Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > iMac

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 26, 2012, 02:12 PM   #26
majkom
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by hfg View Post
I didn't "miss the point" at all.

For a mere $200 more you get a machine with a SSD Fusion drive ... PLUS ... you get a slightly faster processor and a better GPU ... all for only $200 including the SSD.

Just what were you expecting to add a SSD option for?

Would you be happy if they just included the SSD for a reasonable (for Apple) $200 option? And then had the other upgrades for an additional $200?
??? sorry, but you really missed the point... complaint is about unrational (from consumers point of view, not apples revenues, of course) restriction on upgrade options, thats all.. not allowing to upgrade (FOR BLOODY MONEY) base model is simply ridiculous
majkom is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2012, 02:41 PM   #27
Steve121178
macrumors 68000
 
Steve121178's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Bedfordshire, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve121178 View Post
What is the speed of the mechanical part of the Fusion drive, 5400RPM or 7200RPM?
Anyone?
__________________
13" rMBP Haswell i5/16GB/512GB (Late '13) • 21.5" iMac i5/16GB/1TB Fusion (Late '12) • iPhone 5s 32GB • iPad rMini 32GB
Steve121178 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2012, 02:43 PM   #28
TouchMint.com
macrumors 65816
 
TouchMint.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Phoenix
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo1mcm View Post
You are right that it is more money, but you get a better processor and a better GPU. There are guesses that the fusion will add $250 so with the extra $200 for the upgraded 21.5, it is $450 more. Is it worth it? Probably, even for casual stuff and definitely for moderate gaming or photo work. The other option is to just get the basic model and wait for Ifixit to develop a procedure for putting in a SSD. It could get tricky if Apple is glueing stuff or screen removal procedure is totally different. Ifixit usually can figure it out. If Apple has to remove the screen to get to the guts to repair it, then Ifixit can do the same. Good luck. Once you spend the $450 extra, you have a warranteed product with nothing broken.
Anyone who does serious gaming does it in windows. Fusion drive does not benefit windows without some tweaking and even if you can get it to work with windows ~120gb really only leaves room for osx and its core programs, win7/8 and a few games if that…

If you are using this mac to game you are going about it wrong.
__________________
TouchMint.com iOS App Site
Adventure To Fate iOS RPG Game Site
Indie iOS Game: Adventure To Fate : A Quest To The Core JRPG

TouchMint.com is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2012, 02:50 PM   #29
thekev
macrumors 603
 
thekev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo1mcm View Post
it is $450 more. Is it worth it? Probably, even for casual stuff and definitely for moderate gaming or photo work.
Photo work would benefit more from ram than anything. This has been proven dozens of times. You need to at least accept that it's a lot to add to the cost of a base level machine. Going from $1300 to $1750 is significant, and it will not significantly extend the life of the machine. Personally I'd say go with at least 8GB of ram and move to external storage if you're going to consume nearly a terabyte of space. When you're working within an application, the difference should not be that great. If it is, you're short on memory, and that's a much cheaper fix.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo1mcm View Post
The difference between a SSD and a spinning hard drive is just enormous. I think that once the Imac comes out, the reviews with the fusion will be unbelievably positive.
That difference is much more apparent when your OS chomps up more ram than you have available. It would be extremely noticeable under Lion or Mountain Lion with 4GB of ram for most users or 8 beyond a certain workload. Things launch faster either way, but you notice it much more if it's covering for something else.
__________________
world's largest manufacturer of tin foil hats, none of that aluminum foil crap.
thekev is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2012, 02:55 PM   #30
NorCalLights
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve121178 View Post
What is the speed of the mechanical part of the Fusion drive, 5400RPM or 7200RPM?
Short answer: We don't know yet. We'll have to wait for a user to check.

