dbasse Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 Hi guys! I'm about to go out and buy the new MacBook Pro, but there are some issues with the options I haven't been able to google out. First off, I've decided that it'll be the 15" version with 4GB RAM and the faster 7200rpm HDD. When it comes to the GPU, the 512MB version surely sounds better, but I'm told the current GPU cannot take the benefit from the memory increase. You guys agree with this? So on this basis I'd be going for the more basic model. But when it comes to the difference between 2.4GHz's 3MB L2 cache and 2.5GHz's 6MB L2 I'm very unable to make a decision. So my question is, in your opinion, how big is the difference between these two models and is it worth the money (400€ or $450)? I'll be using the 'book for graphics and video editing, studying and probably every now and then for some gaming (though if it doesn't run Crysis at million fps I'm not going to lose myself.. ) on the 30" Dell 3008WFP. Big thanks for you help! (still a bit newbie on the mac side of life as this'll be my first one) //basse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synaesthesia Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 Check out what I say in this thread, and this guy's advice on buying a Macbook Pro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbasse Posted June 13, 2008 Author Share Posted June 13, 2008 Thanks, those we're fine articles you had there! Let me just ask one more question. You see, I'm worried about the 30" screen's effect on the performance (never had such a monster before). Is the extra resolution more intensive on the GPU or CPU? Or is it just a piece of cake for the MBP?-) Mostly, I figure, the external screen will be enough for me, but now that I've discovered Rain Design's mStand I just might use the computer's own screen for Photoshop tools and such. Does that result in a big loss of performance and can you still have the big screen as the main one (with all the OSX menus and stuff)? //basse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synaesthesia Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 Well, it taxes the GPU more, but yes, it is a piece of cake for the MBP. For Photoshop and design programs you will have great graphics performance still, even on a 30" display. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbasse Posted June 14, 2008 Author Share Posted June 14, 2008 Ok, thanks again! I'll order the 2.4GHz version and as soon as I get it, I'll probably be back asking more questions //b Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLiDE FTW!!1 Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 Check out what I say in this thread, and this guy's advice on buying a Macbook Pro. I wouldn't get advice from a guy that claims that there's a 12" macbook... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synaesthesia Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 He just means the Macbook, which we know is 13 inch. His advice is actually good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbasse Posted June 14, 2008 Author Share Posted June 14, 2008 I wouldn't get advice from a guy that claims that there's a 12" macbook... Sometimes, when one has a point to make, they don't take the time or pay the attention to go over every bit and piece just to make sure they didn't type 3 as 2.. //b EDIT: Crappy Internet connection made me double-post.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeekofComputers Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 If you use Video editing and photo editing it tends to use the Vram to generate the multi media faster and remember in Snow leopard coming out theres going too be open CL so extra Vram will take the advantage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbasse Posted June 15, 2008 Author Share Posted June 15, 2008 If you use Video editing and photo editing it tends to use the Vram to generate the multi media faster and remember in Snow leopard coming out theres going too be open CL so extra Vram will take the advantage I'm aware of this but, as I said in my first post, I'm told the 8600M GT doesn't have enough power to really take the advatange out of 512MB VRAM. So unless this can be proved wrong, the 512MB VRAM would be nothing more but nice numbers and a lighter wallet. Rather than that, I'm interested in the effect of L2 going from 3MB to 6MB, and judging by Synaesthesia's posts it really makes no diffenrence worth the money. //b Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realfolkblues Posted June 15, 2008 Share Posted June 15, 2008 I have the 2.4 and 4gb of ram. It runs my 26in great. I dont see why it would not run the 30 great also. PS i run bioshock at full specs and full res on the built in screen. This things got plunty of power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLiDE FTW!!1 Posted June 15, 2008 Share Posted June 15, 2008 Sometimes, when one has a point to make, they don't take the time or pay the attention to go over every bit and piece just to make sure they didn't type 3 as 2.. //b EDIT: Crappy Internet connection made me double-post.. Well, to be technical, it's a 13.3" MacBook... and there was a 12" PowerBook. Proofreading makes the internet a better (and more legible) place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigboss Posted June 16, 2008 Share Posted June 16, 2008 I also agree with most of the things said in this thread 1) Processor speed: 0.1 GHz will not make much of a difference. The only real advantage the T9300 has is 2x the amount of L2 Cache and you will see a difference in CPU intensive apps but nothing to warrant blowing $500 more. It probably costs Apple on average $50 more than the T8300 2) Hard drive: 50 GB? You'd be better off upgrading to a 7200RPM model. This upgrade probably costs Apple $20 3) Graphics: It's the same chip with twice the VRAM. Please note that the 8600M GT's memory interface is 128-bits and the GPU is simply not capable of using the extra VRAM. You might see a small difference in frame rate in some 3D games but beyond that I can't say that it warrants blowing $500 either. The memory bandwidth simply isn't enough and GPU simply isn't fast enough to effectively utilize more than 256MB of memory anyways. I can't really judge the cost of this upgrade but I'll be extremely generous and say $100. So for you are paying $500 in the end for just about $170 of upgrades. Not a good buy in my books. edit: I saw you want to game on your Dell 30 inch. In general, you won't get a decent frame rate with most modern games with an 8600GT processor. To get a decent frame rate at that resolution with some eye candy enabled, you would likely need an 8800 series card at the minimum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts