MacBook Gets it's Core 2 Duo

[ugp]

Saw it today. I wish I would have waited but all well. $1299 gets your a sweet MB with 1GB of RAM and 80GB HDD.

[sky]

seriously... haven't they been around for a bit now? or is it different chips?
the last few things i saw on offer were 2.33ghz c2d chips with 4mb. don't
know about the actual busspeeds and all, but looks like almost e6600 style
though those things in the macbooks (pro) are named differently.
honestly, i have been very tempted lately to get myself a macbook pro. a
nagging friend (of the f-type) keeps telling how a mac is soo much better
than any pc (while basically it is a pc nowadays hehe - the point of which
she kindly oversees, every time :)).

the only thing i'm actually a bit disappointed about is the fact that you
cannot swap the proc out of one such macbook. i'd have wanted to
slap my pos-e6600 in it and get a replacement chip for my desktop rig.
but soldering chips to the pcb is one hell of a way to stop you upgrading.
bummer

[Vapor]

MacBook Pros have had C2Ds for a couple weeks now, MacBooks just got 'em.

And if you're so tempted, just get one :p:

I have one, izze very nice.

And your E66 has a completely different type of grid array than the laptops do. Soldered-in ones are *usually* BGA, pin-into-socket ones are PGA, pins-in-socket are LGA (this is exclusively desktop).

BGA CPUs allow the laptop to be much thinner.....LGA allows for higher pin density (and therefore better power regulation/supply).

[Macaholic]

the only thing i'm actually a bit disappointed about is the fact that you cannot swap the proc out of one such macbook. i'd have wanted to
slap my pos-e6600 in it and get a replacement chip for my desktop rig.
but soldering chips to the pcb is one hell of a way to stop you upgrading.
bummer

Without a doubt. I've already upgraded my Mac mini with Merom. Now I'm looking for a couple of Kentsfield processors to do the same with my Mac Pro. Let me know if you happen to find any strays running around lose. I'll give them a good home. ;)

[Vapor]

Without a doubt. I've already upgraded my Mac mini with Merom. Now I'm looking for a couple of Kentsfield processors to do the same with my Mac Pro. Let me know if you happen to find any strays running around lose. I'll give them a good home. ;)Kents won't work in a Mac Pro....won't even go into the socket. You'll need Clovertons.

[Macaholic]

Kents won't work in a Mac Pro....won't even go into the socket. You'll need Clovertons.

Yeah. That's what I meant. Cloverton. Looooooong day at the office. Up way too late. Kentsfield on the brain because I've been searching relentlessly for one to put in my ASUS P5W64 WS Professional. You understand. Right? :)

[ugp]

Yeah yeah trying to make up for your mistake...lol Just Kidding man.

[sky]

ok guys.. so what would be my best choice, you reckon for a macbook pro?
right now i fancy the 15" 2.33 one. 2gig ram. i'd like the 17" one, too, but

a) that'd be a bit steep without a student rebate (that i won't get) and
b) it also might be a tad big and i rather like it to be smallish and light

note that this is mostly for surfing and maybe to get a bit of work done.
i have a conroe based main sys with enough power to do anything i shall
be able to think of. and if need be i'll upgrade that to a second gfx-card
for gaming purposes. so i'm basically looking for a desktop replacement
when i'm not at home or rather.. in bed :).

judging by the review in a german papermag, the new macbook pro beats
the crap out of most any other regular pc-based laptop. so basically the
decision is made. if it's a laptop, it's going to be a mac. just which one
exactly remains to be seen.

also what are the opinions on glossy vs not glossy. the glossy display looks
ace, but reflects like mad, judging by what i saw on a friends brand spankin
new pc-laptop. also, should i just get the mac with the 2gig ram or rather
get a basic one and put in some ram myself. if so what would be a proper
choice.
the only thing i really want is the bigger core 2 duo chip really (see idiotic
comment of me further up this thread ;) )

if this is thread jacking or something.. um, i'll delete this and create a new
topic. any help is appreciated.

[ugp]

There isn't a big weight difference between them at all. The 17" is a nice choice for $2799 and it comes 2GB of RAM as well. I wish I could get one.

[WesM63]

I love my 15.4" MBP, wouldn't of done it any other way.

(typing on it as we speak)

[Mr. Popo]

I love my 15.4" MBP, wouldn't of done it any other way.

(typing on it as we speak)
Bah, a black MacBook oWnZ.

[WesM63]

meh, I wanted a black one, but i couldn't pass up the offer on this one. Plus the x1600 256mb sealed the deal.

