June 2009 15" 2.53GHz MBP or Oct 2008 15" 2.4GHz MBP

Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Location
UK
Your Mac's Specs
White Unibody Macbook (end 2009)
Hi guys,

I live in the UK and am torn between spending £1300 on the June 2009 15" 2.53GHz MBP, or getting an Oct 2008 15" 2.4GHz MBP for only £1000?

I will be doing 'some' photoshop work (hobby) and music creation (hobby again) the rest will be for everyday tasks including internet and perhaps the occasional game, but nothing too heavy as have a PS3 for that.

For what im using it for, would I notice the difference with the native GT card in the 2008 model, compared to the intagrated one of the June 09 low end model?

I realise the RAM is only 2GB on the older model and will upgrade that myself straight away - I think this one is DDR3 as well if im not mistaken?

Is there any reason at all anyone can think of why I should get the newer version?

Also, the way I see it, given the fact the slightly older model has a better graphics, can make it the same RAM and has a removable battery, the only real difference is the .13 difference in processor power and im guessing that wont make much difference - if any?

Im sorry if this has been asked before, but I couldn't find a thread that compared these 2 models specifically.

Thanks :)

Andy
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2007
Messages
79
Reaction score
1
Points
8
I can't completely remember all the specs for both machines. If you quote them here, I will have a go at giving you a more reliable answer...!


Regards, Rimmer
 
OP
A
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Location
UK
Your Mac's Specs
White Unibody Macbook (end 2009)
OK from memory, here goes.....

2.4GHz Core 2 Duo, 2GB DDR3 RAM (I shall upgrade to 4GB), 9400m and 9600 GT graphics with 256mb memory, removable battery.

2.53GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB DDR3 RAM as standard (maxed though), 9400m graphics (integrated only) and non removable battery.

When you look at it like that and consider there is a £300 difference, to me it seems like a no brainer, the older model is the winner as im sure the .13 difference in processor power wont be noticed. I have heard some horror stories about the GT card failing though and this worries me somewhat?? :Confused:
 
OP
A
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Location
UK
Your Mac's Specs
White Unibody Macbook (end 2009)
I think you replied to the wrong thread Sawday! :)
 
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
191
Reaction score
5
Points
18
Location
Sheffield, England
Your Mac's Specs
Model Identifier: iMac9,1 Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo Processor Speed: 2.66 GHz
Why are you thinking of a Mac book at 1300 when you buy a 24" iMac for 1199? For any design and/or photographic work, that screen is unbeatable :)
 
OP
A
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Location
UK
Your Mac's Specs
White Unibody Macbook (end 2009)
Yeah I have looked at the Imac's and the screen is impressive, however just sold my PC desktop for the idea of buying a laptop, so the Macbook Pro is the clear winner for me :)

So I guess nobody has an opinion on whether the extra £300 is worth it just to get the newest model? My feeling is no its not, as the difference is so small, but would be keen to hear what others think?
 
Joined
Nov 19, 2006
Messages
1,774
Reaction score
81
Points
48
Location
York, UK
Your Mac's Specs
iMac: 5K 27” (2020), 3.3 GHz, 32Gb RAM. iPad2, iPad mini4, iPhone 13 Mini, Apple Watch SE

Shop Amazon


Shop for your Apple, Mac, iPhone and other computer products on Amazon.
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.
Top