Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 4, 2012, 10:39 AM   #276
MagnusVonMagnum
macrumors 68040
 
MagnusVonMagnum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBZieman View Post
The point that the guy was making is that the vast majority of computer usage is put to low-processor intensity jobs like Facebook, or word processing, or surfing porn. The fact of the matter is that even owning V34
You can do e-mail on a 10-year old Mac or Windows machine. If that's all you do, a new computer shouldn't even be on your radar, let alone giving lectures about how WORTHLESS a "mere" 25% speed increase is (especially to those that can actually use that extra speed). That is my point, but you'd rather toss insults. Ho-hum.

The point is that a 25% speed increase has real value to those that need it and is obviously meaningless to those that don't. If you consider my response condescending, perhaps it's because the original poster I responded to was lumping everyone into the "25% is pointless" boat. It's too bad you don't get that.
__________________
Mac Mini Server 2012 (2.3GHz Quad i7, 8GB, 2x1TB RAID 0) ; External 12x Memorex Blu-Ray USB3, External WD 3x3TB,1x2TB HD USB3)
15" Matte MBP 2.4GHz, 4GB/500GB, NVidia 8600M GT; 3 ATV; 2 iPod Touch

Last edited by OllyW; Dec 10, 2012 at 11:48 AM. Reason: clean up to quote
MagnusVonMagnum is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2012, 10:43 AM   #277
xgman
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirpie View Post
People complaining and people complaining about the people complaining are a time honored Mac Rumors tradition.

Allow us our vices. :-)
I get the feeling the forum thread complainers are a paid group of professional complainers that are paid to go on various sites about various topics and simply complain and contradict any and everything they find. I swear I've seen these people on every site on every subject. It takes a great deal of skill and practice to ignore them. It's a conspiracy I tell you!
__________________
{2012 27imac-3.4i7-680mx-32gb ram-768SSD+External TB Samsung840pro ssd + TB velociraptors-UAD Apollo/Marantz/Amphion/Bowers&Wilkins Sound-Impulse 61}
{ipads}{iphones}
xgman is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2012, 10:46 AM   #278
kazyctn
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
On the fence...

Can't believe I waited so long for such a minimal upgrade. At this point I'm on the fence between:

The base model new iMac + external superdrive
The high end quad-core mini
A refurb 2011 imac (high end)

Based on these scores i'm now leaning towards the mini (seeing as I already have a display), but it looks like the geekbench scores don't take into account GPU performance... I'm not an avid gamer or anything, but I'm wondering how much of a difference I would notice between the Intel integrated graphics and a "real" GPU... Any advice for me?
kazyctn is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2012, 01:15 AM   #279
monicaholliday
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
New iMac Benchmarks Show 10-25% Improvement Over Previous Generation

I have read their comments and it seems they didn't understand your chart or what's your point. And I also noticed that I guess the improving was reversed? I just wanted to realize this. Thanks
monicaholliday is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2012, 02:12 AM   #280
gnasher729
macrumors G5
 
gnasher729's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by H2SO4 View Post
Trouble is Geekbench scores mean very little. Which one of those iMacs will beat my Mac Pro, (1st gen), in converting a movie file using Handbrake? None of them? All of them? By how much?
From personal experience, the slowest Retina MBP (2.3 GHz) beats a 2008 eight core Mac Pro (2.8 GHz) in tasks taking several minutes. Not in all subtasks, but overall.
gnasher729 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2012, 07:59 PM   #281
MacSince1990
macrumors 65816
 
MacSince1990's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Naimfan View Post
No, it isn't. It's not going to let someone surf Facebook or eBay any faster, and it's not going to let you read email or the NY Times online any faster. It's like having a car that can do 160 MPH that's been upgraded so it can now go 200 MPH. Since the overwhelming majority of people rarely, if ever, go over 80 or so MPH, they'll never know the difference.
If that's all you do with your computer, you'd be fine with the almost-15 year old upgraded Beige G3 in my signature. Why would you need a new Intel-based Mac?