[sky]

for me a silver one, and i want the mac logo in blue...
well as i said, the 17" will be a bit too steep. especially seeing as i don't get it
for anything like what you guys get. if i'd do a straight currency conversion
usd to eur, i'd end up about 400-500 euros less. but then there's taxes and
the works :(
a decent 17" sells for 2.400 eur. that's a 17" with t7600 (2.33ghz) and 2gb
with x1600 mobility and 100gig hdd + superdrive. that's about 3.1-3.2 grand
(dollars) - and that's not even available. there's not even a shop that has
them available right now for that kinda money... so i'll *have* to settle for
a 15".. which suits me just fine

anything i *should* get on buying my first mac? like extended warranty or
stuff? was a bit shocked to see the normal one is like 12 months only...

[Mr. Popo]

meh, I wanted a black one, but i couldn't pass up the offer on this one. Plus the x1600 256mb sealed the deal.
OK, the X1600 does sound tempting.

[STEvil]

Wow, crazy prices.

You guys would be better off picking up a normal one and putting OSX on it.

Even my 17" Alienware didnt cost as much as anything listed here and came with the x1800 mobile.

[Mr. Popo]

Wow, crazy prices.

You guys would be better off picking up a normal one and putting OSX on it.

Even my 17" Alienware didnt cost as much as anything listed here and came with the x1800 mobile.
OMFG, you actually compared Apple to Alienware? what's wrong with you?

[ugp]

Alienware is not worth the money. Highly overpriced and they still run Windows...so what is the point.

[FragTek]

There isn't a big weight difference between them at all. The 17" is a nice choice for $2799 and it comes 2GB of RAM as well. I wish I could get one.
Yeah that shot the everlovin shiznit out of the resale value of my 17" Core Duo model. Damn youz Macintosh! I'm tryin to sell it on eBay right now as a matter of fact and I'm barely gettin' any hits on it. Might have to either a.) keep it or b.) flog it for way friggin less than its worth.

[ugp]

You probably are going to end up taking a hit on it due to that fact that someone can buy the new Core 2 Duos right now. I know that is what I would go for. You just need to find someone that wants one bite the bullet, take a small hit on it and pay alittle money and get the new 17". You will be happy in the end I know it.

[STEvil]

Alienware is not worth the money. Highly overpriced and they still run Windows...so what is the point.

Mac: $2799. Alienware: ~$2000. Same machine, but x1800 mobile in alienware.

Put OSX on alienware.



Problems solved, you just saved $800 and get a faster video card too.

Of course neither of you noticed I said "You guys would be better off picking up a normal one and putting OSX on it." either, which would probably save another $400 or so off the price of the alienware.

[ugp]

If we wanted a Windows machine we would get one. OS X doesn't run the same on a Windows PC either. Not everyone wants a bad ass gaming rig either. Just a difference in opinions.

[Vapor]

I just configured my MBP as an Alienware....the 15.4"

It cost more from Alienware (after the sale) than it did from Apple for me and the Apple actually had better hardware--X1600 vs X1400, wireless a/b/g/n vs a/b/g, internal bluetooth vs. USB bluetooth. The Alienware had a 1920x1200 display, which was a $200 option over the 1280x800, so lets call X1600 + 1440x900 (110dpi...about ideal for a laptop) vs. X1400 + 1920x1200 a draw. On top of that the Apple has a much nicer kit of hardware (as in: keyboard, case, asthetic, touchpad, etc.), no hassle to get OSX running (plus the fact that the Apple runs it legally/properly), FW800 and FW400 ports, MagSafe (saved my laptop twice now....), etc.

[ugp]

Hands down Apple is much nicer. Although this is my opinion. This thread shouldn't been used to compare whether an Alienware is better than an Apple (which it's not! LOL)

[WesM63]

After owning an apple, no other notebooks compare.

[perry_78]

I chose the T60 over the MBP, so far I'm happy. Apple took too long to bring the new MBP out.

[Mr. Popo]

When you go mac, you wont go back.

[ugp]

I agree. Everyone that says Macs suck or anything bad about them are usually the ones that have never used one.

[STEvil]

Love how you guys keep patting yourselves on the back for a job well done. This is exactly what makes people like me stay away from macs.

Never said they were crap if you'll notice. Just said I can do better for the money, which I did. Vapor, did you use the m5750 as the base?

[Vapor]

No, m5550....I have no use for a 17" screen or a laptop that large. I honestly wish there were a smaller MBP, probably would have gotten that instead.

