2.16Ghz vs. 2.33GHz Mac

it gets hot due to the metal casing. the backlit keys are nice. the screen on these is very bright compared to the last generation of mac laptops.as far as the processor goes, I dont think there is a huge difference IMO. I do find the duo processor to be quite a bit faster than my old ibook G4.

Firstly, make sure you’re buying the Core 2 Duo models, not the Core Duo. Next, are you talking about the iMac or the Macbook Pro? It’s $300 to upgrade the 24” iMac from 2.16 to 2.33, but it’s $500 from the 2.16 Macbook Pro to the 2.33.

Click on THIS LINK to see a chart comparing all the notebooks.

Briefly, the 15” 2.33 comes with 1 GB more RAM and 128MB more Video RAM. Only you can decide whether the difference is worth it to you, since although there is quite a difference between these two configurations in lab tests, there isn’t much in practice unless you run Aperture or Final Cut, and even then the difference amounts to about 10% assuming RAM is the same.

(Even better, if you can wait a bit, the new Leopard OS should be launched next year and you’ll get that with iLife ‘07 – I presume – free when you buy your notebook. Please don’t rely on that info to make your final buying decisions, however.)

In 2 years most of the chips will four or eight core, not two, and you’ll be wishing you had a new computer with a lot of gee-whiz features, not a slightly faster chip.

Thanks for the help. I am talking about the Macbook Pro with the Core 2 Duo. The 2.33 is $500 more than the 2.16, but I figure if you add 1G of memory to the 2.16 the difference becomes $300. Then again, the extra video RAM must be woth 100 or so, so the faster chip is about 200 more or so (thus is my logic). This question may seem basic, but I still don’t understand what the faster chip is about – is it necessary to handle the increase in video RAM, and would it worsen the issue of the computer getting hot? I do plan on running Aperture, deffinitely, and some video software, if not Final Cut. A 10% difference seems like that could be noticeable. – Depressing that in 2 years I’ll be outdated, but that is why I tend to lean toward getting the best I can at the time of purchase. It seemed to work with my PowerBook G4. But I can’t wait to replace it now because it keeps dying on me. On the other hand, I don’t want to spend more money where it is silly to do so. Any other advice?

I read a long while ago in one of the computer mags that the doubling of chip speed does not double performance but only about 30%. The duel or quad core thingie is a different issue. Ram seems to be more important (1 to 2 gb)for photoshop. If I’m totally wrong here will someone set me straight. Always willing for a tech update of my aging brain.
G.

I have a friend working in a Apple Center here in Italy. He told me that the Lastest Core 2 Duo have so many problems, in the Screen first of all, and he cousil me to wait thart Apple work on repair these problems.

Best

Nicola Okin Frioli

Rita, the processor speed is independent of the VRAM; the VRAM’s important for 3-D stuff like gaming and video editing, but a faster processor not only aids such applications but simply helps with speed all-round. Your calculations are quite right, you’re not getting less value for the money, but whether it’s worth it depends on how much you have lying around (diff. in Toronto is actually CA$600+14%TX = CA$684). This benchmark test for iMacs is indicative of the speed difference between 2.16 + 128 MB VRAM and 2.33 + 256 MB VRAM – only a few seconds either way.

I haven’t heard of any specific issues with overheating between the 2.33 vs 2.16, but Macbook Pros in general run very hot (regardless of CPU) although the Core 2 Duos are cooler than Core Duos (there’s a third party app offering some control with this: http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/10/27/howto_macbook_fan_cooler/) ; some random web searches also reveal shut down/sleep issues that can cause overheating; and Apple is aware of and offering fixes for these issues.

Gregory, you’re right that RAM is more important for Photoshop (and even more so for Aperture, which apparently uses up to 2-2.5 GB RAM on its own) but 1) since the memory limit of the new notebooks is 3GB and it costs quite a lot to upgrade from 2GB to 3GB, I don’t know if the extra ~$250 is worth it; $575 if you upgrade on the Apple site 2) there is also a significant difference between the newer Core 2 Duo chips, especially since they’re two processors in one, and previous G4/etc. chips.