Longer answer: It's probably 5400RPM on the 21" and 7200RPM on the 27". I'm extrapolating from the Mac Mini configurations that simply add the SSD to the stock drive specs to create a Fusion Drive.
NorCalLights is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2012, 03:31 PM   #31
MorganJones
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: London, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve121178 View Post
Anyone?
5400rpm
MorganJones is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2012, 05:06 PM   #32
Lankyman
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: U.K.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo1mcm View Post
You are right that it is more money, but you get a better processor and a better GPU. There are guesses that the fusion will add $250 so with the extra $200 for the upgraded 21.5, it is $450 more. Is it worth it? Probably, even for casual stuff and definitely for moderate gaming or photo work. The other option is to just get the basic model and wait for Ifixit to develop a procedure for putting in a SSD. It could get tricky if Apple is glueing stuff or screen removal procedure is totally different. Ifixit usually can figure it out. If Apple has to remove the screen to get to the guts to repair it, then Ifixit can do the same. Good luck. Once you spend the $450 extra, you have a warranteed product with nothing broken.
It so absolutely isn't worth it unless you have more money than sense. The current base 21.5" iMac is often reckoned to be the best value iMac of the lot. The latest iteration has now made it the worst value iMac of all time. Personally I shall be taking a long hard look at the Mini when the time comes to change my mid-2011 base iMac. To spec up the higher cost model plus Fusion as well - totally bonkers.
Lankyman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2012, 05:48 PM   #33
majkom
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lankyman View Post
It so absolutely isn't worth it unless you have more money than sense. The current base 21.5" iMac is often reckoned to be the best value iMac of the lot. The latest iteration has now made it the worst value iMac of all time. Personally I shall be taking a long hard look at the Mini when the time comes to change my mid-2011 base iMac. To spec up the higher cost model plus Fusion as well - totally bonkers.
Well, if only i found nice display, i will go for mini 2011 with ATI... its just dual core, but I would rather sacrifice 2 cores than ATI GPU.. intel hd sucks (yes, another unbelievable fact for me is new generation mini without any serious GPU option)
majkom is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2012, 07:48 PM   #34
toddzrx
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
As for the issue the OP is raising: couldn't agree more. I waited for the new iMacs to be released (or at least introduced) to make up my mind on buying a new one or look for a recent (2010 or 2011) model. When I saw the specs of the base 21.5" I was sort of appalled, especially because you are forced into the high end model to get a Fusion drive, and you can't get a pure SSD on either of the 21.5" models. Sorry, I usually go along with the "well if you don't like it you can buy elsewhere" mantra, but not on this one. And I bet that base hard drive will be a dog-slow 5400 RPM HD as seen in the Mini.

Personally, I was hoping for 2012 that Apple would install a 128GB SSD across their entire computer range, on all models, as the base option. Then, you'd be given the option for more storage in either SSD or HD form, whichever suits your needs most. Instead, Apple has sort of hamstrung the base model because of a lack of upgrade options.

The reality is that the processor is not the speed bottleneck anymore: the HD is and has been for a while. An SSD, or Apple's Fusion Drive, is the best bang for the buck available today for everyday computer usage, and it would have been nice to see both available on the whole iMac range (and Mini too).
toddzrx is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2012, 05:10 PM   #35
Lankyman
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: U.K.
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddzrx View Post
As for the issue the OP is raising: couldn't agree more. I waited for the new iMacs to be released (or at least introduced) to make up my mind on buying a new one or look for a recent (2010 or 2011) model. When I saw the specs of the base 21.5" I was sort of appalled, especially because you are forced into the high end model to get a Fusion drive, and you can't get a pure SSD on either of the 21.5" models. Sorry, I usually go along with the "well if you don't like it you can buy elsewhere" mantra, but not on this one. And I bet that base hard drive will be a dog-slow 5400 RPM HD as seen in the Mini.

Personally, I was hoping for 2012 that Apple would install a 128GB SSD across their entire computer range, on all models, as the base option. Then, you'd be given the option for more storage in either SSD or HD form, whichever suits your needs most. Instead, Apple has sort of hamstrung the base model because of a lack of upgrade options.


The reality is that the processor is not the speed bottleneck anymore: the HD is and has been for a while. An SSD, or Apple's Fusion Drive, is the best bang for the buck available today for everyday computer usage, and it would have been nice to see both available on the whole iMac range (and Mini too).
Sadly the iMac is now looking more and more like a Laptop on a stick I'm afraid.
Lankyman is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2012, 05:50 PM   #36
thekev
macrumors 603
 
thekev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lankyman View Post
Sadly the iMac is now looking more and more like a Laptop on a stick I'm afraid.
It's that way to a large degree. The biggest point of differentiation below the Xeon workstation level is gpu performance rather than cpu at this point. The top options in mobile cards around the 100W level are quite powerful, but the cost to performance ratio is much worse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by toddzrx View Post

The reality is that the processor is not the speed bottleneck anymore: the HD is and has been for a while. An SSD, or Apple's Fusion Drive, is the best bang for the buck available today for everyday computer usage, and it would have been nice to see both available on the whole iMac range (and Mini too).
I'd suggest beyond trivial tasks, ram can be a significant bottleneck too. Basically it comes down to the issue being more one of IO limitations than computation for many ";everyday" tasks. Ram is faster and ssds launch applications faster. I don't pay that much attention to boot times as most people don't reboot on a daily basis. In the case of the imac you pay a massive premium to access this option.
__________________
world's largest manufacturer of tin foil hats, none of that aluminum foil crap.
thekev is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > iMac

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I wanna borrow a charger.... Dopeyman Apple Collectors 7 May 29, 2013 05:07 AM
Can I borrow? Dopeyman PowerPC Macs 12 May 27, 2013 07:10 PM
Fusion confusion. Why no bootcamp on 3TB Fusion but OK on 1TB Fusion inscrewtable OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion 1 Dec 11, 2012 10:21 PM
Don't beg in China: eric/ Politics, Religion, Social Issues 26 Sep 27, 2012 08:56 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:12 PM.

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

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