Which is better, faster processor or more ram?

Hello all!
I'm planning on upgrading from my 1.33Ghz g4 ibook with 512mb of ram to a new macbook, because Logic Express 7 and Final Cut Express 3.5 don't run very well on my current system. Because of money constraints, I'm limited in what features I can afford, so I'd like some advice from other mac users. In having to choose between getting an entry level macbook with 2gb of ram, or the mid-level macbook with only 1gb of ram, which would you think might handle these two applications best?

Hi skipgo,
welcome to macbook forum.
I would go with the faster processor, not only the processor is fixed and not upgradeable, you also got bigger hard drive and superdrive that will be crucial for backing up big files on dvd (4 gb) or dual layer dvd (8 gb) and or burn your project into dvd from your FCE using iDVD.
And memory is tend to go cheaper each day and relatively easy to upgrade it yourself compare to built to order 2 gb memory in entry model at apple store.
And remember that apple will not accept return on BTO model just in case you decided to return it within their 14 days grace period.
Good Luck.
ps: beat by Mike with the same advise.....

Similar Messages

  • Faster processor or bigger ram?

    dear forum,
    i asked basically the same question some days ago, but i didn't have a satisfying answer, so here i am again..
    i wanna use LE on a MackBook. The question is, is it better to have a faster processor (2.0 instead 1.83) or a bigger ram (2 instead 1 Gb) ?
    having both -unfortunately- is not an option, so i have to pick one.
    what should i do?
    thanx folks!

    Hey Richard,
    no one is going to shout you down mate!
    But if someone will, give me a call (I'm a big fellow)! :o)
    We all have diferent ideias and tastes, the good thing
    is to respect the other forum mates and learn from everyone,
    we may not agree always, but we're here to help each other!
    I've made a similar option on my laptop 1.5 GHz over the 1.65
    and more Ram, almost 2 years latter I don't regret my decision.
    In my opinion (nook) if you can´t go any further the 1.83 is
    a very good machine, and boy, with 2Mb of ram you'll have a ball!
    Best regards,
    Jorge

  • New Processor Or More RAM?

    Hi,
    I just wanted to know whether to buy a new processor or some more RAM. I am pretty sure more RAM won't help, seeing as I only have a 400mhz processor. Its just my brother wants to play runescape on it and it won't take it, it's too laggy.
    -Ollie

    One trick you may try is to go to the top menu bar in your desktop and pull down: GO > Go to Folder... > and type in /var/vm/. This will take you to a directory and if you see several files with names like swapfile0, swapfile1, etc. , then you need more ram. Judging from your profile, it probably does need max ram as you're talking about running a game. Don't concern yourself too much with clock speed as the ram is of greater impact, in this particular case.
    Good luck

  • More Memory or faster processor?

    Hi, Im interested in buying a Macbook soon and have a question. Which setup would give me better performance?
    1)
    2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
    2 GB Memory
    2)
    2.16GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
    1GB Memory
    Everything else is exactly the same. Thanks in advance

    Hi jtp861,
    I prefer faster processor over more ram, because the processor is fixed, while ram you can upgrade anytime.
    Also with 2.16 model you also get dual layer dvd burner that will come handy if you need to back up your iTunes library and your other data.
    And if you purchase 2.0 with 2 gb of ram directly from apple, it considered as built to order item, and apple will not accept return on BTO order.
    Better upgrade memory yourself.
    Good Luck.

  • Faster Processor: 3.5ghz quad i7 vs 3.7ghz quad Xeon?

    Which Processor is faster?
    3.5ghz quad i7 vs 3.7ghz quad Xeon?
    So which is the faster processor for Logic X?
    I think Logic supports hyper threading also....
    It's basically iMac maxed out vs base level Mac Pro...
    Which would be better for Logic Pro... How much faster at a guess do you think it will be?
    I don't really need a top monitor and don't really need to graphics cards what do you suggest i go for?

    If you will be using resource intensive applications in a vocational context frequently, the faster CPU will probably pay for it self.
    If you are an avocational user, for the overwhelming majority of usage, there will little of any difference in performance when using most applications.  It then becomes more of a question of bragging rights.
    To put it another way, if you live in the country, a Ferrari makes sense but not so in the center of Manhattan.
    Ciao.

  • Which is better 500gb or 750gb

    I am looking into buying a macbook pro and I am wondering if I should get the 500gb or the 750gb?