Sorry THIS?www.reghardware.co.uk is the link for the smcFanControl, the above is only one to the review.

Trying again .

“Is this one of those things where I’ll save 300 dollars today but in 2 years will wish I’d gone for the 2.33GHz?”

No. Take the $300 and spend it on RAM. That’ll let you more of a difference than any 0.17 GHz…

Thanks for all the advice. It seems you all agree that RAM is more important. Aleph says Aperture takes up to 2 to 2.5 GB of RAM! Well, doesn’t that make these new Mac Intels kind of unviable at this point (given I get the impression Aperture will be the way to go in the near future if not already)? Are any of you guys using one of these new Core 2 Duo macs? I’m thinking I should wait until they improve them, and in the meantime buy a cheap used something as a backup for my failing PowerBook. I am taking heed of Nicola’s warning from his friend at the Apple store (that there are a lot of problems with the latest Core 2 Duo macs, including some problem with the screen, although I don’t know what problem with the screen exactly). Any thoughts?

For what it’s worth I use a 15” 2 GHz Intel Core Duo (not Core 2), with 2 GB of RAM and 256 MB of video RAM with Aperture 1.5.1 and it blazes ..in my opinion. The longest it takes to ‘load’ a full frame horizontal image is 1 second if any at all. A few things you can do to speed the previews is to go in to Aperture preferences and at the bottom uncheck “Share previews with iLife & iWork”, lower the preview quality to say 8 and in the “Limit preview size to fit within” 1680×1680 or 1440×1440 and there will be a noticable difference. What ever Macbook Pro you get fill it with RAM, CDW has high quality RAM for way less then Apple.

Here’s one more unsolicited thought: stop spending time thinking about the differences. :)

If you can afford it, the 2.33 is a good deal; if you can’t, the 2.16 is great value; don’t settle for temporary solutions as they end up creating more problems than they solve. And it doesn’t make financial sense either – you want to spend about $1000 to get a slower system to save yourself a few hundred dollars that would have allowed you to accomplish work faster today, in order to buy something for $2500 in the near future that will be slower than the competition within nine months of your purchase? (Forgive me if that comes off as rude, it’s not meant to be.)

The Core 2 Duos are quite a mature and stable product. Any significant ‘improvement’ (in the hardware) will only come about after a year or so, by which time you could have done a lot with your shiny Macbook Pro. The OS as mentioned might be updated within a couple of months; it might not.

I might be getting ahead of myself here, but it also sounds like you’re not familiar with your software options. Aperture is basically a recent entry to the RAW converter + organizer crowd and there’s a lot of established competition for it already. Lightroom is a good, still-in-beta alternative which is much more memory-efficient. You’re not stuck to Aperture (unless you’ve bought it already.) And 2 GB of RAM is plenty for most applications – it just so happens that Aperture is a design “in progress”. Of course, video editing can consume tons of RAM too. But just how much do you really need? The current notebooks are much faster than desktops selling just a year ago! You can’t win against the technology stampede so just buy a good product within your budget and pretend nothing else is or was for sale.

All notebooks can potentially fail. All software can be slow. All electronics depreciate. Etc. As consumers we are easily led by marketing and tantalized by false choices (I’m no exception)...

Hey Rita—As others have said, macs are memory hogs. Max it out. It is more important than the higher processor speed.

Frankly, with mac you’re going to come down with a case of envy in two years anyway . I edit FCP on a one year old G4 Powerbook, and kick myself for not waiting for the intel duo chips.

Also - hang on a couple of weeks - the big macworld conference is in January and Apple may spring new surprises. Quad cores, blue-ray burners, a major FPC upgrade, an ultra thin 12” model—all sort of goodies are rumoured to be in the pipeline over the next year.

You may get a bigger bang for your buck, or a current model marked down until the new models come up. .