And with my student discount....the Apple was decidedly cheaper for as-equivalent-as-possible hardware (>$100 difference).

[Elisha]

so how do they actually verify that you are a student?
i have a student ID but do they do anymore checking or is that the extent?

[Vapor]

They didn't once ask me....in fact, I used my dad's CC (and it didn't give me a problem) since my CC limit is like half what I needed and I don't like using debit cards online.

[ugp]

I wish I would have ordered mine online and did the student discount thing.

[crfracer290]

I am going to get new MB or MBP...still cant decide how much I want to spend.

But on the MBP student discount gets you 200 bucks off.

Unless you want a top of the line gaming laptop, Apples blow all other notebooks aways IMO.

[Elisha]

i just ordered the 2.0Ghz Macbook C2D. should be here Thursday.
guys just a question......it uses 667mhz ram, does it run 1:1 since Intel's FSB is quad pumped and DDR is only x2
i have 2gb of DDR2 533mhz SODIMM that i may swap in since i do not have any 667mhz ones. will i lose out on bus performance?

i guess the question is.......the C2D runs at approximately 166fsb x4 = 667 and the modules i have run at 266mhz x 2 = 533mhz

is the ram to fsb ratio at quad pumped FSB or and the core of 166fsb?
cause if the ratio is at 166fsb then the ram will be running on a higher divider such as 166:266 not sure what the actual divider would be but i'm sure you guys get what i mean. which also mean that the 667mhz ram they use now is also running on a higher divider from the fsb.

please correct me if i'm wrong.

[ugp]

The RAM is 667MHz speed. It requires PC-5300. I myself am looking to upgrade my MacBook to 2GB of RAM from the 1GB I have now.

[Elisha]

yes i know it is 667mhz. but is it running 1:1 with the cpu fsb?
since 667fsb/4 = 166fsb and 667mhz/2 = 333mhz
looks like the ratio is 1:2
but i have 2x1gb of 533mhz ram handy so it will be 166fsb/266mhz
does the macbook run on dividers ie. is the 667mhz stock ram being used at its full speed or does it downclock it ti 1:1 ratio?

[sky]

hey guys. i've been wondering about this ram issue as well. what brand ram is
usually used in the macbook pro? anything we know and can it be replaced with
any *other* so-dimm ddr2 ram of the 5300 flavour - can it run say, 6400?
if 5300, i'd say mdt 5300 cl4, mushkin 5300 cl5 or teamgroup 5300 cl5 would
probably do it, too. those are going for about 2/3 of what apple asks on an
upgrade per 1 gb.
also the student prices aren't that hot, but with them the macs are at least
(over here anyway) in a pricerange, where it can actually compete with
regular brands, as stevil was saying. true apple usually is somewhat more
pricier (my main gripe with them), but they also are somewhat more appealing
due to their better looks. and yes, i'm prone to go for what looks better to
me... umm hehe. eyecandy? bought. well not really. but you get the point...

[Vapor]

Apple buys whatever is cheapest to them....I have seen all of the follow: Hynix, Micron, Elpida, Infineon, Aneneon (or however it's spelled), Samsung and Nanya (not 100% sure about this last one tbh....I remember seeing it, but I never knew they made DRAM).....probably seen more than just that too, tbh, I don't bother really looking any more.

For RAM, I suggest you follow Apple's practices and just buy the cheapest....the type of RAM they put in (CL5 5300) is just commodity RAM at this point, it's all the same quality and it will all work.

[ugp]

My understanding of it is that it runs 1:1 no divider to be 667MHz

[Elisha]

i would think so too but i looked at CPU-Z on my Vaio with 533mhz ram and a T2050 and it shows 1:2 because fsb for T2050 is 133fsb and ram is 266mhz.
Ratio shows up as 1:2
so i'm willing to bet that it shows 1:2 on Macbook as well since it is 166fsb:333mhz

can someone with the current macbook check for me pls?

[squilliam]

Macs are too bloody expensive.

Building is more fun. You get a certain satisfaction
from it (when it works).

[WesM63]

You build your own laptop's?

[Mr. Popo]

You build your own laptop's?
It's possible.
Barebone + Ram + CPU + Video card + Hard Drive.

[WesM63]

heh i know its possible, asus sells a whitebox barebones lappy.

[IYP]

man, i couldent love anything more than this mac...got a tri-boot going and just finished configuring linux...great stuff..great stuff....just worried about this really light alu chassis flexing over time....want to weld on a few supporters lol....anyone got suggestions?

btw
Mac Book Pro
2.16 C2D
1 gig of ram
128meg x1600
4950 3dmark 05...lol

also...anyone see any clockgens floating around?

