27" iMac GPU: 256MB vs 512MB???

[GadgetAddicted]

Hey guys,

I am about to place my order for the new 27" iMac and I need your advice. I cannot decide between the 256 MB or the 512 MB graphics card. It is an upgrade of a bit over $150. Is the upgrade worth it?

Actually, will I even notice a difference. If I would, where and when would I notice a difference.

I do prorgamming, photoshop, imovie, possibly final cut, videos, pictures etc... What do you guys suggest???/:confused:

[GadgetAddicted]

anyone??

[ogc]

I think the main difference is seen in gaming. someone correct me

[GadgetAddicted]

I think the main difference is seen in gaming. someone correct me

Hmm...well I'm im glad I'm not much of a gamer on computers then :-P Other than that??

[uuaschbaer]

Other than that it is the case that, because of OpenCL, your graphics card could function, with probably a select but growing number of applications, as an auxiliary processor. It can probably not or hardly be upgraded, which could become a problem. Who knows how long the 256 Mb card will suffice? Although the same could be said of the 512 Mb card.
Whether or not this is reason enough to choose the 512 Mb card I don't know.

[Meriana]

the 512MB is also faster, which with opencl support might speed up video editing more than the 256.

It depends on how often you do things that require a lot of computing power and how important it's to you how fast things get done.

[andalusia]

anyone??

Wow. You were patient. 10 minutes of no replies and you couldn't stand the silence?!

[GadgetAddicted]

Wow. You were patient. 10 minutes of no replies and you couldn't stand the silence?!

My bad...I was on the phone with the Sales Representative at the time. Now I took his contact information down so we can communicate via email :-)

[GadgetAddicted]

Other than that it is the case that, because of OpenCL, your graphics card could function, with probably a select but growing number of applications, as an auxiliary processor. It can probably not or hardly be upgraded, which could become a problem. Who knows how long the 256 Mb card will suffice? Although the same could be said of the 512 Mb card.
Whether or not this is reason enough to choose the 512 Mb card I don't know.

Thanks for the reply. OpenCL is my main concern. I know it would function and the only reason that I would upgrade was if I were a hardcore gamer. If I want a gaming machine, I'd build a PC with 2gb of graphics mem lol.

I just want to know whether every day applications would run faster on the 512 than the 256.

[GadgetAddicted]

the 512MB is also faster, which with opencl support might speed up video editing more than the 256.

It depends on how often you do things that require a lot of computing power and how important it's to you how fast things get done.

Exactly how much faster is it? So you are saying that every day computing would be relatively faster with the 512? I do video editing on a weekly basis.

[rrijkers]

My experience is that you should always get the big gfx card with the middle model. Best value for money, you can't go back later and upgrade it so.

[Cycom]

if you're not going to do any gaming then don't bother. save your $$

[southerndoc]

anyone??

Wow, 10 mins. That's a new record for being impatient on a message board.

[Cycom]

Wow, 10 mins. That's a new record for being impatient on a message board.

lol

256 vs. 512: a life or death situation :D

[Jiten]

if you're not going to do any gaming then don't bother. save your $$

This or you need to attach a really big second monitor to your Mac and you want the UI to be silky smooth. :)

[Zortrium]

Thanks for the reply. OpenCL is my main concern. I know it would function and the only reason that I would upgrade was if I were a hardcore gamer. If I want a gaming machine, I'd build a PC with 2gb of graphics mem lol.

I just want to know whether every day applications would run faster on the 512 than the 256.

Lots of people on this board like to go on about OpenCL like it's something that magically turns your GPU into an extra CPU. Most of it is incredibly overblown. OpenCL requires specific developer effort to do anything and most likely is only applicable in certain situations anyways. At present, it does nothing for you. In a year, maybe it'll be used in one or two applications you use (and I wouldn't even bet on that). But in my estimation, for a machine you're buying right now, it's not something anyone should be making a buying decision over. If you're not planning to play games and have no other specific need for a good GPU, save your money. As for video editing, I believe there's a proof-of-concept OpenCL demo for that, but I don't recall for sure, so you might want to look into that if speeding up video editing is a major concern.

