1.83GHz vs. 2.0GHz

im looking at getting a MacBook within the next week and was curious as to whether its worth it to purchase the 2.0GHz version over the 1.83GHz version. I know the 2.0Ghz one has the superdrive, which i would probably only use occasionally and actually could make do without it. superdrive aside is there a large boost in performance between the 2.0GHz and 1.83GHz?

I have both the 1.83 and 2.0---lately,I've been doing some video editing and photo work, along with my regular work on the computers, and I notice no difference at all.
Actually, I had the 1.83 first and added 1GB of ram--when I got the black 2.0, it came stock with 512 MB so I could add my own ram. At that time, there was a difference---the 1.83 was noticeably faster on video and photo tasks only. Adobe Lightroom worked fast (well, as fast as Adobe products run, which to me is kind of slow, but no spinning beach balls) on the 1.83---on the 2.0 with 512MB of ram, constant spinning beach balls. In fact, Lightroom was virtually unusable.
So, ram has a much greater influence than the slight difference in CPU. I got the 2.0 because I liked the color! now, how silly is that?
Also, when I attach my 1.83 to an external DVD burner, it is much faster than burning a DVD with the 2.0's superdrive. So, if you're only going to be burning a DVD once in a while, and time isn't a factor, then the 2.0 with a suprdrive is fine. For me, time is often critical and I might have several projects backed up and ready to burn, so the external works better.
Ultimately though, it comes down to what you feel the best about---and that is as it should be. You'll be spending about US$2000, what with extra ram, that nice new carrying case---so I recommend you get what you like.

Similar Messages

  • I need tips to do a moderate OC of a core 2 duo E8300 2.83ghz 1333mhz to 3.0ghz

    I have  MSI P43 neo3 mainboard  (on CPUz it says I have a  p45 chipset)
    specs
    core 2 duo E8300 2.83ghz fsb1333mhz
    4x1gb pc6400 DDR2/800Mhz
    bios is 1.3
    sigma shark 635w psu
    just wanted some tips befor I start 
     I just want to get 2.83ghz to 3.0ghz for now so basicly 333x8.5 to 353x8.5
    thanks

    Quote
    I have  MSI P43 neo3 mainboard  (on CPUz it says I have a  p45 chipset)
    The Intel P45 and the Intel P43 Chipset both belong to the Intel 4-Chipset family and are therefore pretty similar.   CPU-Z may simply not be able to keep the two versions appart. What CPU-Z Version are you using?
    Quote
    I just want to get 2.83ghz to 3.0ghz for now so basicly 333x8.5 to 353x8.5
    - Disable Spread Spectrum in BIOS
    - Set FSB/DRAM Ratio to 1:1
    - Adjust memory voltage to 1.95V (use +/- keys on the numpad of your keyboard)
    - Increase FSB Frequency to 353 MHz

  • Tiger Upgraded to Snow Leopard and computer runs SLOW, SLOW, SLOW

    I have Leopardcy and itch'n for a cure! Has anyone loaded Snow Leopard onto a Tiger, 4.0.?? operating system? I was told I could. I backed up the info I had in my computger on an external hard drive first, then loaded Snow Leopard. Now it runs so slow I could cry. It took 90 seconds to open Pages, 4 minutes to get onto Safari. The Geek Squad at Best Buy store said to reload Tiger, but first back up the current info onto my backup with Time Machine. Questions: If I take Snow Leopard out and reinput Tiger, will Time Machine still be there?? Is it now in my external so it will work or ???? What will be the ramifications of reloading Tiger??
    I may need more RAM, but I don't know how to determine that. Any ideas of how to figure out what it is?
    Any ideas are most appreciated. Thanks,

