ssd or a extra .3ghz

square_nothing · 15 Jun 2009 at 13:58

cant decide what will be better, to get the 2.2ghz macbook pro with 4gig of ram and add a 128gb ssd or get the 2.5ghz macbook pro with the ram and 250gb hd.

will the ssd make a large difference in loading speeds with the new changes to the mb, and will it make a noticable difference in battery life?
thanks.

Firestar_3x · 15 Jun 2009 at 14:13

Why not buy the better CPU and add the SSD in a few months?

square_nothing · 15 Jun 2009 at 14:16

Firestar_3x said:
Why not buy the better CPU and add the SSD in a few months?

that is another thing i have considered. at the rate ssd's are getting better and less exspensive it might be the best move

glitch · 15 Jun 2009 at 15:09

The extra CPU speed wouldn't make a noticeable difference but an SSD definitely would, although you're probably not getting the best SSD for your money when supplied by Apple. And if you are intending on upgrading to a SSD at some point, you'd be well advised to wait for the current furore to be resolved.

If you can afford the jump to the faster MBP so be it, but I'd wait before you splash the cash.

Nymins · 15 Jun 2009 at 15:10

At a guess i would say you would notice more getting the SSD than just an extra 300mhz. I dont notice any difference between 2.5ghz and 2.8ghz on my E4300 in Vista, so im guessing the difference will be very little if at all on OSX.

yashiro · 15 Jun 2009 at 15:13

The Apple SSD's are pretty crappy. As are Apples prices on these.
The new Macbooks also seem to have an issue with SSD/SATA.
You can always get a better SSD elsewhere later. This tech is evolving every week.
You can't replace the CPU in the future.

To me, getting the machine with the faster CPU is the choice to make.

square_nothing · 15 Jun 2009 at 15:14

glitch said:
The extra CPU speed wouldn't make a noticeable difference but an SSD definitely would, although you're probably not getting the best SSD for your money when supplied by Apple. And if you are intending on upgrading to a SSD at some point, you'd be well advised to wait for the current furore to be resolved.

If you can afford the jump to the faster MBP so be it, but I'd wait before you splash the cash.

i was thinking of the corsair 128gb ssd http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-000-CS, people say it is a lot faster than any hd and it would cost the same amount as getting the extra 300mhz.
so i am guessing it would be not powerfull enough to push the limit of the new mb pro but still be a good increse in speed.

would there be difference in battery life? and would it create more or less heat?

yashiro · 15 Jun 2009 at 15:17

Increased battery life, less heat.

square_nothing · 15 Jun 2009 at 15:23

yashiro said:
Increased battery life, less heat.

thanks, will the increse in battery life be noticable? like a 10min increse in 6hour run or more?

Draeconis · 15 Jun 2009 at 15:42

That's actually a pretty interesting question, we've all seen the benchmarks for improved performance, but what is the the increase in battery life like? performance per watt comparison would be cool too

Sareth · 15 Jun 2009 at 16:54

My unibody macbook 2.4 w/ 4gb ram

stock hdd

Corsair S128

Logsi · 15 Jun 2009 at 17:08

I'd definitely get the cpu and upgrade the HDD at a later date!

square_nothing · 15 Jun 2009 at 17:11

ok thanks a lot guys. its desided i will get the 13'' with the 2.5ghz and then burn up some more money before uni on a ssd, mabey even a 250gb if there under 250 by then

Deleted member 651465 · 16 Jun 2009 at 11:13

Better CPU now, SSD in 6 months.

If you fork out the extra for the 256GB SSD then you'll be crying in 6 months when it's half price.

ssd or a extra .3ghz

Deleted member 651465

Deleted member 651465