[GadgetAddicted]

Thank you so much for your replies guys! Lol n sorry for being impatient :-P. I think I will go with the 256 MB; I am not a gamer and I dont mind waiting a little longer for videos to process. I do use a Dual Display setup but I hope that would not be affected. I am excited! Who here is getting the 27" iMac??

[lasuther]

I recommend buying a quad core. For $300 you'll get the better processor and graphics card. And while it might not seem like such a big deal now, 3 years from now you'll be glad you did. And if you sell the system in the future have the quad core will make a big difference. I think the i5 is the best bang for your buck.

[GadgetAddicted]

I recommend buying a quad core. For $300 you'll get the better processor and graphics card. And while it might not seem like such a big deal now, 3 years from now you'll be glad you did. And if you sell the system in the future have the quad core will make a big difference. I think the i5 is the best bang for your buck.

Great now I'm even more confused lol. Here are the premiums that I would have to pay on top of my budget:

iMac 27" w/ 256mb GPU - $145
iMac 27" w/ 512mb GPU - $297
iMac 27" w/ corei7 - $447

I am NOT a gamer, I do video editing, photoshop, programming, videos pictures etc...I also like changing computers a lot. I sell my computers on a yearly basis and there is a chance that I will sell the 27" iMac in a year n half or so to get a newer better model. What would you guys pick??

[Maven1975]

Somethings fishy about the 4850 this time around. The upgrade price is much higher than previous generations. Could it be a desktop version?

We shall see in November.

[Jubijub]

I was wondering the same, so I made some research on the topic :

On the CPU side, we have C2D (Core2 Duo) 3.06 and 3.33, Core i5, and Core i7.

Benchmarks shows that Core i5 is definitely the best value for money, beeing much faster than any Core 2 Duo

The Core i7 is good, but I don't think it brings much more speed for its cost.

Regarding GPU, the 4850 is also faster, and seems to be mandatory for beeing able to play on the 27".

As a result, given your usage (power, no gaming required), I would still go for a Core i5...because taking the 3.06 and getting the 3.33 upgrade will be marginally cheaper than the Core i5, while bringing noticiably lower power.

Benchmarks for you to read :
GPU :
http://www.guru3d.com/article/ati-radeon-hd-4670-review/1 (this one is interresting because it shows perfs at very high resolution, similar to the 27's)
http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews.php?/gpu_displays/his_radeon_4670_4830_4850_mid_range_round-up/1
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3405&p=8

Processors
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3634&p=1
http://www.presence-pc.com/tests/intel-core-i5-23179/

[GadgetAddicted]

I was wondering the same, so I made some research on the topic :

On the CPU side, we have C2D (Core2 Duo) 3.06 and 3.33, Core i5, and Core i7.

Benchmarks shows that Core i5 is definitely the best value for money, beeing much faster than any Core 2 Duo

The Core i7 is good, but I don't think it brings much more speed for its cost.

Regarding GPU, the 4850 is also faster, and seems to be mandatory for beeing able to play on the 27".

As a result, given your usage (power, no gaming required), I would still go for a Core i5...because taking the 3.06 and getting the 3.33 upgrade will be marginally cheaper than the Core i5, while bringing noticiably lower power.

Benchmarks for you to read :
GPU :
http://www.guru3d.com/article/ati-radeon-hd-4670-review/1 (this one is interresting because it shows perfs at very high resolution, similar to the 27's)
http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews.php?/gpu_displays/his_radeon_4670_4830_4850_mid_range_round-up/1
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3405&p=8

Processors
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3634&p=1
http://www.presence-pc.com/tests/intel-core-i5-23179/

Thanks for the detailed response. You guys are making me lean more towards the i5 but I do not know when in November they will ship it out. Any ideas?

I currently have a 24" iMac that I have to return within the next 9 days (got it the day before new ones were released lol) so that is why I am stalling and wanting the 3.06 so at least I can return this 24" iMac.