    It sounds like you have very very limited RAM and very limited free hard disk space.
    The lack of RAM causes the OS to attempt to buffer information to hard disk. The lack of hard disk space causes everything to become 'slower than molasses' as the system tries to find free space available on the hard disk.
    I'm wondering if you read the installation requirements before you installed Snow Leopard?
    Snow Leopard minimum requirements are 1Gb RAM (but note that MORE is recommended) and 5-7Gb available hard disk space, just to install it.
    http://manuals.info.apple.com/enUS/Snow_Leopard_InstallationInstructions.pdf
    Click on Apple, About This Mac, More Info. Memory shows how much RAM is installed.
    Serial-ATA shows details about your installed hard disk but you have to scroll down to see how much disk space is in use and how much is available. If you have less than 10% to 15% of your hard disk free after installing Snow Leopard, you should get both a larger hard drive as well as more RAM (Snow Leopard runs pretty well in 2Gb).
    Since it came with Tiger installed, I'm guessing you probably have a 2006 or 2007 1.83Ghz or 2.0Ghz MacBook with 512Mb or 1Gb RAM and an 80Gb or 120Gb drive. You can find factory specs for your model here:
    http://www.everymac.com/systems/by_capability/mac-specs-by-machine-model-machine -id.html
    TIme Machine was added with Tiger, OS X 10.5.x, so NO, *a Time Machine backup cannot be restored to Leopard, 10.4.x.* (And you now have a good reason to avoid that BB for future technical support.)

  • Hey! Im not seeing a transparent top of page menu bar on the desktop...

    whats up with that? a quick check uncovered nothing...
    Message was edited by: iShell

    My October 2006 20" displays a transparent menubar.
    Is your 17" iMac 1.83GHz or 2.0GHz.
    The 1.83GHz has an Intel GMA 950 graphics card, the 2.0GHz has an ATi Radeon X1600 graphics card. It may be that Core Animation (the technology used for the Transparency) isn't supported on the Intel GMA 950. (can someone verify this?)

  • 2006 model a good computer

    to supplement my imac g4 and imac g3 i would like to get a computer that is more internet friendly in today's world. iphoto and chrome would probably be the only applications i would use. to save space the 17" model seems about right. and the white color would match my others. any opinions on the 1.83ghz or 2.0ghz 17" models with core 2 duo? i would continue to use my others for all the other stuff i do.  these things are going for very cheap on e-bay now.

    The core 2 Duo oes won't be too bad, but sad thing is the 1.83 only takes 2GB of RAM, which is not half enough for OSX by itself, the 2.0 can take 4GB, (3GB usable), but isn't enough RAM still for today's bloated Internet & the OS.
    My GF was very disappointed with 10.6 on her 2006 iMac, even after I installed 4GB of RAM, & Internet was all she did on it.
    http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/specs/imac-core-2-duo-1.83-17-inch-sp ecs.html
    http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/specs/imac-core-2-duo-2.0-17-inch-spe cs.html

  • Choosing between 1.83GHz v. 2.0GHz (MacBook - white)

    I'm planning to buy a MacBook (white) and would like to know in what situations, if any, I'm likely to notice a difference between the base 1.83 MHz model and the 2.0 GHz level.
    According to MacWorld's tests, the performance difference between the two models wasn't 'significant.' However, I'm not familiar with what MW's testing covers.
    Am I likely to get lesser performance from the 1.83 GHz model when:
    (1) running music applications like Live, Reason, Logic, etc.; or
    (2) just doing a lot of multitasking?
    I plan to max the RAM out to 2.0 GB.
    Re: the 2.0GHz model, if the processor speed difference isn't significant, I would choose the 1.83GHz model, since I don't really think of a DVD-writeable drive as something I necessarily need -- not for the $200 premium, anyway.
    Replies appreciated.

    I had the same questions as you and, seemingly, read the same reports about the marginal operational differences between the 1.83 nd 2.0 GHz models.
    Figuring I'd really only ever use DVD burning for archiving, in the end I got the base unit, cranked up the RAM and bought myself an external HDD (for archiving, backup and storing bulky - but hardly used - programs) and probably still ended up saving myself cash over the 2.0 model.
    Some hardcore gamers and graphic artists have expressed concern over the integrated graphics on the MacBooks (all models) but that's not been an issue for me either - and I'll be d*mned if I'll fork over the Big Cash to Apple for a Pro.

