In the Mac store, they have two different iMacs, a 3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo for $1,699.... and a 2.66GHz Intel Quad Core i5 for $1,999. I know that one is quad core and the other is duo core... but why would it be more money to have less GHz? What is the difference? Wouldn't you want the most GHz? What is the advantage of the quad core? Any other upgrades that are must haves?
Higher clock speed isn't everything these days. The more cores allow you to handle multiple things at once. So although the quad core has a lower clock rate, it actually runs much more efficiently and allows you to manage more processes at once. It is a large improvement over the $1699 version.
More is usually better. I am no expert, but the quad core is important if you will be doing gaming and maybe intensive video editing. Otherwise the duo core should suffice. The Macs are designed to be stellar in every capacity. I got one a couple of years ago and now I have 3 and got one for my Mother.
So the quad core is better if you plan on doing multiple things at once? What if I wanted to run a video game with nothing else running, would the duo core be faster? Thanks
You only need higher ghz if you are playing games or if the application only runs 1 thread. Just noticed that the quad you mentioned is the i5 which is the latest family of processors where as the core2 duo has been around for afew years. I'd get the quad i5 no question, the new turbo boost technology on the i5 makes it possible for it to run @ 3.2ghz(for 1 thread apps) where as the core 2 duo you would need to overclock it. Then of course apps that use multicores the quad usually is at least 10-20% faster even tho the clock is slower. Again it comes down to the actual apps as performance will vary but it's worth spending the $300 for the i5. (currently looking at i5/i7 systems to upgrade my pc).
OK thanks. I see it's only $200 more on top of the $1999 for the i7, and another $200 to upgrade the memory to 8GB. It doesn't seem like too much more for something that I want to use for at least several years. But for most basic computing is it overkill? Also, do you think their prices will drop at all over the next few months? And are they releasing a new iMac any time soon to replace it? I don't want to be out of date right away. Thanks
I saw this after I replied. No the quade isn't better for doing multiple things, lots of ram is needed for multitasking, its what the actual app is doing. So like encoding video files or zipping files or rendering cg the quad is usually better. If it was 2years ago and we were comparing core 2 duo vs core 2 quad then yes the duo would be faster for games but now that it's i5, the i5 would be the same or faster depending on the game. Don't forget the video card makes a big difference for video games so getting the faster system doesn't mean you can slack off with an inferior card. Some games are written for multicores so it still comes down to the game. I'm not up to date with macgaming scene.
Hmm, Apple doesn't have an option to upgrade the video card for the iMac. I am no hard core gamer, I just want to be able to play a shooter game without it crashing on me.
It depends on which i7. Intel have a silly naming policy and not all i7 or i5 are equal :\ I don't know anything about the imac scene, only helping on the cpu front as I'm also in the market for i5/i7. What video card comes with the imac? that would be something else to look at.
It says 27-inch model with quad-core processor comes with ATI Radeon HD 4850 graphics processor with 512MB of GDDR3 memory. I was looking at some Alienware machines too and they don't even go that low... I could get a much better machine for the $2k I know, but I've had the itch to switch to Mac for a while. Also like I said, I'm not looking to be a hard core gamer... but if I want to play something, I don't want to not be able to because of minimum requirements.
The "skinny": http://www.macworld.com/article/143970/2009/11/core15_imac.html IMHO - Yes. The i5 is "plenty". OTOH, as noted in the reference, the i7 supports hyper-threading, which is nice.... No, the i7 is the "latest and greatest". [Faster than the "legendary" Mac Pro's ] You won't be disappointed in any of 'em really...... I'd probably go with 4GB RAM for right now and upgrade in a few months - Memory prices *never* increase, and 3rd party RAM is traditionally cheaper than Apple's. You won't be disappointed Cheers, Ian
Thanks, that was a great article. I'll need all the GHz I can to read about the WORLD champion Saints, hehe. Best
Doesn't matter if you're not a hardcore gamer, everyone wants the best looking graphics and the most framerates at high res, it makes a difference. The 4850 came out 2-3years ago. They were the cards to get back then and are still decent cards but might struggle with the latest games. Don't look at alienware *cough* haha. The best bit about PC's is building your own box which saves you $$$ over the big brands. You always have the option of building a pc but using Linux over windows. Also can't directly compare what the PC companies are offering as the latest video cards are running DX11 which is only available with Windoz7. Just looking at ian's link, looks like you don't have any options in the type of i5/i7 but it looks like they picked them so there is a decent speed difference. If you can afford it get the i7 with 4gb then you can upgrade the ram later if needed. the vid card is enough for now but something you would look at upgrading within 12-24mths.
+1 I don't think the iMac's can have their GPU's "upgraded" in the field - I'm not sure, but I believe it's built into the motherboard - It's not like PC's with cards on the AGP (?) bus. Having said that, "don't worry about it" would be my conclusion. Cheers, Ian
BTW - By default these things all come with a wireless keyboard that doesn't have a separate "numeric keypad" - Dunno if that's significant to you, but the wired "real" keyboard is a "no cost" option: Cheers, Ian
Ohh Well if that's the case then "don't worry about it" would be fine because all games that are developed for mac would be optimised for that card
Indeed. It's not a "gaming" platform though IMHO. Sure, there are now some stellar games available, but I reckon if you want that go with a PS3 or an Xbox. IMHO, the (much more $) Mac Pro can only now be justified if you want/need the PCI bus and thence that "flexibility" with GPU's.... Cheers, Ian
I have the 27 inch 3.06 Core 2 with 4gb. It is bloody f^*&ng fast. Zero issues. Love it. Image Unavailable, Please Login
You're *so* out of date And I still haven't seen any "HELP!" posts or emails from you as initially projected Glad it's working for you. Cheers, Ian
Has Apple fixed the problems with the 27" screen. I read somewhere it was a software fix. But some publications say wait on buying the 27".
I heard there were problems with the display too, but I haven't seen anything on mine other than a perfect screen. A few days ago some firmware update came through for the display issue (and I applied it to mine anyway), but I don't know what it did. If I had to do it all over again, I'd buy the exact same machine. I cannot imagine, using the software I've got, needing anything faster. (Ian, didn't you promise me a black turtleneck and clove cigarettes once I switch to a Mac? I already drive a MINI, do I guess I'm halfway to "fanboy" already).
