 |
 |
How to make the MacBook faster?
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
A friend of my was showing her MacBook to me today. She has one of those 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo chip, 512MB RAM MacBook. It is so slow, I must admit I have never seen any Mac slow as her computer. Yet, she hardly had anything on her computer. If there is no hardware problem, what can she do to make it faster? Apart from upgrade the RAM, is there anything else she can do?
Cheers
Nathan
|
|
iMac 24 Inch
2.33 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
500 GB Hard drive
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator  Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Access tunnel, six feet under the Russian embassy
Status:
Offline
|
|
The RAM upgrade will be the single most important thing she can do.
Max it out to 3GB.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Status:
Online
|
|
What was she running that seemed slow?
Steve
P.S. Seconded on the RAM upgrade. 512 MB is simply not enough, especially with Leopard.
|
|
Guess I finally got that fifth star!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Yeah, I used Tiger on a machine with only 512 MB RAM for a while, and it was paging all the time, enough to be really annoying. And that was a PPC machine - it's going to be far worse on an Intel running Leopard that has both Rosetta and the integrated graphics eating away at the RAM.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Santa Cruz
Status:
Offline
|
|
How about painting flames on it? (Sorry, just kidding.)
Upgrade the ram... it's cheap and easy.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by deeper 
How about painting flames on it? (Sorry, just kidding.)
Upgrade the ram... it's cheap and easy.
oh yeah, even with 1GB she'll see a BIG improvement in performance, but I'd suggest 2GB or more!
FLAMES? how about a wing?
|
|
Macbook Pro 2.16 C2D | 2GB | 160 HD
Mac Pro 3.0 | 4GB | 1.5 TB | 30" ACD
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Oakland, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
17" MBP C2D 2.33/3 GB RAM/160 GB 5400 rpm/Glossy Display &
17" iMac CD|-|15" PB G4 1.25 GHz|-|iBook g4 1Ghz|-|Pismo
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NY
Status:
Online
|
|
I came across this article a while ago. I don't know if any of it helps or is of use to you, but I'd thought I'd share anyways.
The first thing I would do would be to buy RAM. Macsales has some pretty good deals.
|
Macbook 2GHZ Intel Core 2 DUO 1GB of RAM
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
Thanks guys, I thought that particular version of MacBook cannot take anything more then 2GB of RAM, can she have 3GB?
She is using Tiger, and she really didn't have many stuffs on it, should I install 10.5 for her after she gets the upgrade of the RAM?
|
|
iMac 24 Inch
2.33 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
500 GB Hard drive
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Access tunnel, six feet under the Russian embassy
Status:
Offline
|
|
It can address up to 3GB.
Upgrade RAM first, then install Leopard.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
I would get the RAM first. Run Tiger and see how it is. If it works OK and she's DESPERATE to try Leopard, then go ahead, otherwise I'd stick with Tiger for just a bit.
|
|
Backups are like guns and condoms. It's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
RAM's the best way to get less frustration out of a laptop.
After that, put in a larger and faster HD, satisfaction level will go way up.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Status:
Offline
|
|
I know already that I can't top "speed holes," so I'm not going to try.  BUT! I did want to pipe in and suggest the ol' delete-everything-and-reinstall. If a laptop has had software on it for a couple of years, it always seems to be much snappier after one of those. Especially if the hard drive is really, really full when you start. :-)
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by amazing
RAM's the best way to get less frustration out of a laptop.
And Leopard's the best way to get it back in.
Stick with Tiger. It's faster.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by markponcelet
I know already that I can't top "speed holes," so I'm not going to try. BUT! I did want to pipe in and suggest the ol' delete-everything-and-reinstall. If a laptop has had software on it for a couple of years, it always seems to be much snappier after one of those. Especially if the hard drive is really, really full when you start. :-)
That's more of a PC thing unless the user is running out of disc space. By far the biggest bang for the buck is as much RAM as the machine will take. Then bigger / faster hd. Then Leopard.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Access tunnel, six feet under the Russian embassy
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Luca Rescigno
And Leopard's the best way to get it back in.
Stick with Tiger. It's faster.
Not on my MBP C2D. I bet it's going to be faster on the MB C2D as well. I know it is on my MB C2D.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
Leopard is generally faster, but RAM hungrier - if the computer does not have the RAM to give Leopard some elbow room, it can be slower than Tiger.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Access tunnel, six feet under the Russian embassy
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Cold Warrior
Not on my MBP C2D. I bet it's going to be faster on the MB C2D as well. I know it is on my MB C2D.
You're probably right. Leopard is, in my experience, slower on a G4, but it's probably faster on an Intel chip (again, provided you load it up with RAM, preferably 2 GB or more).
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
I don't think it's an architecture issue - Leopard is faster on my G4 - as long as it has enough RAM. My guess is the G4 you are thinking of has less than 1.5GB?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sitting in front of computer
Status:
Offline
|
|
Just to echo what everyone else has said - more RAM! 512 isnt enough, not even close! 2GB minimum! 3GB if its not that much ore expensive.
|
|
I free'd my mind... now it won't come back.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle/Colorado Springs
Status:
Offline
|
|
Leopard is almost exactly the same on my iMac G5 as Tiger was, but it is slower on my minimum requirement G4.
|
July 29, 2009
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
