The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    2.2 vs 2.4 MacBook Pro 15"

    Discussion in 'Apple and Mac OS X' started by m3power1, Jul 5, 2007.

  1. m3power1

    m3power1 Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    Check this review out.

    http://reviews.cnet.com/laptops/apple-macbook-pro-2007/4505-3121_7-32465635.html?ar=o&tag=pdtl-list

    The MBP 15" in the DVD drain test lasted for 3 hrs and 35 mins!!!!
    HOW freakin' impressive is that!!!

    From CNET's article:
    "Perhaps the biggest improvement in the revamped MacBook Pro is in battery life. Thanks to the LED-backlit display (and partially to Intel's energy-efficient Centrino Pro platform), we got an impressive 3 hours and 35 minutes with our DVD battery drain test--that's 36 minutes more than the non-LED version of the MacBook Pro. Bear in mind the DVD battery drain test is especially grueling, so you can expect longer life from casual Web surfing and typical office use. "

    Does anyone know if there is a battery life difference between the 2.2 and 2.4? I would assume the 2.2 would have a even better battery life due to the slower CPU and Video Card. What do you guys think?? Can someone confirm the DVD battery drain test with the 2.2 MBP 15"??????
     
    m3power1, Jul 5, 2007
    #1
  2. hehe299792458

    hehe299792458 Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    175
    Messages:
    1,571
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    0.2 ghz wouldn't make much of a difference in terms of battery life (or speed for that matter). The graphics card's only difference is 128mb of RAM, which also has no bearing on the battery life.
     
    hehe299792458, Jul 5, 2007
    #2
  3. Sneaky_Chopsticks

    Sneaky_Chopsticks Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    460
    Messages:
    1,647
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Video card and processor has nothing to due with how slow or fast your battery drains. The things that drain your battery are the applications you use, and the brightness of the screen.
     
    Sneaky_Chopsticks, Jul 5, 2007
    #3
  4. fan of laptop

    fan of laptop Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    41
    Messages:
    336
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    I do not think that there is a huge diffrence between 2.2 and 2.4. If I were you, I will go with 2.4,just to save some bucks!
     
    fan of laptop, Jul 5, 2007
    #4
  5. robertosee

    robertosee Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    149
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    ??? 2.4 is more expense... how would you save some bucks???

    For graphic design, would it matter to have a 2.2/2.4 and 128/256 graphics card???
     
    robertosee, Jul 5, 2007
    #5
  6. Sam

    Sam Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    3,661
    Messages:
    9,249
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Graphic design as in Photoshop, Fireworks or Illustrator? No, the slight change in CPU speed won't be a big difference (mostly too small for you to notice), and graphics works, unless involving 3D, won't need graphics power from a graphics card.

    It'd be better if you upgrade RAM than the extra 0.2 GHz. However, 2 GB of RAM is enough for Photoshop work or video editing.
     
    Sam, Jul 5, 2007
    #6
  7. robertosee

    robertosee Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    149
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    thanks sam... i think i'll go for the 2.2ghz
     
    robertosee, Jul 5, 2007
    #7