From the links, the i5 defenitely seems like the best bang for the buck. I WILL be running 2 screens so the 512 mb might be a plus. I could cheap out now or spend the extra $447 and get the core i5 which would hopefully have a decent resale value down the road.

As you stated...going core i7 is NOT worth it right?

[harmonica01]

larger memory in gpu tends to minimize latency between card and larger screens

[GadgetAddicted]

larger memory in gpu tends to minimize latency between card and larger screens

I have a dual display setup. What difference will I notice between the 256 and the 512?? I mean will there be an apparent lag or something?

[alent1234]

Great now I'm even more confused lol. Here are the premiums that I would have to pay on top of my budget:

iMac 27" w/ 256mb GPU - $145
iMac 27" w/ 512mb GPU - $297
iMac 27" w/ corei7 - $447

I am NOT a gamer, I do video editing, photoshop, programming, videos pictures etc...I also like changing computers a lot. I sell my computers on a yearly basis and there is a chance that I will sell the 27" iMac in a year n half or so to get a newer better model. What would you guys pick??

get the 27" with core i7. it's only $150 more than the 27" with just the graphics upgraded. you will get it back when you sell it and performance is not an issue.

[GadgetAddicted]

get the 27" with core i7. it's only $150 more than the 27" with just the graphics upgraded. you will get it back when you sell it and performance is not an issue.

SOrry it was a type...it's $447 for the i5 not the i7 :-(

[lasuther]

Thanks for the detailed response. You guys are making me lean more towards the i5 but I do not know when in November they will ship it out. Any ideas?

I currently have a 24" iMac that I have to return within the next 9 days (got it the day before new ones were released lol) so that is why I am stalling and wanting the 3.06 so at least I can return this 24" iMac.

From the links, the i5 defenitely seems like the best bang for the buck. I WILL be running 2 screens so the 512 mb might be a plus. I could cheap out now or spend the extra $447 and get the core i5 which would hopefully have a decent resale value down the road.

As you stated...going core i7 is NOT worth it right?

The i7 is probably a bad idea for you if the i5 is out of your budget. Unless you are a power user who needs hyperthreading save until you can get an i5. And how the hell did you by an iMac the day before it was released without checking this website. We've been expecting a new iMac every Tuesday since the end of September.

[GadgetAddicted]

The i7 is probably a bad idea for you if the i5 is out of your budget. Unless you are a power user who needs hyperthreading save until you can get an i5. And how the hell did you by an iMac the day before it was released without checking this website. We've been expecting a new iMac every Tuesday since the end of September.

lol cuz im smart like that :-P. Actually it was a refurb that i ordered days ago n it ARRIVED on the day the new macs were released. Yeah I was contemplating between the 3.06 and the i5. I dont know if the $300 is worth the upgrade.

[GadgetAddicted]

Will there be more lag with the 256mb gpu when using a dual display set up than the 512mb gpu?? Like would it be noticable?

[gjw4u]

GadgetAddicted, I would go for the i5, as you get the better GPU (4850) and a faster CPU (i5) compared to the C2D.
27-inch: 3.06GHz / 3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo / ATI Radeon HD 4670 - 256MB = $1,699.00
27-inch: 3.06GHz / 3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo / ATI Radeon HD 4850 - 512MB = $1,849.00
27-inch: 2.66GHz / 2.66GHz Intel Core i5 / ATI Radeon HD 4850 - 512MB = $1,999.00

[oftheheavens]

I have a dual display setup. What difference will I notice between the 256 and the 512?? I mean will there be an apparent lag or something?

if you dual box like i do, you will want the bigger card. just for smoothness. you will notice when you are doing multiple things on 2 screens.

[GadgetAddicted]

if you dual box like i do, you will want the bigger card. just for smoothness. you will notice when you are doing multiple things on 2 screens.

You know what I'd love? Dual boxing with another 27" IPS Panel...mmmmmm...

[Bubba Satori]

I wish Apple would have provided an option for the ATI 5700 series. 1GB, 40nm vs. 55nm, 50 watts less power draw and about 40% faster than the 4850.

