Hello,
The difference between the new macbook pros 15'' is very big? It justify to buy the high end that costs 400 more?
Thanks
-
Only justified if you need the faster graphics card. For most people the base model is perfect. Unless you play high-end PC games, the HD6750 will be plenty.
-
-
Whats the difference between the two graphic cards for gaming? Games like Fifa12, and starcraft?
-
AMD Radeon HD 6770M - Notebookcheck.net Tech
AMD Radeon HD 6750M - Notebookcheck.net Tech -
Both cards can run Crysis 2 on high, and that's a pretty resource intense game.
-
The difference is like high vs ultra on starcraft.
-
HD 6750M: 12 FPS
HD 6770M: 13.4 FPS.
Definitely not worth $400 more to me. -
-
Would the difference be noticeable in other places such as 3D Graphic programs? Also is the slightly faster processor worth the money?
-
Honestly, unless you work in a specialized industry and already know that you need that particular CPU or that particular GPU for some reason, you're probably just as well served by the $1800 model. -
I have the 6750 (1gb) and I run on Ultra pretty much everything.
With the 6750 (512mb) you can run it on Ultra BUT with high textures, NOT Ultra textures.
Not really sure why Apple put a 512 mb graphics card in a $1.8K laptop in 2011.
As far as CPU your Matlab and Mathematica calculations will be about 10% faster. So if your running 2 hour long calculations, you get like 12 minutes. -
I was planning on getting the high end but now I guess the only decision I have to make is the Glossy or Anti-Glare...
Or do you guys think it would be worth waiting for the 2012 model?? -
If you are happy with your current computer, wait.
If you aren't upgrade. There will always be something better on the horizon. I personally always like upgrading like 1-2 months after a product releases so bugs are worked out and I don't have the problem of a new product in less then 6 months. But that is just my personal taste. -
By the way, i was thinking in a SSD of 256gb, but wouldnt i see a lack of space on it? I mean i must always have a external disk with me because my computer doesnt have memory for "nothing"..
-
get bigger than 256.. or get an OptiBay kit and replace the Optical drive with a hard drive for storage. Its usually much easier to use an external optical drive the few times you need it than an external hard drive.
-
I think they will do a chasis redesign next year. It is anyones guess what they will do, but I bet they go to 1600x900 on their low end 15" standard to get the wide screen format without losing vertical pixels.
If that is true, by waiting for 2012, you will get a little extra width on your screen, but the screens are already 900p high on the base model which is the most important thing to me. On most websites and other reading, extra width is almost always wasted. If you are a designer, it is nice though to allow you more toolbar space.
Everyone else has already moved to a widescreen format LCD to save on parts because the similarity to the HDTVs and the toolings the factorys use to make the parts, and apple will to.
If profits and cost savings are there, apple will be there also. -
And I suspect you'd need to go to side-by-side screenshots to determine the difference between (1) ultra with high textures, and (2) ultra with ultra textures, in most games. It's not going to be glaringly obvious during gameplay. -
-
-
-
-
-
1.5 555m is already too much for a GT 555m.
On the other hand if you gave it 256mb you would see a performance drop.
Certain cards can only use certain amounts of memory well. Beyond that it is pointless. However if you put in too little memory, you will see some sort of a performance drop. 1gb is perfect for the 6750, 512 is a little low. -
-
Does the 5400 rpm disk performance is very low when compared with a 7200rpm?
-
-
Its not pixel width that a 16:10 gives you, its screen real estate. Think about it this way: per your argument a 56" 1080p TV and a 32" 1080p tv give you the same amount of vertical space.
Just having 900 vertical pixels on a 15" screen =/ a 16:10 screen at all, because the screen is shorter.
I also think Apple likes how it makes their computers look more compact if they go with 16:10 vs 16:9, and Apple will spend more for appearance. -
-
Also the idea of aspect ratio has nothing to do with resolution, aspect ratio influences how you view web pages and things like that. -
One of you is arguing for the sake of arguing.
Vertical pixels are great for productivity, hence why your TV analogy doesn't work.
On the other hand, 1600x900 is a better display [especially for media use], albeit true productivity would be similar. -
Then they can be like "higher pixel density then the competition" and "#1 screen on any laptop in existence". I could see Apple doing something sort of similar, they are always willing to pay for things like screens and unibody enclosures over pure specs.
I think with a 1920*1200 IPS LED screen they could sell a lot of 15" MBPs on screen quality alone.
Also I disagree on the fact that vertical length (in physical dimensions doesn't matter). Isn't a 22" screen more productive then a 21" LCD? A 23" over a 21" is even more productive, even though typically they are all 1080p monitors. I can fit more things in there that I can actually see with my native eye. -
1 very high screen cost on screens over 13" currently
2 a 10 bit IPS screen like the DC2 can not be supported with graphics switching with an intel IGP ( Ivy wont either ) only the 6 bit IPS can be driven with current IGP's hence why my x220 has a " low grade " screen vs my elitebooks
3 power draw, IPS screens pull more juice on their own as well as on the GPU and LVDS circuit.
4 the actual panel glass is thicker, and there us no room for it unless you make a thicker screen assembly for IPS models, which is against apples thinner and lighter mantra -
Crysis 2
6750 38 fps on high
6770 40 fps on high
I doubt the difference in sc2 is high vs ultra. -
-
I'm asking myself the same question: is it worth to go for the 6750 1gb or 512?
Everyone here seems to say "no way" for the 1gb. I trust you, no offense, but is anyone got a link or something, cause when i do a research on Notebookcheck, i can only find 1 model for the 6750m, so it's hard to compare with the 1gb one... any help is welcome! -
Blackened Justice Notebook Enthusiast
I think that trying to cram as many pixels as possible into a screen really isn't that necessary. There has to be a delicate balance in the sizes of the various things (screen size and screen resolution), which ultimately regulates the average distance from your eyes to the screen. I know that my reaction to my two laptops' screens is completely different. Although both are 1280x800, one is 12 inch and the other 14 inch. -
Also to get back on track with the graphics card mydriaze I am curious as to which one to get. Yes $400 is a lot but would it almost be worth it to buy a same what future proof machine so hold on too for a few years at the least...
-
The gains from the 6770m vs 6750m are going to go down as the years progress. As new tech comes out all older graphics cards head towards the same: not able to run. Differences start to go down as well as game designers no longer write their code for those cards.
Futuring proofing would be investing the $400 in something safe and then taking the $450 it will be in 2-3 years and putting it towards a new computer.
If you sold the MBP for like $700, your at $1150, so thats the best form of future proofing, TBH. -
1: it can be physically upgraded ( MXM card )
2: it us currently close to top end as hardware tends to change rapidly.
your much better off saving the difference for a faster unit in a year or 2 vs putting 400 into such a small upgrade that can easily be matched by an overclock -
Futureproofing never works. Technology moves too fast. Better to buy something less expensive now, that meets your needs now, and you'll be able to afford the next best thing when the next best thing comes along.
Someone who buys a $1200 laptop every two years is better able to keep up with technology than someone who buys a $2400 laptop every four years. -
-
-
Macbook Pro 15 High vs Low-end
Discussion in 'Apple and Mac OS X' started by Kacetado, Nov 6, 2011.