View Full Version : Shitty generic question that has been asked before about "real" differences in Pro's

2nd August 2007, 08:38 PM
Old wine, new cup.

Short question is this - is the base MacBook Pro better value than the next model up which has a slightly larger HDD, slightly quicker CPU and GPU video ram?

The real question I suppose is what it will be used for.......shock horror, mainly Vista (or XP) and voice dictation. There will be the odd game, perhaps ones in the last year, and the infrequent newer one e.g. Crysis.

And then.....the dreaded....just wait a few more months for the.....

Anyway, general thoughts appreciated.

2nd August 2007, 08:45 PM
These questions are always hard to give any definitive answer on. AS some people might spend 10 grand on a Mac pro system with 5 GB of Ram and 2 30 inch screens, and 4 hard drives etc...and say thats money well spent... others would say thats a waste of money. Its all what you are willing to pay, what you will be using it for, and are you paying the rent and food bill with it?

I have a professional system at work, that (at the time) cost in excess of 12 grand, and other associated equipment would make it worth 22 grand, but I use it to pay all my bills.. so its worth every penny. At home there is no way I would have such a system, as I dont generate income with it.

So for you its really all about how much can you spend... or want to spend.. and then look for something that matches that... this is really what sort of car should I get... when you can spend 5 grand or 500 grand.. and they will all do the same thing... just in a SLIGHTLY different way....

Hope that helps..

2nd August 2007, 08:49 PM
the base model is much better value then the 2.4ghz model. The extra video ram might help a little but gpu speed is more important then memory generally and they are both the same speed (although vista's new 3d stuff and all that really needs as much video ram as it can get - it does run fine on 128mb though)

As for waiting..... I can't see any upgrades to macbook pro's anytime soon so i cant see any reason to wait (of course im guessing though).

2nd August 2007, 09:02 PM
Yeah, quicker, faster, speedier and dearer!

2nd August 2007, 10:14 PM
... just don't expect any Mac to be able to handle Crysis (short of a Mac Pro running Vista and an OSX-hostile graphics card). Have you seen the preliminary requirements for that yet?!?! OOWWWWWCH!!


2nd August 2007, 11:13 PM
crysis looks great but in saying that... i cant remember the last time i bothered to play a game on pc, let alone any games console... i think it was fifa 98 on ps.

i got myself a 2.4 mbp and so far it equals ... and possibly out performs my pc that i spent 2500 on at the start of the year! why would you bother compromising performance, for a few dollars (when you break it down over several years). i would have gone faster if it was offered!

and the only reason i didnt go 17" was because of portability.

go and get it. quick smart. (thats if you need it)

3rd August 2007, 11:08 AM
if youre just going to use it for windows why not get a far better value PC laptop?

3rd August 2007, 12:21 PM
I agree, the 2.2 is much better value

Benchmarks have suggested at this stage the difference in video cards is almost nothing, the processor is only 9% faster - which leaves only 40gb more hard drive space for $700 more...

I wouldn't consider the 2.4 for a moment

3rd August 2007, 09:46 PM
I decided the base model was the best value for money...
$700 for an extra 0.2GHz + extra 40GB HDD + extra 128MG video memory
is what it came down to for me.

I kept my $700 and went out and bought some more toys as well!

3rd August 2007, 11:56 PM
value for money its the low end, but if you need the graphics card then the high end is what you need to get.

Mikey D
4th August 2007, 09:45 AM
Yeah, you're mainly paying for the extra CPU grunt, which imho isn't worth it.

That said, if you're claiming this all for tax, the difference might be as small as $350, is that worth it? More so, in my opinion.

It's certainly a tough call.