What type of true performance difference can I see between a 1.83 and a 2.2 MB?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by one1, Jan 7, 2008.

  1. one1 macrumors 65816

    Jun 17, 2007
    Chattanooga, TN
    I know they got bumped a little each revision, but in reality what would be the true performance difference between a 1.83 with 4gb ram (showing 3) and a bone stock new 2.2 book with no upgrades?

    (then for kicks, with 4gb ram on the 2.2)
  2. hari-bhari macrumors regular

    Jul 4, 2007
  3. tersono macrumors 68000


    Jan 18, 2005
    It's going to depend on what apps you're running. For standard day-to-day use, you're not going to notice a whole lot of difference. If you're a Photoshop user, then frankly the extra RAM will make more difference than the CPU if you're dealing with big files.

    Overall, if you have the 1.83, I really don't think it would be worth upgrading to the 2.2. Not enough performance hike for the dough.
  4. Consultant macrumors G5


    Jun 27, 2007
    Barefeats.com has benchmarks. You just have to find the old benchmarks and compare to recent benchmarks.

    It's application and sometimes harddrive dependent.
  5. heatmiser macrumors 68020

    Dec 6, 2007
    Effectively none. Once it's a c2d, it's far overpowered for what 99% of consumers will use it for.
  6. Bearxor macrumors 6502a

    Jun 7, 2007
    Unless you're doing something REALLY CPU intensive. I mean REALLY REALLY CPU intensive, then there would be no noticeable difference at all.

    Break out a few benchmark utilities and a stopwatch and you might be able to measure the difference but are you going to notice if you have to wait 6.5s for something instead of 5.8s?
  7. one1 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Jun 17, 2007
    Chattanooga, TN
  8. netdog macrumors 603


    Feb 6, 2006
    The Core Duo won't take 4GB or RAM. The C2D referenced in those benchmarks will only read 3.3GB. Santa Rosa C2D MBPs (2.2, 2.4, 2.6) will read 4GB.

Share This Page