  • Will ram from a MacBook 1.83GHz Intel Core Duo work on a MacBook 2.0GHz Int

    Will ram from a MacBook 1.83GHz Intel Core Duo work on a MacBook 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo?
    MACBOOK   Mac OS X (10.4.8)  

    Yes, both machines use the same type of memory.

  • Mac Book 1.83ghz w/combo drive-using external Superdrive??

    OK, I hope this isn't a dumb question. I am going to buy a Mac Book tonight. I was going to buy the 2.0ghz because it had a Superdrive, but then I realized I have an almost new DVR-110 at home, so I could just get the 1.83ghz with the Combo drive. It is my understanding that with iLife 06, I will be able to use an external dvd burner. Here's my question if anyone knows.
    Because this Mac Book will be sold as the combo drive model, will it have iDVD installed? It seems I remember that iDVD cannot install if there is not an internal dvd burner.
    If this is the case, does anyone know how I would install it? I would assume that the iLife discs will come with the purchase.

    Thanks Rob,
    I know the DVR-110 works, I have it installed on an older G4 that is close to dead (power up issues).
    My plan is to pull that DVR-110 out of there, put it in an external enclosure and use as external burner for the Mac Book. I think that'll work now that you've enlightened me on the iLife 06 pre-installed status of the Mac Books. Thanks for that:)
    Can't wait to get to the Apple store!

  • Better deal? 1.83ghz C2D or 2ghz CD

    I have the choice between these two models:
    Refurbished MacBook 2.0GHz Intel Core Duo $899
    w/ superdrive (though I will probably rarely burn dvds)
    Refurbished MacBook 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo $949
    w/o superdrive
    All other specs are the same. Is it better to have the core 2 duo with less processing speed or vice versa? Which is the better deal?

    That would be a good question, how much faster is the 1.8ghz CD2 than the 2.0 CD. There isn't much difference in the speed (1.8 vs 2.0) - but the difference lies in the architecture of the chips. The 1.8 CD2 might be just as fast, if not slightly faster than the 2.0 CD because of the architecture.
    The other thing to know is, the CD2's have the ability to upgrade to 802.11n if you buy the Airport Express Base Station. The CD's are not able to do this.
    Hope this helps.
    D.A.M.O.N

  • 1.83Ghz or 2.00Ghz? Need Opinions

    Hey guys,
    I am in the process of returning a stock MBP and getting a BTO replacement for it. I am wondering what you guys would recommend.
    these choices are the choices I can afford.
    1.83Ghz with 2GB (2X1GB Dual Channel) RAM and 100GB 7200RPM 128MB VRAM
    or
    2.00Ghz with 1GB (2X512MB Dual Channel) RAM and 100GB 5400RPM 256MB VRAM
    The prices come out to be almost the same for both machines.
    Cheers

    I'm not a gamer so I never thought VRAM would be an issue. However, having used my iMac G5 with 128MB of VRAM, and now using my MacBook Pro alongside it with 256MB of VRAM, there is a clear difference. The ripple effect in Dashborad (bringing up new widgets) is more fluid, the Genie effect when minimizing windows is smoother, and transitions in iPhoto slideshows look better.
    As others have stated, the RAM can be upgradable at anytime, very easily, but the CPU and VRAM cannot be upgraded (simply)
    Go for your second option of the 2.0GHz model.
    *nathan

  • Want to upgrade my G5 iMac to a 2.0ghz MBP

    Hello,
    I am (was?) seriously considering purchasing a 2.0Ghz MBP and then selling my G5 1.83Ghz iMac.
    My iMac has been really great to me but given my newish job and the fact that I've been really mobile lately, I much prefer a notebook computer.
    But, after reading all the posts here about whirring problems, heat problems, logic board problems, not to mention next Tuesday quickly approaching... I'm wondering if I should a) wait or b) not get a MBP at all.
    My question to you is: what do you think? Is it a safe time to purcahse the MBP given its problems and Apple's hush-hush attitude?
    Or should I consider a Macbook? Or does the Macbook have similar problems??
    What about a refurbished notebook (Intel or non-Intel notebook)?
    Any advice/opinions you could share would be most helpful!
    Thank you!!
    christine

