PDA

View Full Version : superseeded MBP vs Unibody MB 2.4 experiences...



simo123
26th November 2008, 07:01 PM
I am interested to know through anyones real use experience how a


MBP (superseeded model 2.4, 4gb, 256mb video)

would compare to

the base speced 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo model (is it true these actually have a 256mb video card??)



tasks include (on my recently sold rev A MBP 2.0 core duo 2gb ram 128mb video)

- general (web browsing/ office/ email)
- rare but do use photoshop/ imovie
- intensevely use eyetv (HD processing)
- video playback


e.g what are the issues/ what would be better for what


thanks for any help/ info

(i leave apps open e.g usually would have word, eye tv, firefox open etc.)

matthew858
26th November 2008, 07:24 PM
The video card is the NVidia 9600GT mobile graphics card. The MacBook Pro has a 9600GT mobile NVidia graphics, as the MacBook only has a 9400GT mobile graphics card. Both notebooks have a 256MB graphics card.

Joe91
26th November 2008, 10:29 PM
Sorry to sound picky, but the 9400M really isn't a graphics card - it's just an intergrated chip. It doesn't have it's own dedicated VRAM, it just shares with the regular RAM.

So only with the MBPs you will get a dedicated graphics card (9600M GT) and the onboard 9400M. One of the BTO options of the MBP is 512MB of VRAM from the standard 256MB. This means it can handle bigger textures and video output to other monitors will be a lot better,

The older MBP would be faster for the things you mentioned, and won't dip into the systems RAM.

And FWIW, my 2.4GHz Alu MacBook can play Unreal Tournament 2004 on all high settings without lag, pretty damn good for an intergrated chip.

Huy
26th November 2008, 10:33 PM
If you're picking between 2.4 Penryn or 2.4 unibody, go unibody.

EDIT
Oops my bad. I thought he meant MBP 2.4 unibody, not MacBook.

NeoRicen
26th November 2008, 11:01 PM
The Unibody will be better unless you were doing 3D work in stuff like games and Motion. Also there's the obvious things like the smaller screen.

Based on the usage you posted the Unibody should perform better, but how much RAM do you plan on having in the Unibody?

simo123
26th November 2008, 11:19 PM
i thought the older MBP would be better (i forgot to mention I drive a 22" lcd) for the HDTV, video etc

(probably 4gb in either)

NeoRicen
26th November 2008, 11:50 PM
i thought the older MBP would be better (i forgot to mention I drive a 22" lcd) for the HDTV, video etc

(probably 4gb in either)
Video is much more demanding on the processor than anything else, and the new MBs can drive big screens just fine (but you will need one of these (http://store.apple.com/au/product/MB570Z/A?mco=MTIxODk3Mw)) . Also the new MacBooks use some GPU to help decode h.264 video (http://gizmodo.com/5065435/new-macbooks-use-gpu+accelerated-h264-video-decoding), so the MB should be better than an old MBP with the same CPU for that kind of video.

Also the MacBooks have DDR3 RAM, whereas the older MBPs have DDR2. Not sure if this will improve anything noticeably, but it is faster.

Galumay
27th November 2008, 01:46 AM
i guess the point is that the older MBP will do the tasks you describe with ease and without issue, the new one has a different design you may prefer but it wont be noticabley different at those tasks.

hell my old PB can do those tasks perfectly well! (well maybe not intensive HD video processing!)

luztra
4th December 2008, 04:02 PM
I am interested to know through anyones real use experience how a


MBP (superseeded model 2.4, 4gb, 256mb video)

would compare to

the base speced 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo model (is it true these actually have a 256mb video card??)



tasks include (on my recently sold rev A MBP 2.0 core duo 2gb ram 128mb video)

- general (web browsing/ office/ email)
- rare but do use photoshop/ imovie
- intensevely use eyetv (HD processing)
- video playback


e.g what are the issues/ what would be better for what


thanks for any help/ info

(i leave apps open e.g usually would have word, eye tv, firefox open etc.)

I actually have both of these machines (exact specs you have posted)...I will use my Macbook Pro with 4GB RAM (matte screen) for photo editing, and my new Macbook is for everything else. I prefer the Macbook as it is more compact (I'm a girl)...I gave the Macbook Pro to my partner and he is happy with it (it is only 9 months old).

simo123
4th December 2008, 07:45 PM
ended up buying the 2.4 macbook pro $1700 (2 mths old in as new cond.)

oneplusone
4th December 2008, 08:16 PM
ended up buying the 2.4 macbook pro $1700 but only a 2 mths old in as new cond.

That is a damn good buy.

I also bought a Penryn MBP about a week after the Unibody ones came out for $2059.
Bunger 4gb ram in it, and she purrs.

Thinking about getting a 8gb SD card and expressport SD card reader to use for a PS scratch disk....

simo123
4th December 2008, 10:42 PM
yeah I was thinking of upgrading the ram 2gb --> 4gb. Although its pretty snappy with the 2gb. In activity monitor vary rarely will the ram drop to extremely low levels (only through vm ware etc)


also I'd probably get stuff all for the 2x1gb sticks I have

akwoo
5th December 2008, 09:29 AM
good article to read is
Ars reviews the 2008 MacBook Pro, Part II: performance: Page 1 (http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/2008-macbookpro-review-2.ars)

Geoff3DMN
5th December 2008, 09:36 AM
I know this isn't exactly the comparison you're looking for but my new Al MacBook 2.4 C2D with NVidia 9400 feels faster than what my earlier MacBook Pro 2.16GHz C2D with X1600 128Mb ATi does in everything except for games. In games they seem to offer roughly similar performance.

The recently superseded MBP 2.4 would also be faster than my earlier version though.