They is a $100 difference in the refurb store between the 2.16 CD and 2.16 C2D MBP. How noticeable is the speed difference? Which would you recommend?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Which MBP is better? CD or C2D?
- Thread starter jayeskreezy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
For sure get the Core 2 Duo. For that $100, not only do you get a small bump in speed, but you also get a 64 bit CPU which will run 10.5 so much better. If you saw the example in the keynote, it's an incredible difference between 32 bit and 64 bit.
I would go with the C2D.
First the CD versions had some issues that was fixed by the C2D.
Second C2D are faster and are 64 Bit which other then just memory management (which the systems wont support very well because the Max memory is less then what can be addressed in 32bits) but 64 Bits can be used in other methods that needs to deal with numbers greateer then 4 billion. Which may be handy in the future for other things.
Third Being the difference between 32 bit and 64 bit there is a good chance that a further future verion of OS X (American Shorthair) will no longer support 32bit so the CD will be obsolute. While the C2D my still have an extra 1 or 2 OS upgrades left.
Forth it is faster, that little extra 4 years down the line will be the different between intolarable and tolarable.
Fifth if you need windows support you will probably be better off because probable the next version of Windows will be 64 bit only.
First the CD versions had some issues that was fixed by the C2D.
Second C2D are faster and are 64 Bit which other then just memory management (which the systems wont support very well because the Max memory is less then what can be addressed in 32bits) but 64 Bits can be used in other methods that needs to deal with numbers greateer then 4 billion. Which may be handy in the future for other things.
Third Being the difference between 32 bit and 64 bit there is a good chance that a further future verion of OS X (American Shorthair) will no longer support 32bit so the CD will be obsolute. While the C2D my still have an extra 1 or 2 OS upgrades left.
Forth it is faster, that little extra 4 years down the line will be the different between intolarable and tolarable.
Fifth if you need windows support you will probably be better off because probable the next version of Windows will be 64 bit only.
Maybe I will wait until October to get a new macbook. I was going to get it this summer because Leopard didn't seem all that impressive to me.
Speed increase is really negligible. There's a bit better battery life, quieter, less problems, 64-bit support, and option to get 3.3GB of RAM (if you feel like dishing out the cash).
Honestly, don't get a CD. Unless you want to buy mine
I wouldn't even consider to save $100 and get a laptop that it's already obsolete. I had the opportunity to get it $200 cheaper and I refused it. Get the 2.2GHz Core 2 Duo and you'll be a happy camper.
The two things that haven't been mentioned that the C2D MBP includes are: dual layer superdrive and firewire 800. Everything else is sort of "meh" if you ask me. The speed difference is negligible, the 64-bit thing is overstated because the only real advantage it gives you at the moment is the ability to use more memory (3gb versus 2gb real memory). Perhaps it'll make more difference in the future, but that's a long way off really. By that time, both machines will be old. And as far as these so-called problems are concerned -- you shouldn't have any with either computer you buy from the refurb store. If you do, certainly they'll be fixed under warranty.
With that said, the C2D is a better buy for an extra $100.
With that said, the C2D is a better buy for an extra $100.