    No, Guts was suggesting that you wait until the next version of the MBP is released with Core 2 duo processor chips. And he's betting that all of your apps would be available in UB format by then, so you don't take the speed and memory hit of running under Rosetta.
    Apple has just released a new line of iMacs with Core 2 duo processors and they are a tremendous bargain, faster than your current computer. But you would still have to run Photoshop under Rosetta. And they are not notebooks.
    We don't know when Apple will release the next generation of MacBook Pros. My own bet is that Photoshop will still have to run under Rosetta when they are released -- which could be any time from right away until early 2007. (Apple for some reason keeps that to itself. <grin>.)
    You didn't specify whether your current PowerMac has 1 or two processors. If it has only one processor, you might find that a MacBook Pro (current model) will be competitive in most Photoshop tasks, especially if you install 2 GB RAM. And the MBP will run Photoshop more quickly when Adobe finally releases a UB version of Photoshop.
    I wouldn't be put off too much by the problems you see on this site. My week 12 MBP has been perfect since I received it on 30 March and has paid for itself in productivity. My guess is that most MBP owners are quite satisfied. For Photoshop work you should consider the MacBook Pro line, as it has a better graphics card and larger screens than the MacBook line. The 17-inch MacBook Pro is a bit large for carrying around all the time, but may be worth looking at.
    As you are already into Macs, I don't think you would be as happy with a PC notebook. When the next generation of MBPs is released, they will be a bit faster than the current generation. And that next generation won't be as fast as a subsequent generation. But a current generation MBP would be a much better buy than a PowerBook, because the PowerBook will be much slower running the next generation of Photoshop than a MBP.

  • Anyone one using the 1.83Ghz Macbook ....

    Hey Guys,, whts up? Well i am now really confused between both the white models (1.83Ghz and the 2.0Ghz). If you have a 1.83Ghz macbook, why did you choose it? Is it working well enough? Is the difference between the Ghz worth it all? Is the DVDRW worth it? Thx a lot.
    Ash.

    Hi mate,
    DON'T BUY IT unless u don't kw what to do with your $$, because it runs slower than my window98 m/c.
    Worst, the MacOS alone took-up 1/3 of the standard 60Gb hardisk space in which the Apple salesman never tell me during the purchase. If I knew it, I could have upgrade the m/c or stayed with my window98 notebook.
    I'm speaking the truth, I bought this m/c from Singapore as an overseas student under educational purchase. Now studying in Sydney, the Singapore Apple office refused to honour the return of my m/c in Sydney except global warranty despite there're plently of Apple store in Sydney there. Instead, they expected me to incurr my own expenses to have the m/c courier into their Singapore Office.
    It's a complete nightmare for me..........i simply get very very ANNOYED & FRUSTRATED everytime i run this MacBook:(

  • MacbookPro 2.0GHz Upgrade for MBP owners?

    Hello, I was just wondering if it would not be an Idea to offer MBP customers of the 1.8GHz (and even old 1.6GHz) a free upgrade to 2.0 GHz?
    It looks like Apple realizes that the dual 1.6 and 1.8 Intels are not pushing the performance one would expect. I have this idea because it has had 2 upgrades since the short launch of the MBP.
    Most of my frustration commes from the fact, my 1.83GHz Macbook Pro has bin dropped to the same performance benchmarks as the plastic $1000 MacBook. (I know I pay extra for looks and bigger HD, Smart-DVD and such)...
    It is good that you eliminate products from your program when you knowtice they are not what you want them to be, but don't forget about all the customer who already fell for the first 2 editions, which willl be the most hardcore Macintosh Freaks (like me)?
    And what about the people who bought the 2.0GHz MBP for about $2400, and it is now not even $2000 !?
    Or am I the only one bashing my head over this Upgrading of Apple?
    I am supriced no topics have bin started on this issue already.
    Apple is loosing it's key customers who will no longer buy freshly released products...

