Apple MacBook Pro 15" with Intel Santa Rosa Review Discussion

I was really surprised at the performance of the 160GB 5400 RPM drive in my MBP. I usually swap out the stock drives with a 7200 RPM, but in this case I may hold out.

 

Great review. Quite objective. I'm certainly interested in hearing how things continue...

As to the long-term AppleCare warranty, Apple wants $349 for it basically extending the warranty to three years (and adding 9 months of phone support.)

Here's a place that sells the same AppleCare warranty for $267.77:

http://www.mac-pro.com/s.nl/it.A/id.763/.f?sc=2&category=2

I'm not connected with them in any way. Just a satisfied customer.

 

Yeah, I think this is one of the perks of these new high capacity PMR drives.......... even seems to extend to the 200 and 250GB 4200rpm drives, it seems.

 

$349 for the warranty isn't really that bad. Dell, HP, Gateway...all charge a similar price for a 3 year warranty, and with those companies they have to send someone out to you...you can't just walk into an Apple store that same day.

 

Not that much difference in OSX between the 128 and 256.
http://www.barefeats.com/rosa03.html

 

Great link! 9% is certainly a small margin.

 

Yeah can we consider this a definative answer, that the 2.4ghz model just isn't worth the extra money?

Though I do realize that there is one thing this article failed to mention. Whether or not newer DX10 games are going to need/use that extra 128mb of VRAM. (For example ShadowRun the new FPS coming out in a while, will that run ok on a 128mb card or will it need a 256?)

 

I wouldn't necessarily say that; one problem I'd have with using the barefeats article again is that they're testing in mac OS X, with Mac versions of these games, and frankly, older games where the VRAM difference might not matter all that much either.

Of more interest to me would be comparisons with newer games running under Windows on Boot Camp.

 

ahh yeah good point

 

Does the 8600GT make use of TurboCache? (similar to ATI's HyperMemory)

If so, it can borrow from system RAM when absolutely necessary. I've seen benchmarks to show that TurboCache is much more effective than HyperMemory, actually.

 

Yes, it does (people with 8600M GT machines have already reported Vista showing the shared system memory as well as the dedicated VRAM).

 

Based on what I read and hear, the 128MB model is at a slight disadvantage but I wouldn't consider it to be a huge deal. Anyone into hardcore gaming more than likely has a dekstop or one of the big 17" laptops (XPS M1710, etc.)

Good info, all! That's why I love this website.

 

Yeah, I've been deciding back and forth. Frankly I'm thinking of getting the base model, and using the $500 I'd save to buy an 8800GTS 640MB graphics card for a new PC build.

One thing I've found is that even when I have owned laptops that can game, I realistically don't use them much for that anyway. I'd be happy just playing whatever games it can play well, and leaving it at that. The 8800GTS on the desktop would give me a lot more enjoyable gaming anyway...

 

Just do an 8600GT SLI setup... :-D


You are right though...the $500 price difference is enough to buy another battery + AppleCare, or some nice accessories.

 

Not necessarily. I believe the 128Mb 8600GT will be a mid-high card for at least 2 years..

 

New stuff on the 17" from Barefeats
http://www.barefeats.com/santarosa.html

 

Thanks for the thorough review.

One question, though: When using the 1/8-inch mini audio jack (either for headphones or plugged into speakers/stereo system) do you detect hiss or whine or hard drive activity noise?

The review on Macintouch discusses this, but I'm wondering if it's a problem with all new MPB's.

Thanks,
Avi

 

Same here. The 17" gaming laptops are really too big to travel with, and end up sitting on a desk. That makes all the laptop performance concessions stupid, and you are better off with a desktop.

 

and now the $1 million question:
can any MBP owner look inside it and tell us if the 8600 is soldered or otherwise upgradable in future ?

 

whats the time response for the led backlit screen?

even if the max screen resolution is 1440*900 can it still show full hd videos with good quality? (1920*1080)

are the overclock capabilities in macbook pro good? (cpu and gpu)

whats the gpu clock for the 2,2ghz and 2,4ghz santa rosa?

hdd 5400rpm vs. 7200rpm are there big diferences?

gpu 128mb vs. 256mb are there big diferences?

cpu 2,2ghz vs. 2,4ghz are there big diferences?

vista performance test in each 2,2ghz and 2,4ghz version?

how's going steam games in vista via bootcamp 1.3? (valve magnific scalable hl2 source engine )

any chance to play future games hits like crisis on my macbookpro?

ps: sorry for my bad english and the lot of questions but i never had a mac... and i'm thinking about switching to it xD (my problem is almost the great games for windows... and some cool aps...)

