NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Apple Forums › Apple Notebooks › MacBook Pro 15" vs 17" - some questions
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MacBook Pro 15" vs 17" - some questions

post #1 of 14
2/20/07 at 10:12am
Thread Starter 
Hey Folkes, its getting to the time of upgrade, and iv been eying the Macbooks since the introduction of c2d chips.

Tho i have some questions,

is there any difference in quality and brightness between the 15" and 17" lcd screens? besides the size and resolution?

also, a small followup, you guys recon apple with introduce dx10 ati cards in their Macbook Pros when these become available?

thx for the info
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 14
2/20/07 at 5:29pm
I don't believe there are any significant differences in quality between the two different sizes. I haven't heard anything at least.

Apple will not be the first ones to introduce DX10 cards into their laptops because the extra features are superfluous in OS X as it doesn't use DX. They'll make their way in eventually I'm sure, but don't expect them immediately after they start shipping.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 14
2/21/07 at 12:35pm
maybe also another distinction between the machines.

the 17" battery lasts a little longer. the 15" battery is only 60whr, i think the 17" is somewhere around 80?
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 14
2/22/07 at 6:53am
Thread Starter 
the 17" has a 68watt battery according to apple. what would that be in actual gain? taking in to account the larger screen ? Im on a 17" laptop now (Dell, in my Sig) and its just too heavy to carry around, so ill most likely go for 15" if they are equal in quality.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 14
2/22/07 at 10:51am
honestly I think the only difference is the 17" is a bigger screen, they virtually identical, same proc, same GPU, ones just bigger, of course the 17" is gonna have a bigger battery cause of the screen size, so now its just a simple question of large or small
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 14
2/22/07 at 12:35pm
apples site rates the 17" battery at 5.5 hrs vs the 5hrs for the 15"

i generally am lucky to get 4hrs on my 15", but it is pretty close to that.

maybe an additional 15min tops from the 17, since it does power the bigger screen. so maybe a little over 4 tops.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 14
2/22/07 at 1:06pm
Thread Starter 
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/periphera...ros-238765.php

this article spells possible good news for the macbook pros. if theyr getting the dx10 ati cards ready for their mainstream pro's, then it shouldnt be too farfetched to assume theyd upgrade the gfxcard of the macbook pro's as soon as the mobile version of the dx10 card becomes available!
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 14
2/22/07 at 3:03pm
Maybe.

But Apple's never been a big video card company. They'll put in what they need to run their system well, but never someone just to grab the latest just because it's the newest.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 14
2/22/07 at 4:11pm
who cares about dx10 in osx. not me.

no big deal
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 14
2/22/07 at 6:02pm
Like I said earlier anyway, OS X doesn't use DX so it's a completely useless technology for Macs. The only reason a Mac user would want a DX10 card would be if they also want to run Vista on the same computer.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 14
2/23/07 at 11:41am
Thread Starter 
well, the graphicscard of the mac is intended for more than just the OS - games for example.

nevertheless, the reason im getting a mac wont be to run any mac specific applications or games, but to dualboot it with Vista, which is heavy on dx10, and my work requires access to a gfxcard that is as fast as possible. i will keep my fingers crossed they do change their old habits as theyv proven capable of doing when they dropped ppc cpu.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 14
2/23/07 at 8:10pm
Games for OS X don't use DX either.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 14
2/23/07 at 9:11pm
Something to remember about the first-gen DX10 mobile cards (also true for desktop cards) is that the first generation is usually not very capable (except in the very top of the line) of running games of that new DX generation terribly well; it's usually not till the second-gen that cards are readily available that run the then current version well.

That aside, I think it will probably be a little while before we start to see DX10 compliant (a lot different than "compatible") mobile cards. Really, the x1600 is quite the capable current gen card; sure it's not the fastest out there, but for the MBP's form factor you really can't, and wouldn't want to put a more powerful card from this generation in (aside from possibly the x1700 but there's a very small performance difference between the x1600 and it; really the same card, just tweaked a little bit).

Anyway, just my $.02.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 14
2/25/07 at 1:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraCow
Something to remember about the first-gen DX10 mobile cards (also true for desktop cards) is that the first generation is usually not very capable (except in the very top of the line) of running games of that new DX generation terribly well; it's usually not till the second-gen that cards are readily available that run the then current version well. That aside, I think it will probably be a little while before we start to see DX10 compliant (a lot different than "compatible") mobile cards. Really, the x1600 is quite the capable current gen card; sure it's not the fastest out there, but for the MBP's form factor you really can't, and wouldn't want to put a more powerful card from this generation in (aside from possibly the x1700 but there's a very small performance difference between the x1600 and it; really the same card, just tweaked a little bit). Anyway, just my $.02.
1000.3% agreed
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Apple Notebooks
NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Apple Forums › Apple Notebooks › MacBook Pro 15" vs 17" - some questions