# MacBook Pro line updated



## mdnky (Jun 5, 2007)

Slightly higher clock speeds (2.2gHz & 2.4gHz vs. 2.16gHz & 2.33gHz) on the Santa Rosa chipset, larger bus (800mHz vs. 667mHz), 4GB memory capacity (was 3GB), and nVidia 8600m GT graphics.  The 15" model gets a LED-backlight display, while the 17" model gets a $100 built-to-order 1900x1200 option (17" is still florescent backlight).

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/


----------



## Sunnz (Jun 5, 2007)

Does the increased FSB Speed improve performance given that the RAM still runs at 667mhz?


----------



## bluedevils (Jun 5, 2007)

The nvidia graphics will really help those using linux as well.  ATI support is not good for linux.

I'm wondering how long it will be before the upgrades trickle to the macbook.  I just bought one (doh!).


----------



## fryke (Jun 5, 2007)

Well, the MacBook's just been updated as well, so it'll probably be at least 6 months until the MacBooks get "the upgrades" (and they probably won't get the graphics card, of course).


----------



## icemanjc (Jun 5, 2007)

That is one of the nicest upgrades apple has done in a while.


----------



## Veljo (Jun 5, 2007)

I'm interested to know what kind of affect the new LED displays will have on battery life. As of now I get between 2-3 hours from my MacBook Pro depending on usage.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Jun 5, 2007)

ha ha i get more than that on my 6 year old ibook...   in all fairness it struggles with even the smallest videos...


----------



## icemanjc (Jun 5, 2007)

yep, I srill get 4.5 hours on my ibook G3. On my new MacBook I get 5.5 hours.


----------



## Ferdinand (Jun 5, 2007)

On my iBook G4 I get 1.5 - 2 hours and on the MacBook 5-6 hours.


----------



## irfaan (Jun 6, 2007)

Ferdinand said:


> On my iBook G4 I get 1.5 - 2 hours and on the MacBook 5-6 hours.



What am I doing wrong?  How is it that I only get around 2.5 - 3.5 hours out of my macbook?  Do you have airport turned off and run a low backlight setting?


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Jun 6, 2007)

new 15" mbp have another 30-45 mins battery life, between LED backlighting and Santa Rosa


----------



## nixgeek (Jun 6, 2007)

I'm very impressed with the improvements made this time around.  I especially love the NVIDIA graphics since I can give the MacBook Pro a little but of Penguin Love with full 3D support.   And the prices are great!  I've always loved Apple's stuff, but it's nice to see some good configs at some very competitive prices.

Regarding Santa Rosa, I wonder if it's going to include all of the features of Santa Rosa like vPro management and Turbo Memory.


----------



## artov (Jun 6, 2007)

Does anyone know if the 7200RPM disk (160GB) is worth the extra cost?
I mainly us my current Powerbook on program development (Eclipse) and
video conversion and Civ4.


----------



## Ferdinand (Jun 6, 2007)

irfaan said:


> What am I doing wrong?  How is it that I only get around 2.5 - 3.5 hours out of my macbook?  Do you have airport turned off and run a low backlight setting?



No, I always run the highest backlight setting - but I never run many apps at the same time. I have airport on most of the time, say 2 out of 2.5 hours, or 4 out of 5 hours, in this case. But it could be because for some reason my MacBook didn't recognize my battery, so it couldn't load it. That's why I got a new one in Febuary. I have my MacBook since June 06, so it isn't that new either.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Jun 6, 2007)

artov said:


> Does anyone know if the 7200RPM disk (160GB) is worth the extra cost?
> I mainly us my current Powerbook on program development (Eclipse) and
> video conversion and Civ4.



i'd go for a larger capacity, slower disk.  faster spinning disks are becoming mythical, in that they don't really offer that much speed difference (a 4200rpm 200gb sometimes even beating a faster smaller drive, due to the needle having to move less over higher capacity platters), yet use more much-needed battery life, and heat up the already hot MBP even further.