    It looks like Apple realizes that the dual 1.6 and
    1.8 Intels are not pushing the performance one would
    expect. I have this idea because it has had 2
    upgrades since the short launch of the MBP.
    I really don't think that is the case at all. Dell, HP, Sony, Toshiba are all still using those processors, so those companies must feel something is right about the performance of those processors. I think if Apple is guilty of anything it is of taking advantage of price drops to offer the performance gains immediately. It is an interesting strategy because many manufacturers like Sony will sit on the same specs until they update model numbers. For example updating the SZ100's to SZ200's. As Apple lacks models numbers and probably had a desire to position themselves a little ahead of most of the current competition they apparently decided to make them immediately available.
    Would you have felt better if that had waited until August or September to do it? What difference would it have made? What about those who would have maybe purchased in late August just to see them upgraded in early September? The point is your not going to make everyone happy. I think Apple did what they could to make people happy by passing on the price drops immediately. It seems it is a damned if you do, damned if you don't strategy.
    Most of my frustration commes from the fact, my
    1.83GHz Macbook Pro has bin dropped to the same
    performance benchmarks as the plastic $1000 MacBook.
    (I know I pay extra for looks and bigger HD,
    Smart-DVD and such)...
    Or am I the only one bashing my head over this
    Upgrading of Apple?
    I am supriced no topics have bin started on this
    issue already.
    Probably because for the majority of people it is a non-issue. It happens and most people realize and accept that it happens. I am still a big Canon fan despite the fact that they released the 30D not long after I purchased my 20D. Nikon did a quick model change from the D70 to D70s as well

  • Exchanging 1.83 for 2.0Ghz Today, Any Tips?

    Hello,
    I'm traveling to my nearest Apple Store to exchange my 12 day old 1.83Ghz for the faster 2.0Ghz MBP today. Have any of you sucessfully done this? If so, would you offer any tips? Will I need to pay the restocking fee? Will my AppleCare transfer to my new machine?
    Background Info:
    I purchased mine on May 14th with the education discount, along with the AppleCare Protection Program (which has been registered)
    Thanks!
    1.83Ghz MBP   Mac OS X (10.4.6)  

    I am not sure about the restocking fee. When I changed my troublesome 15" out for the 17" I had to pay the price difference but no restocking fee. They declared my 15" DOA though. I am not sure what your situation is.
    As far as the AppleCare warranty they did transfer that to the 17". The warranty policy states "The replacement product or parts will be functionally equivalent to the replaced
    products or parts and will assume the remaining coverage under the Plan."
    So yes. The new replacement laptop will replace your old one under the plan. Just be sure to tell them you registered the plan and need to have it transfered.

  • Any difference between the RAM for 1.83GHz and 2.0 GHz Macbook Pro?

    Hi all,
    I want to upgrade my 2.0GHz Core Duo MacBook Pro to 2GB of RAM. So far Crucial.com is my choice however I've noticed the difference in price (due to sale) for the 1.83GHz MBP and the 2.0GHz MBP:
    http://www.crucial.com/store/mpartspecs.asp?mtbpoid=8698C1B9A5CA7304
    http://www.crucial.com/store/mpartspecs.asp?mtbpoid=B8539EC6A5CA7304
    Could you guys confirm there is actuall no difference between the two memory models, and it's just a marketing ploy on Crucial's part?
    Thanks,
    Eric

    The prices indicated on both links are the same. However, the answer to your question is that all MacBooks, MacBook Pros, Intel Minis, and Intel iMacs all use the same type and spec RAM. You will find the appropriate information in the computer's User Guide. It's also described in the Apple guide on how to install the RAM.
    Why reward points?(Quoted from Discussions Terms of Use.)
    The reward system helps to increase community participation. When a community member gives you (or another member) a reward for providing helpful advice or a solution to their question, your accumulated points will increase your status level within the community.
    Members may reward you with 5 points if they deem that your reply is helpful and 10 points if you post a solution to their issue. Likewise, when you mark a reply as Helpful or Solved in your own created topic, you will be awarding the respondent with the same point values.

Maybe you are looking for