Which CPU on 27" iMac?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by coreymlong, Dec 5, 2012.

  1. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    #1
    I plan to upgrade to 32GB RAM. For Photoshop, Video Editing, Music Editing, and every day use, which is best?

    27-inch iMac - $1924.00
    2.9GHz Quad-core Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
    8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x4GB
    1TB Fusion Drive
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M 512MB GDDR5

    27-inch iMac - $2124
    3.2GHz Quad-core Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
    8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x4GB
    1TB Fusion Drive
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX 1GB GDDR5

    27-inch iMac - $2304.00
    3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz
    8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x4GB
    1TB Fusion Drive
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX 1GB GDDR5
     
  2. thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    #2
    Also, is it possible to use my Macbook to install Logic on the iMac via the Macbook Optical Drive?
     
  3. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2006
    Location:
    Bedford, England
    #3
    if you are already planning on 32gb of ram, then I guess go the whole hog & spend the 280 bucks extra to have one heck of a kick ass' mac!
     
  4. thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    #4
    But wouldn't the $1924 model suffice for what I'm doing? I'm just wondering if the extra processor speed would really make a difference or if the Fusion Drive and 32GB RAM will make enough of a difference?
     
  5. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2006
    Location:
    Bedford, England
    #5
    Also on the optical drive..... why?:confused:
     
  6. thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    #6
    I have Logic Express and I'll want to install it on the iMac but don't want to buy an optical drive just to install that one program.
     
  7. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    #7
    Yes, and you won't have to buy another one for a very long time!! Unless, you really want to.
     
  8. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2006
    Location:
    Bedford, England
    #8
    the imac will have a superdrive internally that will allow reading of dvd/cd...
     
  9. thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    #9
    So if I have it connected to the macbook it will be able to read it?
     
  10. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2006
    Location:
    Bedford, England
    #10
    sorry.....read what?

    Are you talking about the macbook's dvd drive?
     
  11. thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    #11
    Yeah, if I put Logic Express into the Macbooks dvd drive and connect it to the iMac will I be able to install the program on my iMac?
     
  12. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2006
    Location:
    Bedford, England
    #12
    why not use the iMacs dvd drive?
     
  13. thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    #13
    The new iMac doesn't have an optical drive though...
     
  14. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2006
    Location:
    Bedford, England
    #14
    Sorry, see where you are going with this... duh!!!

    Yes, you can share the optical drive from your Macbook.
     
  15. thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    #15
    Perfect! That saves me not having to buy an external optical drive. Thank you!
     
  16. macrumors 601

    talmy

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Location:
    Oregon
    #16
    The i7 choice is only worth it for applications that can use the additional 4 virtual ("hyper threaded") cores. I've only found a real time savings with Handbrake. Photoshop won't use it. iMovie doesn't but Final Cut would. GarageBand won't and I don't know about Logic. The i5 upgrade would give you at most a 10% speed boost at at a minimum none (because of TurboBoost).

    Frankly the base model would be fine. Save your money for other things. And even though RAM is pretty inexpensive (except for the 32GB upgrade), you are unlikely to use more than 8, so try running your normal application load first to see what you are using. Look at the "Page Outs". Every 100MB represents second lost to swapping.
     
  17. thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    #17
    That's what I was figuring. I wouldn't use it for gaming so the graphics upgrade doesn't mean much to me. I might by a 16GB pack of RAM so that it runs at 24GB which would be perfectly fine. I think the fusion drive will give me a big speed increase as well.
     
  18. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    #18
    32gb ram

    Hey guys, I found 32gb ram way cheaper online. Is the RAM from Apple the only ram I can use in the imac? anyone know how many pin the ram is on the imac 27" models ?

    the price difference where I'm from is $600 (from apple), or $160 (corsair - found online).

    thanks!!
     
  19. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    #19
    I would imagine that future versions of these apps could add support for hyper threading.....
     
  20. macrumors newbie

    imacanon

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Location:
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    #20
    No, you can use all brands. so dimm 204-pin. http://www.apple.com/imac/specs/
     
  21. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    #21
    HyperThreading has been around for over a decade. If software is going to take advantage of it then it would have already.
     
  22. macrumors 601

    talmy

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Location:
    Oregon
    #22
    There is no way to explicitly support hyperthreading. It's a matter of how many execution threads an application can keep active at one time. Most applications have only a single execution thread. All of the processors are quad core and will run four threads simultaneously. Hyperthreading will allow eight threads, although the additional 4 are only about 30% as fast. Very few applications will use a quad core processor fully.

    Most applications aren't really amenable for multiple threads or require so little CPU resources that recoding for multiple threads is not worth the effort.

    You can use activity monitor to see how much CPU an application is using. In the process display, 100% CPU represents full use of a single core while the CPU display at the bottom of the window is scaled so that 100% means every resource is 100% utilized (with a quad-core hyperthreaded CPU, 12.5% would be one core fully utilized).
     

Share This Page