$1799 iMac FASTER than $1999?!

eroxx · Jan 14, 2013, 08:10 AM

Did you guys see the macworld article?

http://www.macworld.co.uk/mac/news/?newsid=3420278

Confuzzzed · Jan 14, 2013, 08:22 AM

In summary this article claims the 3.2GHz Core i5 of the top-end 27" iMac to be inferior to the 2.9GHz Core i5 of the entry level version.

The only other difference in the machines being the GPUs.

As someone who is about to receive the 3.2GHz Core i5 iMac, these are not results I wanted to see but perhaps I am not going to tighten the noose just yet. There's lies, damn lies and then there's statistics. I am sure the tests they run have more to do with the HDD than anything else. Perhaps luck of the draw? Mine sports fusion anyway, so hoping it's got a bit more zip

ybz90 · Jan 14, 2013, 08:29 AM

The difference is extremely minor and almost certainly due to the hard drives. Furthermore, these results shouldn't be surprising at all as the two models are nearly identical, one being the 3470 and the other is the i5 3470S, differing in just 0.3GHz. For all intents and purposes, the performance difference between the two is negligible anyway.

pauldy · Jan 14, 2013, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eroxx

Did you guys see the macworld article?

http://www.macworld.co.uk/mac/news/?newsid=3420278

NM I misread the i5 3.2 vs i5 2.9.

oldgeezer · Jan 14, 2013, 08:34 AM

The review attributes the speed difference to the Seagate Barracuda drive vs the Western drive. I'd like to see the same tests with each iMac sporting the same drive - preferably the fusion drive.

You don't have to read between the lines to determine that their testing methodology is for overall speed and not a measure of CPU/GPU performance alone and they state that the Cinebench tests of CPU performance show the higher end processor to be 7% faster.

Arman · Jan 14, 2013, 09:11 AM

Still, given hard drives are the bottleneck of modern pc, it is a little disheartening to see such a gap in performance between the two drives.

eroxx · Jan 14, 2013, 11:10 AM

Does anyone know which HDD the Fusion drive uses as it's HDD "partition"?

Mister Bumbo · Jan 14, 2013, 11:30 AM

Just FYI, I have the 3.2 i5 with Seagate Barracuda HD.

eroxx · Jan 14, 2013, 11:31 AM

I'm curious if all fusions have a certain model ...

kflanary · Jan 14, 2013, 11:51 AM

I have the Seagate drive - I found the serial number for that. But how do you check the cache on the drive? Thanks in advance.

Jan 14, 2013, 08:10 AM	#1
eroxx macrumors 6502a Join Date: Jul 2010	$1799 iMac FASTER than $1999?! Did you guys see the macworld article? http://www.macworld.co.uk/mac/news/?newsid=3420278
	0

Jan 14, 2013, 08:29 AM	#3
ybz90 macrumors 6502 Join Date: Jul 2009	The difference is extremely minor and almost certainly due to the hard drives. Furthermore, these results shouldn't be surprising at all as the two models are nearly identical, one being the 3470 and the other is the i5 3470S, differing in just 0.3GHz. For all intents and purposes, the performance difference between the two is negligible anyway. __________________ Buy my Thunderbolt Display and Drobo (and other cool stuff)!
	1

Jan 14, 2013, 09:11 AM	#6
Arman macrumors regular Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: SoCal	Still, given hard drives are the bottleneck of modern pc, it is a little disheartening to see such a gap in performance between the two drives. __________________ Late 2012 27" iMac 3.4Ghz, 32GB, 1TB fusion, 675MX Late 2011 15" MacBook Pro, 2.2Ghz, 16GB, 250GB SSD iPhone 5 Black 32GB; iPad 4 Black 32GB
	0

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Jan 14, 2013, 08:22 AM	#2
Confuzzzed macrumors 68000 Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Liverpool, UK	In summary this article claims the 3.2GHz Core i5 of the top-end 27" iMac to be inferior to the 2.9GHz Core i5 of the entry level version. The only other difference in the machines being the GPUs. As someone who is about to receive the 3.2GHz Core i5 iMac, these are not results I wanted to see but perhaps I am not going to tighten the noose just yet. There's lies, damn lies and then there's statistics. I am sure the tests they run have more to do with the HDD than anything else. Perhaps luck of the draw? Mine sports fusion anyway, so hoping it's got a bit more zip
	0

Jan 14, 2013, 08:34 AM	#5
oldgeezer macrumors member Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: Maryland	The review attributes the speed difference to the Seagate Barracuda drive vs the Western drive. I'd like to see the same tests with each iMac sporting the same drive - preferably the fusion drive. You don't have to read between the lines to determine that their testing methodology is for overall speed and not a measure of CPU/GPU performance alone and they state that the Cinebench tests of CPU performance show the higher end processor to be 7% faster.
	1

Jan 14, 2013, 11:10 AM	#7
eroxx Thread Starter macrumors 6502a Join Date: Jul 2010	Does anyone know which HDD the Fusion drive uses as it's HDD "partition"?
	0

Jan 14, 2013, 11:30 AM	#8
Mister Bumbo macrumors 6502 Join Date: Apr 2012	Just FYI, I have the 3.2 i5 with Seagate Barracuda HD.
	0

Jan 14, 2013, 11:31 AM	#9
eroxx Thread Starter macrumors 6502a Join Date: Jul 2010	I'm curious if all fusions have a certain model ...
	0

Jan 14, 2013, 11:51 AM	#10
kflanary macrumors newbie Join Date: Dec 2012	I have the Seagate drive - I found the serial number for that. But how do you check the cache on the drive? Thanks in advance.
	0