    The 500 GB at 7,200 RPM is faster at loading your files and saving, likely not noticeable unless you had a 5,400 RPM previously. Drawbacks, it might reduce your battery life a little more.
    The 750 GB has more space and at 5,400 RPM is obviously slower, but most users won't be able to tell the difference. The battery life is a bit longer as it takes less energy, but one likely wouldn't notice.
    The big difference in video graphics rendering quality between the
    13" poor HD 3000 integrated graphics  scores 11 points (all glossy screens)
    15" 2.0 Ghz last years video card  scores 18 points (anti-glare screen option)
    15" 2.2 Ghz + newest video card scores  30 points. (anti-glare screen option)
    If your going to 3D game and want your machine to last longer, feel snappy, then I suggest the 2.2 Ghz or better, you can add more RAM and a faster hard drive later if you wish.

  • Mac recognizes more ram but no performance difference?

    I purchase an extra 2 GB of ram for my macbook pro intel core 2 duo laptop for a total of 3 GB. I bought the ram at a pc store outside of apple but is built with the exact specifications of memory bought from apple.
    I successfully installed the memory myself and when I booted up the mac and looked under 'about this mac' it showed 3 GB of ram so hip hip hurray i did everything ok.
    However, there was no performance difference at all. Opening up music files, to video and even PDF files loaded up no faster than when I had just 1 GB of ram.
    I did a mem test and an additional memory test with tech tool pro and everything seemed to be working fine.
    Anyone know why I cannot see any performance difference? Actually to be exact, it feels as though the speed has improved about 512 MB but no where near 3GB.
    I then took my 1GB ram stick out and just inserted the 2GB ram stick (which is the newly purchased one) and no performance difference occurred.
    Even when I talked to customer support of where I bought the ram the guy said that this is quite odd and that the mac should perform much faster.
    Any suggestions or solutions?
    Thank you.
    Dorian

    +Opening up music files, to video and even PDF files loaded up no faster than when I had just 1 GB of ram.+
    The first time you open them, it's limited by the speed of reading from your hard drive, so the extra RAM isn't making any difference.
    +Actually to be exact, it feels as though the speed has improved about 512 MB but no where near 3GB.+
    RAM won't magically make your computer run faster. Adding more RAM simply stops the computer from slowing down by going to the hard drive only if it actually uses that much memory.
    It just sounds like the typical way in which you use your computer requires a bit more than 512 MB but less than 1 GB, and this is really quite normal.

  • Compromise: More RAM or better Processor

    Hi
    I'm looking to buy a new iMac in a couple of weeks, I know that I want a 27" one and I have a budget which will allow me to get one of two configurations:
    - 2.9GHz i5 Processor, 512MB GeForce GTX 660M with 16 GB of RAM and 1TB Fusion drive
    or
    - 3.2GHz i5 Processor, 1024MB GeForce GTX 675MX with 8 GB of RAM and 1TB Fusion drive
    I will be using the computer for web and app dev so i'll frequently be using Photoshop, X-Code, Dreamweaver and Parallels with Windows (running windows browsers for testing) and of course Pages, Numbers etc.
    I honestly don't know which to compromise on; processor and graphics or ram. I realise that I can upgrade the ram at a later date, but at almost £300 for 16GB I don't want to compromise on RAM now and have to buy more a few months down the line.
    This will be my first mac after having a bad time with Windows and AMD of late, so I don't mind spending the money so long as it lasts me a good few years. Any advice would be great!
    Many thanks in anticipation :-)

    It depends what you want to use your iMac for - if you're into video editing, the best processor (i7) and a lot of RAM will help. You do not need to buy your RAM from Apple, Crucial (in Europe) or OWC (macsales.com) in US are the two most recommended RAM vendors - check out their prices. If you get one with the stock 8 GB RAM, you could simply add 2 x 4 or 2 x 8 GB later.

  • IMac 2012 (December) more RAM or faster processor?

    I will buy a 21.5 iMac.  Basic user: web, MS Office documents, some photo editing, burn DVDs.  Maybe light video.  I tend to keep my computers a long time (current Mac is the half dome from about 8 years ago).
    Question: for the most bang for the buck, and long term use, is it worth adding more RAM (8 to 16) or upgrading the processor (2.7 to 2.9)?
    Or just keep the basic model?
    Unlike previous questions like this, the 21.5 Macs don't let you add RAM later.   I get conflicting opinions from Mac store.

    IMHO if you intend to keep the machine a long time in order to get the best performance and most futureability I'd recommend getting the i7 21.5" with 16GB and get the 1TB Fusion drive. The 2012 21.5" iMacs are not designed to be user upgradeable for anything however OWC (www.macsales.com) sells a RAM upgrade kit. It takes skill to do the upgrade and will probably invalidate the warranty but it's possible.
    IMHO I'd buy the upgrades from Apple at the point of order. You can purchase the above (i7, 16GB, Fusion drive)  configuration from Apple's online store, I doubt the brick and mortar store would carry it.

