[new_apple]

I'm having a small buyer's dilemma here. I truly do not need a DVD burner. I've had one for two years, and haven't used it *once* since I got my 2GB memory stick. This makes me wonder if I should go for the cheapest MacBook, since that would basically leave me some cash to get 2GB of RAM and a kickass harddrive (thinking about a Seagate Momentus 160GB). The 170MHz difference doesn't worry me at all. The only issue left is the difference between $MB and 2MB L2 cache... How does this affect the performance? Of course, it will run slower, but I'm basically looking for benchmarks here. I can accept a 5% hit on performance, at least with the $'s it saves me.

Main use for this MacBook would be Adobe Lightroom stuff, some photo editing in Photoshop (levels, curves, noise reduction...). Some games, all depending on how well it runs (this isn't a major issue).

[Tuoder]

Macworld should be testing these laptops against each other soon. 1.83Ghz vs. 2Ghz is not a very big difference. This includes the cache difference. The very same processors are used in the iMacs. According to MacWorld testing, the difference in CPU-intensive tasks is not large. The RAM 1GB vs. 512MB will however, make a difference in performace. This will be expecially big in Rosetta.

[Simon]

I agree with Tuoder.

I think if you don't need the burner, you're better off getting a 1.83 GHz MB and adding more RAM (do not stick with 512MB!) and a better HD.

[analogika]

The cache difference will mostly have an impact for audio and video applications.

[CheesePuff]

170 MHz per core and 2 more MB of on-chip L2 cache. There will be a difference, and you will notice it.

It's also only $200 more and you not only get the better processor but also the DVD burner in case you need it, double and RAM and a slightly larger HD. Take the plunge and get the $1,299 model.

[phazedowt]

Originally Posted by new_apple 

I'm having a small buyer's dilemma here. I truly do not need a DVD burner. I've had one for two years, and haven't used it *once* since I got my 2GB memory stick. This makes me wonder if I should go for the cheapest MacBook, since that would basically leave me some cash to get 2GB of RAM and a kickass harddrive (thinking about a Seagate Momentus 160GB). The 170MHz difference doesn't worry me at all. The only issue left is the difference between $MB and 2MB L2 cache... How does this affect the performance? Of course, it will run slower, but I'm basically looking for benchmarks here. I can accept a 5% hit on performance, at least with the $'s it saves me.

Main use for this MacBook would be Adobe Lightroom stuff, some photo editing in Photoshop (levels, curves, noise reduction...). Some games, all depending on how well it runs (this isn't a major issue).

I hope by "2GB memory stick" you mean that you're getting 2x1 GB as a matched pair. Remember, the MacBook's integrated video uses up memory bandwidth so you want to make sure the memory operates in dual-channel mode (matched pairs).

[mduell]

Anandtech looked into this: AnandTech: Intel's Core 2 Extreme & Core 2 Duo: The Empire Strikes Back

Best case is a 10% speedup (Divx encoding), worst case is a 0.5% speedup (Cinebench), average is 3.5% difference due to the change in cache size.

I'd go with the 1.83Ghz and 2GB/160GB.

[new_apple]

Thanks, Mark! That was exactly what I was looking for. The weird thing is I might be going for a MacBook Pro (!) - I get a 20% discount on the newest models through school, but no discount at all for the MacBook. So it might be a good idea to mac out the credit card The matte screen option for the MBP is really tempting, I'm not all too fond of the glossy screens.