
    You must also consider that there are two cores running at the faster clock speed.
     
  8. smacman macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2006
    #8
    This information is spot on in my opinion. 99% of users don't even utilize half of their processing power these days...
     
  9. Patriks7 macrumors 65816

    Patriks7

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    #9
    Exactly. If you are considering to get anything above the base MBP, you should know what you will be needing it for. If you don't know what you'll need it for, then obviously you don't need it. Just save the 500$ and put it into an SSD. You will see a much greater increase in speed.
     
  10. J the Ninja macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2008
    #10
    The 8800GTX is roughly 4x as powerful as the 9600M GT. You missed my entire point. 512MB is nice if the GPU is powerful enough. My point was that anything that needs the extra vRAM will be so bottlenecked by the GPU, it won't matter.
     
  11. wonderbread57 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    #11
    thought you meant cpu bottleneck. in this case i have no comment.
     

Share This Page