  • Which configuration is better: higher GHz and lower RAM or lower GHz and higher RAM?

    I want to buy a new iMac. If all other factors are the same, including price, which configuration is better?
    21.5" iMac (late 2012) $1699
    3.1GHz Intel Core i7 Quad-Core
    8GB of 1600Hz DDR3 RAM
    --vs--
    21.5" iMac (late 2012) $1699
    2.9GHz Intel Core i5 Quad-Core
    16GB of 1600Hz DDR3 RAM

    A faster CPU gets the work done faster.
    More RAM deals better with large chunks of work (= large files) and multitasking (more apps open simultaneously).
    Fusion Drive is a an acceptable compromise to get the speed of SSDs and the affordable space of HDDs for as long as SSDs in the total target size are so astronomically expensive.

  • Ok, so i bought a imac 27 about 4 months ago, and now they release a new one!  ****... So my question is, should I sell this one (which by the way is the i5 2.8 with 1 gb 5750 and 4gb ram) and buy the new imac 27 i5,or keep the one i have and buy more ram

    ok, so i bought a imac 27 about 4 months ago, and now they release a new one!  ****... So my question is, should I sell this one (which by the way is the i5 2.8 with 1 gb 5750 and 4gb ram) and buy the new imac 27 i5,or keep the one i have and buy more ram. I mostly use my computer for photoshop cs5 and illustrator cs5 for graphics out put as well as surfing the web and music.
         Please give me you thoughts on what I should do!!  Thanks  lot!

    The new iMac is about 25% or so faster than your current iMac(comparable model would be the 3.1ghz version). There are a couple of things that you will benefit from such as the dual Thunderbolt/Mini Display ports/ which may help with multitasking. The video card in the new iMac again the comparable model being the 3.1ghz is a lotttttttt better than the current one that you have. So thinking of the long run those few things may be beneficial for you to upgrade(but it depends on what is important to you).
    I had the 2.93ghz i7 version that I just bought in March this year and I turned around and sold it about a week before the new iMac's were announced. I got about $1600 for it, yeah I took a loss but to me it was worth it because my new iMac performs that much better. Now keep in mind I went from i7 to i7...3.4ghz i7 with the 2gb video card. Now I have dual thuderbolt/mini display ports. I have noticed significant gains in my video editing and also in my gaming. So to me it was definitely worth the upgrade!
    One last thing, I would not have sold my 2.93 i7 and then bought the 3.1ghz i5, the big reason is because HT(hyper threading), it's only on the i7 model(3.4ghz)... If you take a look at some of the bench marks on engadget, maclife, macrumors, macworld, ****Barefeats.com(they really get into benchmarking)*** you will see charts that will help you make a better decision.
    In closing I would say look into it, if you can get a good price out of your current iMac to put toward a new iMac then do it. Like others have mentioned to you, tech changes and Apple will change the tech in these machines next year or do a speed bump later this year or so. One last thing if you go from the 2.8 i5 up to the 3.4 i7, you would definitely see the difference (HT is a must especially for programs that utilize it. You can go to my youtube channel(mob1278) and take a look at my geekbench results.... my 2.93 i7 scored around 10500-11000(8gb ram)...my 3.4 i7 scores from 12700-13000 with 4gb ram....so yeah as you can see big difference. Basically the 3.4 i7 would perform similar or just under a 2.4ghz 8core 2010 Mac Pro which runs you about $3500 with no monitor.... it's your money spend it how you want....and Lion is only going to push it even more when it is released!

  • Speeding up Rendering in LR3: Faster Processor or Better Video Card?

    I'm currently running a MacPro with 2 Dual-Core Xeons at 2.66 GHz and 7 GB of RAM. I upgraded a while ago to an ATI Radeon HD 3870 video card.
    I'm a professional photographer who is wondering what would give me the best LR3 rendering speed bump for my buck. Should I...
    1. Add more RAM?
    2. Upgrade my Video Card? (If so, which one?)
    3. Start from scratch with a faster Mac?
    4. All of the above?
    I'm looking for any information that would show me real world measurements using LR3. I'm NOT looking for philosophical discussions or speculation. Has anyone seen a test that I could read, or information source that compares different systems rendering identical content in LR3? Concrete help (rather than speculation) would be appreciated.
    Thanks!