[Anarki]

My housemate has just got a Mac Book Pro, 15" 2.33GHz C2D, 2 Gig of RAM, it has a X1600 in it.

From the few hours I have used it, I'm blown away!

Battery life is brilliant, running bootcamp it will play any windows game fine, in a decent level of quality. It really is a brilliant laptop, but it did cost £1800 :woot:

My 2p is I highly recommend one :)

[Elisha]

i bought 3 laptops before i settled for the Macbook.....it was the cheapest with the best specs.
i paid $1350CAD for a T7200, 1gb, 80gb and it has integrated BT, iSight plus its only 13.3 inches.

everything else with similar specs were a couple hundred more.

btw for memory dividers....with 667mhz ram the divider is 1:2 and with 533mhz ram, the divider is 5:8.
i ran SPi and both got me under 26secs at stock. so looks like the memory speeds didn't affect anything much.

[thunderstruck!]

After my first year in college, I really need something easily portable and small. Lugging my desktop around has been a nightmare and I'm constantly worried that someone might spill something on it or accidentally break it. (Plus it's w/c'ed). I've been debating between a MB and an XPSM1210. The one thing that's throwing me off is the integrated graphics of the MB, I really wish it at least had an option the use a X1400 or something. Also, there's no gpu selection for the MBP, what does it come with?

Any suggestions?

[Vapor]

MBP comes with X1600. MB, though smaller, is actually heavier IIRC. Still fairly light considering everything.

Might want to check out Lenovo for a thin and light laptop....

[thunderstruck!]

I would rather not make a whole thread about it, but I've having trouble deciding if the MBP is worth the additional cost and all.

I'm looking to get a MB or MBP as my only computer/laptop. The only program I see using that would tax a system is Photoshop. Now, I've never used PS before (besides the basics), but am probably gonna minor in photography, and need to use PS to do post processing on my pics. Would I benefit from having a MBP? Also, would a matte screen be better than glossy? I want to make sure I see the correct colors, and want it to run quickly.

Also heard of a program called aperture. Any comments on that? I wouldn't consider it a replacement to PS, but just want to know what others think about it.

[Vapor]

I chose the MBP over the MB because I can't stand the glossy screen, it's not good for accurate colors (this was a HUGE deal to me....I won't even touch IE because of it) and is pretty reflective....and gets dirty easily. However, the MB does need the glossy screen since the panel itself isn't particularly great, so the glossiness does lessen its weaknesses. On top of that, I plan to run Vista on my laptop with OSX as well....so I need a GPU at least capable of displaying the GUI. I also got the MBP because the aluminum frame is sweet, FW800 is great, and it came with a C2D before MB did.

In terms of raw speed, the MBP isn't very far ahead of the MB....

Photoshop, as it currently stands, is NOT a Universal Binary yet....meaning it doesn't run well on any Intel Mac. CS3 is due out in March and is Universal, and just overall gonna be awesome, so I guess that shouldn't be too much of a concern considering you're getting this for the long haul.

Aperture is young. It's a very good idea for a workflow program, but it has issues, especially with RAWs. Adobe is coming out with their own version, Lightroom, and will integrate into their other applications better. Whether or not it will be the better program, too soon to tell. As a photography minor, I assume you'll be taking a lot of photographs, so a workflow program will probably help a decent bit.

[Got Chow]

I just bought a MBP, the lower end version with the 2.16GHz proc. Used my University ID and got the $200 off. Ended up being just under $2k USD out the door, and picked up another 1GB of RAM from CompUSA for $90.

So far I like it, running XP as well as OSX. There are some great features on OSX, but there are also some flaws. The lack of a right click really bothers me the most, since it is used so much even throughout OSX now. Also, there is the lack of programs that run natively without Rosetta. And some of them I use extensively. MS Office (have to use it for work), Photoshop are the 2 big ones. Those 2 programs by themselves required me to run XP since I own those programs in their Windows versions. I just don't want to buy and run programs that are going to run through Rosetta... seems like a waste.

I picked the glossy screen but if you're going to do photography work, don't get it! Get the matte screen for sure. I do all my photo editing at home on my desktop and would not do anything serious apart from web photo work on my MBP so I chose the nicer looking glossy screen instead. And no, the glare is not bad.

I do like the laptop though, it's quite nice and it's not that expensive considering the hardware specs. I've built my own laptops, bought expensive boutique ones, and had no problem paying the $2k for this. Truthfully I think it's a good buy...