Your analogy is a complete logical fallacy, and demonstrates an absolute utter lack of rational thought.

Using your logic, computers ought to have stopped increasing in speed two years ago when they were capable of 60-80 "MPH".

I don't drive at 160 or 200MPH. But I would appreciate being able to complete FCP projects, Photoshop work, file conversion and encryption 25% faster.


And for the record... I very often hit 90.

Btw.. Might I also point out that nothing you mentioned requires an optical drive or a dedicated GPU?
__________________
Beige G3 w/1 GHz Sonnet G4, 768 MB, 400 GB HDD + 2x120GB, Radeon Mac Edition, ATA/133 PCI, 4-Port USB 2 PCI, 18x DVDRW, MacOS 10.4.11
15" Mid 2012 2.7 GHz Hi-Res/AG MBP 16 GB RAM, 1 TB 7200RPM 10.9.2

Last edited by MacSince1990; Dec 6, 2012 at 08:05 PM.
MacSince1990 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2012, 08:54 PM   #282
coocooforcocoap
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: kathmandu, nepal
Build quality, that's all I care about.

My upper backlight tube just went out on my iMac8,1. That's after 4 years of "heavy" use daily (Adobe CS, MSOffice, FCPandX, Protools, VMware, VUE&C4D, etc.). The fix is to replace the entire screen assembly according to my mac support dude. I guess there is no way to know, but what I want is longer lasting parts for any new workhorse I buy, and I am not all that concerned about minute differences in speed. To use another bad metaphor, I just want the beast to plow on virtually forever, without dropping dead from exhaustion in the middle of next fall harvest, which Bessy just did. From a purely business standpoint, this horse paid for itself within the first year, so 3 years of return on that investment is pretty darn good I guess...ok, happy, but I retired from my consulting business this year and maybe I can get by now with just a laptop (my 4 year old MBP is still going strong, despite 3 logic boards under the first 2 years of Apple Care) and a thunderbolt. But, at the current crossroad, I am thinking to say the hell with media production and real work, and just live stress-free with a phablet and cheap windows boxes which can be had here in Asia for less than 400 bucks. In my SOHO that's quickly becoming a shrine to working class and a museum of old equipment: media converters, tape cameras, tripods, control surfaces, blabla, all I really need now is something to run PLEX, some large drives, and some wide screens hanging around the hut to watch the super bowl on. By now, I was hoping for translucent sheets of smart glass to do everything / anything I wanted to, but I guess I may have to wait until the next life to actually own some of those. A thinner faster iMac just does not excite as it once did.
__________________
 Small A/V Studio retrofitted with new aluminum iMacs and unibody MBPs  but using Android tabs and phones
coocooforcocoap is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 4, 2013, 10:44 AM   #283
symber
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: London
I bought a refurbished mid-2011 last June, the 27" 3.4GHz i7. It cost me 1529.

If these Geekbench scores are right, the only iMacs that beat it are the BTO i7 ones, so for a superior machine, with a 27" screen and an ODD, you'd have to spend 1924.

http://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks

That, to me, makes for a poor update on the product line, regardless of what you think of the new design. These machines should all be outperforming a computer essentially available in 2011, don't you think?
symber is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
move AEBS config from previous generation to current generation? fhall1 Mac Peripherals 4 Apr 25, 2014 10:54 AM
Maps on iCloud.com show isles of Home Improvement store FreeState iCloud and Apple Services 7 Apr 15, 2014 02:45 PM
Haswell: out! "The single largest generation-to-generation battery life improvement" Jobsian MacBook Air 36 Apr 16, 2013 11:37 AM
Previous generation iPhone models 5/5s rex3 iPhone 6 Mar 24, 2013 01:59 PM
4th Generation iPad Benchmarks Show 1.4GHz Dual Core Processor, 1GB of RAM MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 276 Nov 14, 2012 07:00 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:56 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC