MacBook Pro spec bump due?
 

I didn't really know where to put this thread, so I hope it is OK here:

Given the spec improvement "cycles", when could we expect the next speed bump on the MBP? I want a new MBP soon and am waiting for 10.5, but will wait longer if we are approaching a "bump".

.
May I ask a question Gavin? Well, three actually; that was the first one...
I’m advising at translator friend who is switching from Windows to Mac, convinced that a Vista future is a horrifying prospect to which he does not wish to subject himself.

He’ll probably buy an iMac and a laptop.

What do you see as the attractive qualities of the MBP above an "ordinary" MacBook? To me the latter seems like one heckuva machine for the buck (kroner, actually), and since he’s doing no graphic design, no gaming or processor-intensive tasks, I’m wondering if the MacBook isn’t sufficient.

Thoughts?

the age old question !
 

well i would have thought there is a bump gonna happen about the time of leopard(end october) but don't expect a huge jump......

i would have thought the base model will goto 2.4 C2D and top end to 2.6 C2D.
So not much gain IMHO.

If you want leopard pre installed then wait until it is released.

Hi Arctic, I can only answer as a user who has had both. I went down to a MacBook for portability but straight back to an MBP for the screen size and the fact that those glossy screens are hard on your eyes with the sunlight levels here.

From what I have read, some people see a disadvantage in the memory sharing setup of the MacBook, but I had no issues with it. Just the gloss and screen size. My kids all have them and they are great little machines. I know nothing about gaming, so can't comment there. Your friend sounds like me - a heavy "normal" user. If he has no eyesight issues, go for the MacBook. incredibly good value, especially if you know someone travelling back to Norway from the USA.

Did Apple ever fix the case discoloration issue on the white ones?

.
Thanx for the quick reply. :)

Interesting... I’m still using my 3.5 year old PowerBook. I wouldn’t give up the 17" screen for anything -- happily letting my wife have the black MacBook we bought last year. Working almost exclusively with text, I need to see as much of it as possible when I’m editing something complex. I don’t even mind the slower processing rate; not a problem.

Hadn’t thought of that glossy screen. That may well be a deal clincher for my friend, who is not price sensitive. In fact he’s thinking of purchasing the "old" iMac model precisely to avoid the reflections that inevitably accompany the gloss.

-- ArcticStones

the MBP to MB comparison
 

if you are doing basic things with a computer then the MB will serve you well. I must admit I find glossy screens a bit too reflective and do not give a true representation of colour/contrast in colour matching environments.

Anything program that uses graphics processing (photoshop, lightroom,video apps etc) then MBP is the way to go. Dedicated graphics/fast memory will always give you much better performance.

I do alot of video encoding DV to H264 and it can do up to 75fps that 3 times real time ! not bad from a laptop. I can also capture direct to h264 without having to do conversions as well.

I am so happy with my MBP.....the best machine i have ever owned. It blows most G5's out of the water ! Cant really see myself upgrading for another 3 years.

I just ordered a new Mac laptop. I was considering the MBP, but since I'm not a gamer, the superior graphics performance was not enough to justify the price difference. On the other hand, the MBP does have an Express Card slot and a FireWire 400 port, which I do think I would find useful.

From a processor standpoint, the two models are very similar. The front side bus on the MBP is 800 MHz compared to the MacBook's 667 MHz FSB. Since they both come with 667 MHz memory, the faster bus speed of the MBP is unlikely to yield large benefits. Some people even claim that, with the C2D processor, memory and FSB running at the same speed is more beneficial than a one sided speed increase on the FSB.

Both the MBP and the MacBook can take up to 4 GB of RAM, but the MacBook will only recognize ~3.3 GB of 2 x 2GB.

So, I ordered a MacBook. With the money left over, I picked up a 3 GB RAM kit, a 200GB 7200RPM SATA HDD, and a 500GB external FireWire drive.

Astonishing! I’ve not read that anywhere else. Does that essentially mean that 4GB is a waste in the MacBook?

Out of curiosity, what RAM kit did you purchase? I understand that Apple’s are priced at a premium...

Is the 200GB internal the standard one offered by Apple?
Which external?

i thought the mac pro would be next, maybe some more cores :D, but the mbp and mb both need major bumps up, and maybe a decrease in price

Apple RAM is well pricey. I have used Kingston, Crucial and another brand that I forget the name of now and only had a problem with a Kingston module that the shop here replaced without demur. But then, I am a regular customer. ;)

A quick mooch on the Apple site reveals that the 200Gb drive is only 4200rpm, so there will be a performance loss there. Interestingly, MB-wise, they don't appear top offer any of the 7200 rpm drive options anymore. They still have the 160GB 7200 version available on the MBP though.

I think the MB (black, for me) is incredible value and I am considering another one as a backup machine for the MBP. I absolutely cannot be without a notebook; it would cost me too much biz, so the price is borderline irrelevant. Gotta wait for 10.5 though.

Ha!

Most of the MBP graphics on Apple's own website still depict the prior model with the thicker upper casing around the screen. Come on Apple!

It depends on what your doing with the computer. For the results of similar, but slightly different tests, see here and here. Notice that in some cases extra RAM over 2 x 1GB caused no significant improvement, or even slightly degraded performance. In particular, extra RAM beyond 2 x 1GB didn't seem to improve video performance. In the Cinebench test, 2 x 512MB actually offered the best results.

The 2 x 2GB configuration generally performed better than the 1GB + 2GB configuration, but only minimally. On the other hand, there was often a dramatic difference between 2 x 1GB and 1GB + 2GB for processor and memory intensive tasks.

I originally noticed a discrepancy with the previous iMac, which was said to support up to 3GB of memory. There were some PC manufacturers (or maybe it was Intel) who were advertising (the PC version of) the same logic board supported 4GB. A little bit (okay, a lot) of Googling found that there was some addressing overlap, and that only a small part of the fourth GB (about .3 or .4 GB, IIRC) would be recognized. Apple understated while the PC manufacturers (or Intel) overstated the maximum RAM capacity. As far as I am aware, neither the iMac, nor the MBP use that logic board any longer.


I ordered this memory kit. I found other similar kits, also, but this one was the least expensive kit that offered a lifetime warranty. I'll run a Rember test (Memtest with a GUI front end) on it for a few hours as soon as I install it.

Apple doesn't seem to offer any 200GB 7200 RPM drives in their laptops. I suspect that I'll probably end up taking a hit on battery performance, although Hitachi claims the power consumption is similar to a 5400 RPM drive.

My external drive is a FireWire case and a Western Digital Caviar 500 GB 7200 RPM that I'll have to assemble myself. I liked the WD 3 year warranty, and also that they advertise their drives as 500GB formatted.

Due to density of the data, even at 4200 RPM there should be a little bit of a performance gain for the 200GB compared to the 120 GB 5400 RPM drive. The 200 GB drive and the 160 GB 5400 RPM drive should have similar performance.

Then again, I could be misunderstanding the effects of data density and hdd performance.

Barefeats has a shootout between four of the newer notebook hard drives. See for yourself which is faster. I think you'll notice that it really depends on how the drives are being used, and how full the drives are.

This is an earlier shootout which shows clearly how capacity can be a bigger performance factor than RPMs alone.

We just got a bump with the introduction of the new 15" MBPs with LED displays. According to Macktracker, they came out in June of this year, so I wouldn't expect anything until December or January. Remember, Macworld is in January, so start saving up now!

Interesting stuff, thanks for posting it. :)

I thought so too. Thanks for reading it!

I believe that if you buy the current model MBP after Leopard is released, then you'll get Leopard for free even though that MBP model is currently shipping with Tiger.

There really isn't any point in waiting for a speed bump on the MBP line. I don't believe that you'll notice any performance gains even if they bump to 2.6 or 2.8 GHz. What you need is better system optimization, and possibly a higher RAM ceiling, which the current MBP offers.

I wonder how soon (if ever) Apple will put the Core 2 Extreme in at least the top end of the MBP line. Or perhaps it's just too much processor for the MBP's small form factor, and heat issues will keep it out.

I'm still waiting for them to get the G5 inside of a PowerBook. :cool:

I guess the Core 2 Extreme can't be all that hot. They've got them running in the iMac 24", and there isn't much more room inside of one of those machines than in a MBP.

You are staring to sound like Jimmy Carter!:D

I am actually more concerned with larger hard drives and RAM. I am aware that clock speeds don't show much speed advantage per se.

I would like to see eSATA ports added, and non-gloss screens still being an option.

Glossy is now standard???

That's a drag out here, but I imagine a screen protector will fix it for me. Added expense, though. :(

As much as I'd love to see a speed bump, I don't there's much of a point in waiting for it. Wait til Leopard comes out, and if there isn't an announcement at the same time, then just bite the bullet and pick it up then if that's what you're waiting for.

If you keep waiting for the next best thing to come out, then you'll never buy anything 'cause there's always something on the horizon.

That's my way of thinking at least; thus the reason I'm snagging a MBP (my first mac) as soon as Leopard is released.

You are doig the right thing, investigating before buying it.

I always check this before buying:
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/

I hope it helps you to decide.

My personal opinion is to wait for Leopard.

I'm hoping by Macworld January. Leopard will be out, so it will be free with new MBP. And it's a new year, so I can put it in next year's business deductions...

FYI, I bought my current Powerbook after Panther came out, but it was manufactured before Panther was pre-installed on the machines, so at no extra cost, Apple put the Panther disks in the box for the customer to install.

The MacBook is glossy only...
In its last iteration, the iMac became glossy only...
...so that’s why I fear the option of an antiglare screen perhaps disappearing on a new MacBook Pro.

From Apple's MBP profile:

"MacBook Pro offers an antiglare widescreen display that’s perfect for color-minded professionals. For a more immersive viewing experience, you can configure the MacBook Pro display with a glossy finish. This gives everything you see a richer, more saturated feel."