I just can't bring myself to spend $2,500 for the top 27" iMac and have it come with a one year old mid range card trying to drive a 2500x1400 monitor. Maybe the 5700 will be available in a few months with a matte screen option.

[Hing]

I wish Apple would have provided an option for the ATI 5700 series. 1GB, 40nm vs. 55nm, 50 watts less power draw and about 40% faster than the 4850.

I just can't bring myself to spend $2,500 for the top 27" iMac and have it come with a one year old mid range card trying to drive a 2500x1400 monitor. Maybe the 5700 will be available in a few months with a matte screen option.

Same reason that i will wait. Why cant apple give you 8 gb ram for 2000+ dollars.

[GadgetAddicted]

I wish Apple would have provided an option for the ATI 5700 series. 1GB, 40nm vs. 55nm, 50 watts less power draw and about 40% faster than the 4850.

I just can't bring myself to spend $2,500 for the top 27" iMac and have it come with a one year old mid range card trying to drive a 2500x1400 monitor. Maybe the 5700 will be available in a few months with a matte screen option.

the 4850 is a year old mid range gpu? lol matte screen option iMac..i doubt that would happen

[300D]

Same reason that i will wait. Why cant apple give you 8 gb ram for 2000+ dollars.

Because very few people even need 4GB of ram.

[GadgetAddicted]

Because very few people even need 4GB of ram.

I beg to differ...2gb is very laggy on my iMac...i upgraded to 4gb and it is SO much better!

[Eidorian]

Because very few people even need 4GB of ram.There are many features that just come standard once you start coughing up lots of money for a computer. Apple seems to neglect them for ridiculous periods of time.

Quad cores start at ~$550 from Dell and at least 4 GB of RAM has been standard for ages in notebooks and desktops. Over $1,000 and you start seeing 8 - 12 GB in the desktops. It doesn't help that Apple uses SO-DIMMs for their "desktop" computers either.

[jneedee]

I'm so sick and tired of all those individuals who find it necessary to compare Apples and Oranges - by "Dell" or any other name. It has been done over and over and over again. NOTHING will compare to an Apple; neither in performance for $ value, operation, or just plain Looks (not to mention the fact that it runs OSX... duh). Get over it PC lovers. You Cannot and never will build a machine anywhere near as powerful and definitely nowhere near as beautiful for the same coin. Not even close. All it takes is about 4 minutes on Newegg or TigerDirect or Dell to learn this. And no matter WHAT you do - it will never be an Apple.

As for the 27" iMac: Listen, I bought the white 24", 2.16 GHz Core 2 Duo when it first came out for $2499 and I have and never will complain about it's value. Performance wise it is lacking in the pro apps compared to my Mac Pro for sure but if I were to ever buy another (and no doubt I will), I would definitely go for the i7 quad. There really is no other iMac that will compare to this for probably 2-3 years and when multi-threading is properly implemented (most likely within the next 8-12 months), it will be the best bang for the buck for a LONG TIME coming, particularly if you are doing anything in pro apps - I believe you mentioned Final Cut. Compressor in particular is a dog on iMacs but the i7 will change that for sure. In the end, the extra 5 or 7 hundred will come back to you in the way of resale value, should you choose to sell it and upgrade. The original Mac Pro 2.66 dual Dual Core (Quad) is 3 years old and is selling on average for around $550 less than original pricing in it's original configuration, so consider that the i7 iMac will run circles around that machine and you know you have a worthy long term investment. In the end, the i7 after 2-3 years or so will likely have only cost you around $650. Choose wisely. Go for the gold and leave the questions behind.

[Animalk]

At that resolution, take everything you can get in terms of video ram.

[gattler]

Very helpful thread. Thank you. I reviewed some of the links in this thread and compiled an overview and conclusion about Power Consumption, Heat and Noise of the core i5 and i7 iMac. http://meshfields.de/blog/?p=241 (http://meshfields.de/blog/?p=241)