Future proofing the iMac

MeFromHere said:

Really? Do you have an example where the base model wasn't supported but systems with add-ons were supported? That would surprise me.

Click to expand...

Sure. Late 1999, iMacs. Only those with FW can run Tiger. Base model stuck on Panther. 2003 17" iMac. 800Mhz is stuck on Tiger and the 1GHz gets Leopard. Snow Leopard also requires certain video cards for hardware Quicktime or OpenCL, although this is clearly less arbitrary. There are others I'm sure.

BitterCreek said:

"Future proofing" is impossible.

Click to expand...

Technically true, but the higher specs you have on your computer up front the longer until it is no longer the hot thing on the block. With macs becoming less upgradeable over time what you get is pretty much all that will be in your machine until it dies for most people.

When deciding on specs on my macs I try to think what I could see myself wanting in 5 years. Not what I need right now. Although with the acceleration of the computer industry that is more a guess than anything else.

For example, I may think a half a T for an SSD is overkill now. When I look at how my drive sizes have exploded over the years it is not unreasonable though.

flopticalcube said:

Sure. Late 1999, iMacs. Only those with FW can run Tiger. Base model stuck on Panther. 2003 17" iMac. 800Mhz is stuck on Tiger and the 1GHz gets Leopard. Snow Leopard also requires certain video cards for hardware Quicktime or OpenCL, although this is clearly less arbitrary. There are others I'm sure.

Click to expand...

Thanks. Those years are before my time on iMacs. I was running my 1995 PowerMac 7100/80 up until 2007 so I didn't keep up with Mac OS X releases.

(My PowerMac got a 300 MHz CPU upgrade from NewerTech, so he wasn't bad at all until I needed newer software that didn't run on PowerPC.)

MeFromHere said:

I was running my 1995 PowerMac 7100/80 up until 2007 ... he wasn't bad at all ....

Click to expand...

Man, talk about stretching a dollar. So how was it in 2007 when you discovered YouTube and the modern internet?

GimmeSlack12 said:

I wouldn't bother with a 3TB drive. You can easily get yourself a NAS or other external solution later down the road when your 1TB drive is full.

Unless you're a photog or video editor, I don't know why anyone needs that much space.

Click to expand...

A 3TB fusion drive will be much, much faster than a NAS. Of course, that requires you to check your pr0n collection regularly, but if you are buying such a good machine for gaming, chances are you are single anyway.

I'm in a similar position, in fact this post just changed my mind about which model I was looking at.

I know the RAM is upgradeable on the 27, but is the hard drive? I'm just put off by paying an extra £320 for the fusion. Might upgrade at a later stage if its possible.

JonnyBravo said:

Agree with this. My 2009 iMac currently has 512MB with an i7 and after 3 years, have noticed considerable performance slowdowns on the graphics side. I'm not a big gamer but I do dabble in a little photo and video editing. And because I have enough RAM, I always regret not getting a larger GPU.

Problem solved though since I've ordered a 27" with a 2GB GPU!

Good luck with your decision!

Click to expand...

Just wondering if you ended up deciding on the i7 for your 2012 iMac. That was the one upgrade I couldn't justify (went with the high-end 27" + 1TB fusion + 680MX) simply because a 200 mhz bump and hyperthreading didn't seem worth $200 to me. I plan to do some gaming, occasional video and photo editing with my iMac. But I'm certainly not going to be a hardcore logic or final cut user, if at all.

I'm skeptical of those who say an i7 will help you squeeze extra years of life out of an iMac. It doesn't feel at all like the kind of upgrade that will make even a year's difference in longevity over the 3.2ghz i5 for the vast majority of users.

kidwei said:

Just wondering if you ended up deciding on the i7 for your 2012 iMac. That was the one upgrade I couldn't justify (went with the high-end 27" + 1TB fusion + 680MX) simply because a 200 mhz bump and hyperthreading didn't seem worth $200 to me. I plan to do some gaming, occasional video and photo editing with my iMac. But I'm certainly not going to be a hardcore logic or final cut user, if at all.

I'm skeptical of those who say an i7 will help you squeeze extra years of life out of an iMac. It doesn't feel at all like the kind of upgrade that will make even a year's difference in longevity over the 3.2ghz i5 for the vast majority of users.

Click to expand...

Hi Kidwei

I did go for the i7 again but for your needs, you should be fine with the i5. When I bought the 2009 iMac, I really had no reason to get the i7 with the exception of just "wanting" it. For my 2012 iMac, I wanted to make sure I had the equivalent because even though I said I dabble on a "little photo and video editing," I really work on Photoshop and will be upgrading to Final Cut Pro soon. What was more important was to upgrade the RAM on the GPU to its max because the current 512 MB would certainly not help for my future work.

JonnyBravo said:

Hi Kidwei

I did go for the i7 again but for your needs, you should be fine with the i5. When I bought the 2009 iMac, I really had no reason to get the i7 with the exception of just "wanting" it. For my 2012 iMac, I wanted to make sure I had the equivalent because even though I said I dabble on a "little photo and video editing," I really work on Photoshop and will be upgrading to Final Cut Pro soon. What was more important was to upgrade the RAM on the GPU to its max because the current 512 MB would certainly not help for my future work.

Click to expand...

Cool, yeah thanks for your thoughts. I read on this forum that Photoshop and iMovie can't even take advantage of hyperthreading... rather it's apps like Handbrake, Final Cut, and possibly Logic that do... While I definitely plan to use photoshop and imovie, I don't really see myself needing the i7...

I ended up going for the 680MX and 1TB fusion upgrades.. 2399 was about as much as I was willing to spend

The only way to future proof anything is to have the gift of being able to see in the future.

unknownking123 said:

I'm in the process of buying my first iMac and considering all the specification options, I decided on these specs.:

2.9GHz Quad-core Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x4GB
3TB Fusion Drive
NVIDIA GeForce GT 660M 512MB GDDR5

+ additional RAM from crucial = £1,720.80

However, I was wondering whether it would be worth paying an extra £176.40 for the following purely for future proofing purposes:

3.2GHz Quad-core Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX 1GB GDDR5

Click to expand...

At the moment you can't install windows via bootcamp because of the 3TB HDD.
If you need it...