21.5" iMac Has No User-Upgradable RAM; 27" Has Four Accessible RAM Slots

[tbrinkma]

Originally Posted by longofest

It's a common speed for 2.5" drives. Laptop manufacturers will use them to get better battery life. Now why you'd ever use it in a desktop is beyond me.

Well, given the same storage capacity and platter count, a 5400 rpm 2.5" drive actually has slightly *faster* access times than a 7200 rpm 3.5" drive. This has to do with the combination of increased data density (the same amount of data stored in a smaller space), and the shorter distance the read heads have to move to seek from one extreme to the other. So, if they're using a 5400 rpm 2.5" drive in the 21.5" iMac, it's actually a slight step up from a 7200 rpm 3.5" drive in the old one in that regard.

The most noticeable difference will be the maximum internal storage space. (Currently 1TB for a 2.5" drive vs. 3TB for a 3.5" drive.) Given the suggestion earlier in the thread that they should have put a 128GB SSD in it and let people use external storage, that doesn't seem to be a universal concern, even from people complaining about this particular decision.

----------

Originally Posted by cgk.emu

Configurable = at checkout
Upgradeable = user serviceable

Almost. In this context it's actually:

Configurable = at checkout
Upgradable = Apple considers it a user-serviceable part.

The open question is whether it's not considered a user-serviceable part because it's past a certain threshold of 'easy to get to', or because it's not something you can do without expensive, specialized equipment and raw, unmounted chips.

IOW: Is it only upgradable if you're willing to go through the hassle of getting inside where Apple doesn't expect normal people to be comfortable, or is it actually *not* upgradable once it's been built? Given the fact that, as others have pointed out, they mention the dimm-count for the 21.5" iMac, where they *don't* for the Air or Retina MBPs, its quite likely that it is upgradable, but not 'user accessible'.


----------

Originally Posted by stiligFox

It more than likely has to do with where the RAM has to be on the motherboard. With the 27 inch there was more room to put the RAM in an accessible place, but not so with the 21 inch.

Question though -- any ideas why the 27 inch is almost exactly twice the weight of the 21 inch?

My guess is that the weight difference is largely a matter of the extra weight in the 'foot' to ensure the system is stable. That and the larger pane of glass on the front.

[jalebibai]

is it available in india

[Deejacob]

Or just buy the 27inch version which you can have upgradable memory, hard drive which runs @7200 and has better graphics. 👍

[nospeed411]

Originally Posted by Lancer

Do we think the 21.5" has soldered RAM or is it just like the HDD and Apple needs to upgrade it?

IMO most base model users will never upgrade the RAM and 8Gb will probably outlive the useful life of the computer.

Either way I'm looking at the 27" and will add 8Gb more RAM later.

I thought the same thing in 2010 when I bought my mother in law a new Mac mini.... However after upgrading to Mt. Lion the other day I found it was extremely hampered by the original 2gb of ram it came with . Installed the max 8gb and it now screams again. Who knows what the future of OS is but I foresee people being in the same boat down the road. The computer will def outlive the the small amount of ram it comes with if purchased with 8gb option.

[Lancer]

Originally Posted by nospeed411

I thought the same thing in 2010 when I bought my mother in law a new Mac mini.... However after upgrading to Mt. Lion the other day I found it was extremely hampered by the original 2gb of ram it came with . Installed the max 8gb and it now screams again. Who knows what the future of OS is but I foresee people being in the same boat down the road. The computer will def outlive the the small amount of ram it comes with if purchased with 8gb option.

I agree now, that previous post was done not long after the new iMac was announced and we didn't know the full details of how hard it is to crack open the new iMac.

IMO is you get a 21.5" then the least you should do is Max the RAM to 16Gb.

I order a 27" with i7, 680MX, 1Tb Fusion and because I got Apple Care at the same time they added 8Gb of more RAM (2x 8Gb) so I can still get more RAM later without having dump the existing RAM.

Fingers crossed I'll get it tomorrow

[inscrewtable]

Originally Posted by MrXiro

I'm still on last years 27 inch though and I'm poor now, so I shall be sticking with my Fat 27inch iMac.

Maybe sticking a 512GB SSD in it and creating a fusion drive, will make you feel better.

[malexandria]

Originally Posted by nagromme

There are only 17 people in the world who need to custom hand-install 16 GB of RAM in the smaller iMac.

But all 17 of them are about to post And I feel your pain: you need what you need!

Maybe those who don't want to get hosed on Apple's ridiculous Ram prices may want to be able to upgrade.

[Macman45]

Originally Posted by dribble

Agreed - if this was not the case the iMac would have retina

And that would be fine IF Apple ever get around to a meaningful refresh of the Pro range. I caved in, got tired of waiting for an upgrade that may never appear and bought a BTO maxed out iMac. ( 27") I'm still inclined to think that the Pro is in the process of being killed off.