----------



## irfaan (Jun 6, 2007)

Ferdinand said:


> No, I always run the highest backlight setting - but I never run many apps at the same time. I have airport on most of the time, say 2 out of 2.5 hours, or 4 out of 5 hours, in this case. But it could be because for some reason my MacBook didn't recognize my battery, so it couldn't load it. That's why I got a new one in Febuary. I have my MacBook since June 06, so it isn't that new either.



My macbook is newer by a few months... could my lower up time just be due to the batteries half life?

Can anyone else give feedback on how their batteries are performing, and if my times are normal?


----------



## fryke (Jun 6, 2007)

Apple has issued statements about battery issues a couple of weeks ago. Go to Apple support and ask whether they replace your battery for free. They will replace mine, AFAIK, which behaves similarly.


----------



## hawki18 (Jun 7, 2007)

Apple increases the front side bus to 800mhz and then ships the laptops with 2 gigs of ddr2 667 mhz ram, does not make any since to me.  I have looked at specs at serveral sites and they all show 667 mhz memory.  Why are they doing it.  Hope it is not some lame answer like using all the 667 mhz memory they have in stock


----------



## ablack6596 (Jun 10, 2007)

hawki18 said:


> Apple increases the front side bus to 800mhz and then ships the laptops with 2 gigs of ddr2 667 mhz ram, does not make any since to me.  I have looked at specs at serveral sites and they all show 667 mhz memory.  Why are they doing it.  Hope it is not some lame answer like using all the 667 mhz memory they have in stock



It's part of Intel's Santa Rosa.


----------



## Sunnz (Jun 11, 2007)

nixgeek said:


> I'm very impressed with the improvements made this time around.  I especially love the NVIDIA graphics since I can give the MacBook Pro a little but of Penguin Love with full 3D support.   And the prices are great!  I've always loved Apple's stuff, but it's nice to see some good configs at some very competitive prices.
> 
> Regarding Santa Rosa, I wonder if it's going to include all of the features of Santa Rosa like vPro management and Turbo Memory.


Well TurboMemory's effectiveness isn't really that ex-ordinary - benchmarks showing little to no performance improvement:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=2985&p=4
http://xtreview.com/review194.htm

That is, if you have like 1 GiB or more of RAM, it is not going to help at all, and all the new MBP has a minimum of 2GiB. So I don't think they have it in the MBP, and have spend the money time and resource on the new nVidia 8600M GT and LED and other stuff, which would outweight the tiny benefit of Robson.

Have you (or anyone) tried getting the Penguin on it yet? Hopefully I can get my hands on one of the MBP and try it next weekend!!


----------



## hawki18 (Jun 12, 2007)

ablack6596 said:


> It's part of Intel's Santa Rosa.



A 800mhz front side bus that uses 667mhz memory is dumb.  If that is part of Santa Rosa chip set some one need to send Intel eng. back to school to learn how to design chips sets right.  On the dark side or PC if you have a 800 mhz or 1066 mhz front side bus it uses the same speed memory to make the most of the bus speed.


----------



## nixgeek (Jun 12, 2007)

hawki18 said:


> A 800mhz front side bus that uses 667mhz memory is dumb.  If that is part of Santa Rosa chip set some one need to send Intel eng. back to school to learn how to design chips sets right.  On the dark side or PC if you have a 800 mhz or 1066 mhz front side bus it uses the same speed memory to make the most of the bus speed.



I read somewhere that sometimes using the seemingly faster RAM doesn't always mean that you're going to get a major speed increase.  They mentioned something about DDR2-667 memory possibly having better CAS levels than what was found on the DDR2-800 modules, which is why most companies have stuck with the DDR2-667.  It was a tradeoff balance, I imagine....better to have the slower transfer rate with less latency levels than higher transfer with higher latency levels.  Of course, having the DDR2-800 with matching CAS levels of the DDR2-667 would probably be better, but I don't know if that's available yet.

Of course, I could be wrong (and probably am ).

Hopefully this makes some sense.


----------