 

Also a "switcher" as of yesterday, so don't yell at me...you should all be happy, haha

1st: Looking at both models, 2.2 and 2.4, wouldn't be better to just suck up the $500 difference b/c of the increase in processor speed and video for future releases?

It's almost like the sayings:
Seems like you get what you pay for...Always get what you want and don't regret your decision a year down the road

2nd: No one answered the question about how much space would be left after both OS installed...since there is only 160 GB to start with, space will be a premium, unless you get an external drive. Any comments on this issue?

 

On a 160GB hard drive, I started with 131GB of space; theres a lot of lost space there...Maybe its the NTFS formatting. That includes that OSX install. I partitioned off 60GB for XP, and after installation of Windows, I had about 54GB left. So overall, I had 125GB total left for files and programs and such.

 

A fair amount of space can be recovered in OS X by removing additional language support, printer drivers, etc. you don't need (at least a couple gigs). And if you don't use the iLife apps, a lot of space is taken up by things like GarageBand files, iMovie templates, etc.

 

It always comes down to what you can budget for, and what your future needs will be. It is true though, the extra $500 spent now does probably mean more longevity down the road, but I think the base model will do just fine too. But again, it would depend on the apps/games one might expect to use in the future.......... if one can definitely afford it, it does make sense to spend it, but if it is difficult to spend the extra $500, I think someone would still do just fine with the base model MBP.

 

You know you want the 2.4 model Zadillo! Better MBP >>> NVIDIA Geforce 8800 Ultra!

 

What is everyone's take on the glossy vs. antiglare versions of the display?

I know it's more of a personal decision, but I wanted everyone's opinion who owns one and seen both.

 

Heh, well, I'm still thinking about that....

Right now, I've got around $4000 saved up for the purpose of getting a laptop + building a new desktop PC.

My current PC that I built a few years ago is kind of getting long in the tooth; socket 754 athlon 64 3400+, AGP 6800GT, 1.5GB of RAM, etc.

Obviously the coolest thing to do would be to get the 2.4GHz MBP and build a crazy PC, but I'd like to keep things reasonable.

One thing I've found is that as much as I like the idea of having a laptop I can play games well on, I've found that realistically I don't usually find themselves in that many situations where I would actually use a laptop for that purpose. When I'm at work or school, I just don't really ever have an opportunity to sit there playing any intensive 3D games, and when I'm at home, there isn't a really good reason to play a game on my laptop when I can do the same on my desktop.

And when I think that the $500 difference between the two MBP's would buy me an 8800GTS 640MB GPU for my desktop PC build, it seems like a more practical use of the money.

I honestly expect to primarily use the MBP more for other purposes; I like the idea that I'll be able to play some games, but I'd be fine playing with maybe lower quality settings when it did come up.

 

I really don't know how can one replace the right click of the mouse in MBP as well as on the touchpad while using XP. I'll surely miss the copy/cut/paste option and the save as option and open in new tab as well.. or am I wrong here ?

well some of us do not need/have a desktop anymore so..

 

You can use a mouse with a second button for right clicking in OS X. Even Apple's own mighty mouse has a second button.

You will have to do a keystroke along with the single button on the MBP when just using the touchpad for the context-sensitive right click.

 

Honestly, with the new displays, they both look very good to me. The glossy certainly does give an extra sort of "shiny" appearance that maybe does add a bit to movies and photos (kind of like looking at a photo printed on glossy vs. matte paper).

I went to the Apple Store and set the 9-minute Ratatouille preview playing on both the glossy and matte versions..... honestly, they didn't seem that different to me, and even with the matte screen, the colors were still great and the detail was nice and crisp.

I think the perk for me with the matte is that reflections from overhead lights weren't so noticeable. Especially when using it in an office or library, it is nice to not have that distraction.

So normally I think I'd choose the matte screen option.

 

Oh that's good to hear then.. I thought I lost all these options in XP ..

 

I had thought the mouse driver in Boot Camp did enable support under Windows for the same two-finger right-clicking and two-finger scrolling as in OS X.... is that not right?

