Which CPU exactly does new unibody MBP use?

[Wolfpup]

It wouldn't surprise me if the 2.8Ghz CPU has to have the fans ramped up a bit more, REGARDLESS of which 2.53GHz chip is in it by default.

Though power management stuff may negate that to a large extent. IMO the upgrade isn't worth the price really, although it's not a total rip off either (more just that Intel charges a lot for the very top bin CPUs).

 

[brentris]

http://browse.geekbench.ca/

I searched for 2.53Ghz and found the Macbookpro5,1

It says T9400!!! NOOooo!

So do we think this confirms that it's the 35W higher power one?

 

[Wolfpup]

Hasn't ANYONE put Windows on one of these yet to find out for sure?

But again, remember the 2.53Ghz chip is still going to be using less power at full blast than the 2.8Ghz one, regardless of the TDP.

 

[burtherman]

It's a T9400!

I'm not sure why no one has answered this yet. I had to come down to the Apple store to get on a display model and run geekbench. It is indeed a T9400, so 35W power consumption.

For me, I think that means I'm going to go for the 2.8ghz.

 

[TheCakeIsALie]

OK so it seems that it's been confirmed that the 2.53 Ghz chip is the T9400. Regardless it should still be less power hungry than the T9600 due to the lower clock frequency. I'm kind of annoyed (a little) by Apple now, why didn't they use the P9500? It's only $30 more retail than the T9400.

 

[hohohong]

OK so it seems that it's been confirmed that the 2.53 Ghz chip is the T9400. Regardless it should still be less power hungry than the T9600 due to the lower clock frequency. I'm kind of annoyed (a little) by Apple now, why didn't they use the P9500? It's only $30 more retail than the T9400.

So MBP 2.8GHz is using T9600 right? Is there noticeable power consumption different between 2.8 and 2.53?

 

[Dias]

Well, since T9400 is confirmed, there are no reason to not get 2,8Ghz right? I mean, besides few hundred bucks...

 

[Wolfpup]

So MBP 2.8GHz is using T9600 right? Is there noticeable power consumption different between 2.8 and 2.53?

YES! As everyone keeps saying, the 2.8GHz chip is going to draw more power. Though I think the decision should mostly be based just on the performance difference. Personally I think the 2.53Ghz chip probably offers the best bang for the buck, but the 2.8GHz upgrade isn't too outrageously priced.

 

[philamac]

I honestly think there will be minimal impact on battery life & heat when comparing the 2.8 and 2.53 ghz CPUs.

If you need the power, I would tell you to get the 2.8Ghz and not worry about battery life & heat, as I believe it will be nearly the same as the 2.53.

[edit] BTW...
For my own reasons, I went out and got a 2.53Ghz MBP. Yay me! You guys don't have to take my word for it, but I can confirm as well that the CPU is definitely the 35W T9400.

 

[makowb]

BTW, it's basically the same difference when getting a 7200 rpm hdd vs a 5400 rpm. Yes the 7200 consumes more battery life, but because it gets the job done quicker, the difference is minimal.

Because the cache is twice that of the 2.4, I'm sure the battery life will be very similar. Of course the difference is that the CPU is always running instead of the hdd which only runs when necessary, but it's all relative to your usage. Maybe people who have gotten the 2.8, 2.53, and 2.4 can all post battery tests on here? It seems all the reviewers got 2.53...