    ambienttroutmask wrote:
    Good hard fast hard drives can also help, cheap and can carry on to any new machine, so always worth sticking one in. The Samsung F3 HD103SJ 1TB is an absolute bargain and for real world speed only SD is faster and then only if the OS is on the SD. I got one recently for video editing and stuck my LR catalog on it, a definite noticeable  speed increase over other hard drives of a similar spec (although I have heard nasty stuff about them failing early...so back up obviously. I also have a big fast video card for video editing, that sits there doing absolutely nothing when using LR...so unless you edit video or like playing games, don't bother. I prefer my old machines ancient Matrox card for stability and 2 D rendering, but it won't do video sadly!
    Processor comparisons here. With your set up you are going to have to invest in a top of the range MAC with an i 7 to benefit anything significant. More RAM won't hurt but may not get used by LR. More RAM and a i7 processor will ensure the RAM actually gets used.
    Pete,
    Just curious. Have you done any measurements on the Samsung? Say with SpeedTools for the Mac?  I'm just wondering what the read/write speeds are across eSATA connection vs. any of the others..  I know a lot can vary from one machine to another, but I was just asking on your machine how it compared with a measured result to another brand.  Like you say, the specs are very similar to other drives.
    Thanks.
    Jay S.

  • Easiest speedup--more RAM, or faster HD?

    I recently got a stock 2GHz C2D Macbook--80 GB 5400 RPM HD and 1 GB memory. If you could only upgrade one, which would see a better speed boost: up the memory (to 1.5 GB using unmatched RAM), or install a 7200 RPM HD (remain at 80 GB)?
    95% of the time, the speed is great, but after awhile switching between apps (especially heftier apps, like iPhoto and iTunes and very especially bringing these apps up via FrontRow), causes very noticeable delays. The login screen to get out of screensaver then takes awhile to come up as well.
    Not too surprised to see pageouts (via MenuMeters) numbering in the hundreds of thousands, but my old dual-533 MHz PowerMac G4, with only 768 MB of RAM, didn't seem to choke as bad between iPhoto, etc. I don't regularly run PPC apps on my MB, though I do expect a speed/response penalty after starting one up.
    So is my amount of RAM "okay" if I just up the speed of the HD?
    One other difference: I always shut down my G4 when done so it starts fresh next time; my MB I just sleep/wake, so RAM isn't allowed to clear and virtual memory isn't flushed.
    Comments and experience welcome, thanks!
    Macbook 2 GHz C2D   Mac OS X (10.4.8)   1 GB RAM

    If you are getting lots of pageouts, the correct solution is more RAM, or running fewer RAM-hungry programs at the same time.
    Your ratio of pageouts to pageins should be less than 10%. If it is greater than that, you are working the virtual memory system too hard.
    You probably should have 2 Gig RAM, but going to unmatched 1.5 will be a start. Eventually match up another 1 Gig DIMM.
    When you run Acitivity Monitor, look to see what PPC stuff is running. If you can replace all the legacy PPC stuff with Intel or Universal apps, your memory will go farther, because you won't have the additional overhead of the Rosetta emulation layer running.
    Widgets are often RAM hungry, too. Watch out there.
    Since you are currently working your Virtual Memory system too hard, I'd recommend rebooting more often, to clear stuff out. (Once Rosetta is started by running a PPC app, it will stay in memory until reboot.)
    Over-working the VM system will lead to premature Hard Disk failure, in addition to bad performance and lousy battery life.

  • Does anyone know which will be faster, an i5 2.5 ghz with a cheap ssd and 8gb ram or a standard i7 2.3 ghz

    Does anyone know which will be faster, i will be using it mostly for garageband and tv/movies and occasionally games.
    Any responses appreciated
    James

    Welcome to Apple Support Communities
    Get the Mac Mini with the faster Processor, then upgrade the RAM and maybe even SSD yourself.
    see > Memory, Drives, Free Installation Guides for Apple Mac mini

  • More RAM = longer processor life ????????

    does anyone out there know if adding more RAM helps reduce stress on the processor, thereby extending its lifespan? significantly?

    Miguel Peralta:
    i what about the difference between putting a computer to sleep and shutting it down. i have the idea that "sleep" does not mean that the computer stops working, and that it in fact remains ON. would shutting down be a better option istead of sleep, to conserve CPU life??
    When you place it in sleep mode, the entire state of the machine is still in the DRAM, and the memory is still on and being refreshed. Basically a "1" is stored in a DRAM bit on a single capacitor where the voltage decays rapidly. The mechanism basically reads and rewrites each location periodically to ensure that the state of the memory is maintained above a required threshold to recogize a "1". It takes a certain amount of power to do this.
    I believe the CPU power consumption is severely reduced in sleep mode.

Maybe you are looking for