 

Oh, I forgot that you can have two fingers on the touch pad to change the single button into a right-click option! My bad, I just made the switch over to a MBP (actually, it's arriving here on Tuesday the 19th).

I hope that you can do the same two-finger scrolling in XP/Vista under bootcamp, but I have never heard of that. That would be a great bonus if we can do that in Windows.

This switch of mine is sounding better and better all the time!

 

BUMP!!!!!!!!!!

 

vartaxe, you really should try asking your questions one at a time. You've laid out a single post with 10 separate questions, and I think it will be hard for anyone to answer them all at once.

Also, many of the questions you've asked have been answered in dedicated threads and some are frankly just not known (i.e. overclocking abilities..... overclocking a machine like the MBP isn't a great idea anyway).

And some are general questions (5400rpm drives vs 7200rpm drives).

Pick a question, ask it, then ask the next. You're more likely to get a response.........

 

Well, very few laptops have WUXGA in the 15.4" range - the majority of them being top-end gaming or business laptops. So even if you had a normal WSXGA+ 15.4" laptop, you still wouldn't be able to view 1080p at full size.

Yep. About 6 weeks of shipping time difference

Do you do any processor intensive stuff, like encoding? Otherwise you won't even feel the difference.

 

thanks. didn't know about this. my other worry is about the heat.. there are no admission vents at all in this machine and the only evac vent is on the back side between the hinges

 

As for heat, yes, those big vents at the back are the primary vents.

For the rest, as the entire case is metal, which is an excellent conductor of heat, that is sort of how most of the heat is expelled.

 

Did you know know, if you dab some oil on the palm rest and crack an egg over it..it'll fry in less than a minute?


...

...

and before someone asks, no...not really. Although my old Thinkpad probably could've

 

I am getting ready to make the switch from the PC world to the Mac with the new MBP, however there are two configurations (not to mention price differences) of the MBP I am loosing sleep over. Which would give me better performance....the 2.2ghz 128mb VRAM with a 7200rpm hd or the 2.4ghz 256mb VRAM with a 5400rpm hd? I do a lot of photoshop/image editing/data processing at work. Any opinions on the matter would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

 

whats the time response for the led backlit screen?

16 ms

even if the max screen resolution is 1440*900 can it still show full hd videos with good quality? (1920*1080)

Yes, they will be downscaled but will still look great

are the overclock capabilities in macbook pro good? (cpu and gpu)

check the apple section. Some members have posted their overclocking results.

hdd 5400rpm vs. 7200rpm are there big diferences?

when moving large files yes, while just surfing the web, no.

gpu 128mb vs. 256mb are there big diferences?

it depends, in some cases their is no difference, but it other cases the difference is quite large. This could be due to immature drivers.


cpu 2,2ghz vs. 2,4ghz are there big diferences?

no

vista performance test in each 2,2ghz and 2,4ghz version?

again check the apple section. many members have posted their results

any chance to play future games hits like crisis on my macbookpro?

It will most likely run crysis at medium settings.

 

I am sure i could have done it on my brother's P4 laptop

 

Does anybody know if the 8600's are 128bit or 256bit?

 

I believe they are 128 bit.

 

What aps did you guys use to increase the clock speed of the GPU?

 

ATI tool or nTune are popular overclocking apps.

 

So are these "LED" monitors going to be standard on future laptops? How about desktop monitors?

 

Probably. Apple has said they are planning on transitioning all of their laptops and desktop displays to LED-backlighting.

I believe HP has said they will be doing it in Q4 of this year.

And more companies are starting to use them as well (i.e. I think the upcoming Dell XPSM1330 is supposed to have an LED-backlit display).

Sony of course has been using them for a while on premium SZ models and the TX and TZ laptops, and hopefully they will start using them on other laptops as well.

-Zadillo

 

I went to see the new MacBook Pros at the University bookstore yesterday, and I was pretty amazed, and not only by the brightness of the LED screen. These seem to be much *much* cooler than the older Core Duo MBPs. I went at about 3pm, so 6 hours after the store opened and I'm assuming 6hours that the MBP was turned on. It was just as cool as the 14" T60 that was sitting right next to it! Before, when I went at around noon, the MBPs would be really burning hot. So I guess Apple has solved all of its cooling issues

 

i just want that they update the gpu to 8700gt xD