[ugp]

Set the mouse pad to right click with a two-finger tap. Works great. I love it! And I use two-finger scroll as well.

[Vapor]

Yeah, sure does....I wish I could do it on my other touchpads (even ones with a right click button).

I wish there were an app for three finger gestures. Left = back in Camino, right = fwd, circle = reload. The pad can support it too....if i scroll with three fingers, doesn't go anywhere.

[Got Chow]

Yeah I ended up turning it on and it's better than the ctrl+click, but I think it would sure be nice to have a right click anyway! But yeah, the 2 finger tap is a good alternative.

Now if I can only find a good program which can undervolt the CPU in OSX, then everything will be gravy. My Merom can go decently low voltage and runs a lot cooler in XP with Notebook Hardware Control. Just wish I could get the same thing for OSX!

[ugp]

I like the two-finger click better than a right click. I don't even use the single mouse button on the touch pad. I have gotten so use to the touch pad I love it. When I am sitting at a desk though I have the wireless mighty mouse.

[WesM63]

I just use the tap on the trackpad for right click and button for left click.

Then again i don't use it too often, i'm a mouse kinda guy.

[ugp]

I just ordered 2x1GB G.Skill and WD 160GB HDD for my MacBook. 2GB should help out alot when I'm running bigger applications and now I can hold all my music and photos on my internal HDD and dual boot Windows and still have room to spare.

I placed the order 4 times and cancelled it 3 times. I couldn't decide whether I really wanted it or not but then thought about it and it seems well worth it.

[Got Chow]

I keep most of my files on my desktop but I think 160GB is a good size for a laptop if you keep a lot of music and videos on there.

2GB is darn near necessary I think. When I'm running WCG on here, it takes up 1.8GB of RAM sometimes when it's really crunching through those work units.

[ugp]

I am usually running Azurues for torrent seeding and that seems to bog this system down a lot. And anytime I want to run Parallels I can't at the same time. At least with 2GB I can even run Vista if I wanted to.

I often run Azurues, iTunes, and iPhoto sometimes. And RAM always helps with Photoshop and what not.

Everyone has told me a Mac benefits more from 2GB of RAM than a PC does from 2GB of RAM.

I am still trying to figure out how the RAM is used on a Mac.

For instance this...
http://xtremesystems.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=53838&stc=1&d=1165987225

Why does it say Used RAM and Inactive right above it and then Free is so low . This is only once I get applications running. But right from a clean boot it has a lot cleared.

[Got Chow]

That's a good question ugp, I really don't know how to "read" the activity monitor either. But I also have a similar situation even with 2GB of RAM. I'll have a big blue chunk of pie that says inactive, and free RAM is pretty low.

Some additional "unrelated" info I guess. I plugged the AC adapter into my Kill-A-Watt meter and it read 70W while the laptop was at 100% load on both cores, fans at 100%, and charging the battery, and I cannot remember the screen brightness, but it was probably about 1/2. With the screen off it drops to about 63W. With the battery NOT charging and just 100% load, well... I forgot to check but I will do so later. So this thing can suck down quite a bit of juice for a laptop. It's the 2.16GHz 15" MBP with 2GB of RAM, FWIW.

In comparison to my older laptop which is a 2.0GHz Dothan (undervolted) with 1GB of RAM and a 15" screen, full load with screen on full brightness - 30W!

[Vapor]

The heavy use of RAM is from caching/prefetch/whatever you want to call it.

[Kingcarcas]

Looks like fun, but too damn expensive. If i want to try something different i'll run Linux:cool:

[ugp]

Looks like fun, but too damn expensive. If i want to try something different i'll run Linux:cool:
What does this comment have to do with anything?

On a side note does anyone know how the Mac uses RAM exactly? I got my 2GB and 160GB HDD today. Up and running again and it seems a lot more smoother now.

[Elisha]

i have 2gb of 533mhz on mine and mine seems more efficient than yours.
btw i also notice that the dashboard is not loaded when you start the pc but when you open it......all its processes remain in Activity Monitor and that takes up quite a bit as well.

btw how do you do a screen capture?

[ugp]

For just a specific application: Apple + Shift + 4, then highlight the windows and press space bar and then left click

Complete screen shot: Apple + Shift + 3

This will automatically save them to the desktop as a PNG

Yeah I have noticed that the dashboard remains open as well. I really don't use the dashboard that much.

[WesM63]

I have the dashboard turned off, currently with transmission (BT Client) and 1 FF window i'm using 474mb of ram.

Shoot me a PM if you want the script to turn the dashboard off.