I'm considering a 256 or. 512 GB SSD to put in my mid 2010 (last ever made) 13" core 2 duo MacBook.
Finally pulled the trigger. Got the rMBP 13 with 512GB. Decided I could wait on the 16GB of ram. I think 8GB should be plenty for my needs. 4GB doesn't cut it though. I've been on the fence since Nov about the rMBP, deciding when to get it. Then I was tossing up the 256 or the 512, and decided, f0ck it, drop another £200 for it. It'll be okay in the long run. I'm already struggling with 256GB. It's no point spending all of that money and then to be still struggling with hard drive space.
Just seen your sig and it's your 3rd laptop. What do you do with the C2D machine?
Koing
Right now I'm using it to play movies with the mini-DP out I already upgraded it to 4GB a long time ago. It makes a pretty decent web browsing and media playback machine and it does run mavericks.
I see. I probably wouldn't bother then if it's not your main machine, unless you have a spare £80 burning a whole in your wallet for a 256GB one
Koing
I'll consider it, let me talk to my gf she's the one who decides what I'll be doing with tha C2D machine.
I'll get back to you.
So the rMBP is your daily machine? The MBA is your ultra portable and the C2D is for media? Wouldn't the MBA be easier to use for the media as you only need one HDMI cable? I have the mini display port to DVI adapter and a optical out to my receiver. Luckily my receiver has 2 opticals. A lot of receivers now a days only have one optical. My last one had about 2 or 3 but it was from 2008.
I don't think you'll really need the SSD for media IMO. The biggest gains with the SSD are for system responses and if you transfer a lot of big files.
Koing
The MPB is my work machine. I use the MBA for home and trips but I don't pay for cable TV just FiOS so I kinda use the C2D as a cable box to jack FiOS TV because my bro has an acct he doesn't use. It's also default GF machine if she needs to use word or photoshop.
I think the P8600 is only maybe 20-30% slower than the sandy bridge i5 in my MacBook Air. If it had an SSD I think it would be a much more usable machine but it's a great machine runs mavericks fine
Really? My C2D 2.4, 4 GB white 2008 MacBook works fine on 720p YouTube, and also plays 1080p rips OK. However, it does it with vacuum cleaner fan mode, and eats battery. Totally stresses out the CPU I guess.I see.
My C2D 2.1, 4GB would CHOKE on youtube . It would also choke on some 1080p rips but would incredibly play them smoother than youtube 720p .
Really? My C2D 2.4, 4 GB white 2008 MacBook works fine on 720p YouTube, and also plays 1080p rips OK. However, it does it with vacuum cleaner fan mode, and eats battery. Totally stresses out the CPU I guess.
Meanwhile my slower clocked C2D 2.26, 4 GB aluminum 2009 MacBook Pro works perfectly with everything, ultra smooth.
That GeForce 9400M GPU really makes a huge difference. I'm not complaining about the white MacBook too much though, since it's a kitchen/living room machine only, and it only cost $400 used (plus SSD and memory).
Yes my white C2D 2.1 4GB 256GB SSD would choke on youtube at times. It will play rips fine for the most part but it would stutter at times which was really annoying. Yes the fan is really blowing hard as well. Yeah the graphics is much better on your MBP.
My dam qnap (TS 210) doesn't work with mavericks for Time Machine . I've already spent about 3hrs trying to get it to work and there are issues with it and Mavericks. It would work fine on 10.6 on my C2D.
I've taken out the SSD from my C2D and transferred pretty much everything to my rMBP now. Only a few small things. Then to sync my iPhone 5 to this rMBP.
Koing
Really? My C2D 2.4, 4 GB white 2008 MacBook works fine on 720p YouTube, and also plays 1080p rips OK. However, it does it with vacuum cleaner fan mode, and eats battery. Totally stresses out the CPU I guess.
Meanwhile my slower clocked C2D 2.26, 4 GB aluminum 2009 MacBook Pro works perfectly with everything, ultra smooth.
That GeForce 9400M GPU really makes a huge difference. I'm not complaining about the white MacBook too much though, since it's a kitchen/living room machine only, and it only cost $400 used (plus SSD and memory).
There must be some kind of architectural difference between the 2.26 in the MBP and the 2.4 in the MB
The 2.4 in my Macbook (a 2010) should be faster than a 2.4 from 2008, I haven't checked the ark but I'm pretty sure there are some difference between older C2D and newer.
Flash can be hardware accelerated, but you have to have certain GPU. Does choking one have integrated graphics?
Good point, the 2010 macbook has a geforce GT320 but it's at least somewhat integrated because it has no vram
What does the 2008 macbook have?
Intel GMA X3100 with 144MB of RAM which is shared with main memory. I guess if you bought it used in Spring 2008 it could be an Intel GMA 950 card, which only has 64MB of RAM.
It's the very weak graphics card.
Do you guys use the official apple time machine or do you use a NAS that is time machine compatible? I've had NOTHING but trouble with my qnap TS 210 ever since I got it
Koing
Yep. For integrated Intel GPUs, X3100 is the one you DON'T want.
GMA X3100 = no significant GPU acceleration for H.264 video. That is what is in my 2008 MacBook.
GMA 4500MHD = full GPU acceleration for HD H.264 video. That is what is in my el-cheapo Acer.
In 2009, the MacBook got the GeForce 9400M, like what my 2009 MBP has.
Yes, and also, the 2008 MacBook only supports up to OS X 10.7 Lion.So basically if I had waited another year or so I'd have been okay
I got to say this rMBP is very nice to use. The keyboard feels a lot nicer, not that the old one was bad on the MB. Just that it had 7yrs use.
Yes, and also, the 2008 MacBook only supports up to OS X 10.7 Lion.
The 2009 MacBook (and my 2009 MBP) supports even OS X 10.10 Yosemite, presumably because of the GPU again.
That's annoying to me, because Lion is buggy IMO. I would have preferred at least 10.8 Mountain Lion support.
Yes, and also, the 2008 MacBook only supports up to OS X 10.7 Lion.
The 2009 MacBook (and my 2009 MBP) supports even OS X 10.10 Yosemite, presumably because of the GPU again.
That's annoying to me, because Lion is buggy IMO. I would have preferred at least 10.8 Mountain Lion support.