Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Thanks for the link. Now I'm glad I've choose the 2.2 with 160gb HD and save that extra money...
 
Quite interesting this, as I was planning on just stumping up for the extra cash, but this may change my mind.

I plan on hearing owners opinions though.

Cheers
 
It's all about the VRAM. If you have no need of twice the VRAM there is no point in getting the mid range model.
 
Slight difference in performance, but for those who demand every extra fps they can nab the 2.4GHz MacBook Pro w/ 256MB of VRAM will still be worth the extra cash. :)


Either way you go, you still get one heck of a fast laptop. :) :apple:
 
Quite interesting this, as I was planning on just stumping up for the extra cash, but this may change my mind.

I plan on hearing owners opinions though.

Cheers

It depends what you plan on using your machine for.

For example, if you run multiple displays, it might be worth the extra. If you run any kind of batch jobs (say, 3D rendering) that take a long time, it might be worth it. If you want to play lots of current Windows games (via BootCamp) and want to keep the settings as high as possible, it's worth it.

None of the games tested are terribly stressful on a system when compared to recent Windows titles (e.g. Oblivion, S.T.A.L.K.E.R., Supreme Commander, Company of Heroes...) -- if some games like that are tested I think we'd see a greater difference.

Having said that, I doubt the 8600M won't be running those games well with full eye-candy anyway.
 
I'm a happy MBP 2.4 user, just maxed it up to 4GB and it flies.
But that test is a bit surprising, expected a more significant difference...
 
Its only 200Mhz....no huge difference, but if its going to be you main computer, or your going to be working on it alot, it might be helpful.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.