Hi all Im looking at two MacBook Pro', I need apple for school but/and Im installing windows to run rFactor 1+2! But I don't know which one is the best to the job, and hope you can help me choose! (both are gonna have 8Gb ram) 1: MD322 Apple MacBook Pro 15.4" - Core i7 - MacOS X 10.7 Lion - 4 GB RAM - 750 GB HDD Processor: Intel Core i7 2.4 GHz (boost to 3.4GHz) / 6 MB Cache Memory: 4 GB DDR3 Screen: 15.4" LED 1440 x 900 / WXGA+ Graphics: AMD Radeon HD 6770M / Intel HD Graphics 3000 - 1 GB GDDR5 2: MD103 Apple MacBook Pro 15.4" - Core i7 - MacOS X 10.7 Lion - 4 GB RAM - 500 GB HDD Processor: Intel Core i7 2.3 GHz (boost to 3.3 GHz) / 6 MB Cache Memory: 4 GB DDR3 Screen: 15.4" LED 1440 x 900 / WXGA+ Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M / Intel HD Graphics 4000 - 512 MB GDDR5 Hope you can help me, all input are appreciated, good or bad! Regards Mukendi
Between the two, the 650M is slightly faster than the 6770M. More VRAM typically supports performance at higher resolutions, but at 1440 x 900, the more memory in the 6770M won't count for much at all. The 100Mhz between the CPU clock's is negligible. Also worth noting, the notion that rFactor2 has generally been more compliant with Nvidia hardware. I'm gonna be very common and ask this anyway: Does it have to be a Macbook Pro? Unless you require Final Cut for your school work, you could spend less on a decent Samsung or MSI notebook with a better GPU. Then use the extra cash gained from not paying the Apple tax on an SSD. So much faster.
The only significant difference between the two is the graphics card and at the moment Nvidia seem to be better for rF2, but another update could change that...The first set up has twice the video ram and that is also important...so I would lean towards that one, but wait to see if some Apple users drop by.
Thanks!!! Fair question, and yes Final Cut Pro is a tool I use more than I play rFactor. And I have also been thinking about buying a MS machine. But have to have a Mac)
Good idea to wait and see. No. 1 is the cheaper of the two, but No. 2 has other good things going for it, like usb 3.0, BT 4.0 better wifi and so on, and possible to get hi-res screen too...hmm )
Another one is this, its very expensive, but not total sifi for me to get a holed of: 2.3GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 Turbo Boost up to 3.3GHz 8GB 1600MHz memory 256GB flash storage1 Intel HD Graphics 4000 / NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 1GB of GDDR5 memory Supported resolutions: 2880 by 1800 pixels (Retina) But its about 500$ more...hmm auch...
Depends how much you can afford really and if you can justify the expense. A notebook can never be as powerful as a PC you see (or whatever you call the PC sized Mac) The trade-off between mobility and performance has to be made. Components get too hot, battery life gets eaten within 1 year. For example, the cost of that latest Retina display Macbook is enough to buy a laptop AND a PC. The second issue is lugging the damn thing around, MacBook pros are heavy. Lastly there's the cost of damage or loss, seems trivial I know, but if I had a laptop as expensive as a small car without insurance I would be guarding it with my life, let alone afraid to scratch it. Plus it will lose half it's value within 2 years. Too much stress for me personally, but that's me!
Yeah for $500 you could probably buy, and certainly build a PC to run rF so if you have that kind of money then the cheaper laptop and get a PC for rF.
I can't really justify buying the most expensive one. And yes I have been thinking about buying the cheaper Mac and a standing PC, but here in DK, a standing PC is not that cheap... I'm thinking Mac no. 2 is a good solution, even though I would like 1Gb on the graphics instead of only 512Mb... Yes or no, thats the big question... And again, thank you all so much for the very quick responses!
