2.4ghz vs 2.8ghz...Help!

Discussion in 'iMac' started by msb212, Aug 8, 2007.

  1. msb212 macrumors newbie

    Jul 7, 2007
    I'm debating between the two 24" models...love some advice. Will the difference be noticeable? Value perspective on resale? All thoughts are welcome!
  2. iBookG4user macrumors 604


    Jun 27, 2006
    Seattle, WA
  3. msb212 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Jul 7, 2007
    photos, web, limited video, spreadsheets, etc. but I hate slow machines!
  4. iBookG4user macrumors 604


    Jun 27, 2006
    Seattle, WA
    Get the 2.4GHz, you won't notice a difference and it'll be a waste of money to get the higher end CPU.
  5. Zwhaler macrumors 604


    Jun 10, 2006
    For what you are going to be doing, the 2.4 is perfect. The 2.8 is a waste of money - the lower end 24" is too good of a value!
  6. theheyes macrumors regular

    Mar 8, 2006
    The low end model is the best value for money. And, based on what you say you use a computer for, you wont notice a difference between the 2.4 and the 2.8 so save your pennies.
  7. iW00t macrumors 68040


    Nov 7, 2006
    Defenders of Apple Guild
    If you want good resale value go for the Mac Pro.
  8. newkeyboard macrumors regular

    Jul 30, 2007
    Sussex, UK
    For what type of work would the 2.8 really benefit the user? (I went for the 2.4 version with 2 GB upgrade. Great value!).
  9. ascender macrumors 68020

    Dec 8, 2005
    Looks like you're paying a lot more for the extra RAM, HDD and CPU jump. RAM seems to be much cheaper elsewhere and most people tend to add an external HDD these days, so it does seem like a fairly big premium to pay for the CPU speed.
  10. MIDI_EVIL macrumors 65816


    Jan 23, 2006
    You can upgrade the lower end 24" with the 2.8 Extreme.
  11. Flaki macrumors member

    May 14, 2007
    how much does 2.8 Intel extreme cost in store?

    didn't find the exact CPU model...
  12. Mollemand macrumors regular

    Aug 1, 2007
    I will go for the 2.8GHz. It is a 16% performance increase over the 2.4GHz, something that I believe you will notice.

    The processor is not something you are likely to upgrade in an iMac, and OSX is a hungry servant... I think the $250 are well spend. I don't want to spend the next two years thinking what might have been for $250 more.

    If you want to minimize cost, you can chose the 2.8GHz BTO upgrade on the 2.4GHz version, and then buy the last GB of RAM from a third-party vendor. It is the same RAM-spec as the old iMac. That is doable for the $150 price-cut, with money left to spend.

    I think of it this way: I was ready to spend a lot more on the old 2.4GHz, and get much less. In that light the 2.8 looks pretty-darn-cheap.

    That is my take on the story...
  13. Mollemand macrumors regular

    Aug 1, 2007
    If any of them it is the X7800. The iMac uses the intel mobile technology normally designated the product code T7XXX. The X in X7800 signifies that this is an extreme version...

    Update: The X7800 is listed as a 2.6GHz. I believe the one in the iMac is the 2.8GHz X7900. I do not think that it is on the general marked yet.

    The QX6800 is a quad-core and dare I say MUCH faster processor, only to be found in the pc-guy's room. It is however running way too hot for iMac application, at least with a reasonable noise level. Think of it as a 2.66 GHz Xeon Quad core, made for single processor configuration only. This processor range is normally designated the product code Q6XXX - a 4 core derivative from the 2 core family E6XXX. A processor family sadly neglected by Apple.
  14. bonafide macrumors regular

    Feb 26, 2007
    And that's exactly what I did...
  15. deepcdiver macrumors newbie

    Aug 10, 2007
    Not a quad core ????

    Please put this in English for us mo-rons....The new Imac 2.8 Extreme is NOT a quad core??? I did a google search and came up w/ intel quad core info....bummer if it's dual core, I will get the 2.4 or search for a used Power Mac :(

  16. rainydays macrumors 6502a

    Nov 6, 2006
    I was thinking about getting the 2.8GHz, but I opted for 4GB of ram instead (bought elsewhere). I couldn't afford both.

    I do have some regrets about not getting the 2.8 since the CPU isn't upgradable. But I think I'll be fine.
    In music production I max out the CPU all the time. And the 0.4 would certainly result in being able to have a few more tracks running.
    However, since I also work with large images, the 4GB of RAM will make a difference.

    I guess I should have gone with the 2.8GHz and buy the RAM later on. But I've already ordered it now.

    Oh well. It will be faster than my MacBook anyhow.
  17. bluedoggiant macrumors 68030


    Jul 13, 2007
    MD & ATL,GA
    the second option:
    Intel® Core™2 Extreme mobile processor
    Experience the world's highest performing mobile processor¹. Bar none. Now you have the performance to play the latest multi-threaded games anywhere, with the Intel® Core™2 Extreme dual-core mobile processor X7800.

    * 4 MB of shared L2 cache
    * 800 MHz front-side bus
  18. alaskakaz macrumors newbie

    Aug 14, 2007
    Difference of $250. Why not get the 2GB and the extra disk space?
  19. Dimwhit macrumors 68000


    Apr 10, 2007
    I get a new Mac every 4 or 5 years. So I buy the fastest machine possible with the money I have. It so happens I had enough for the 2.8, so I ordered it. If you plan on keeping it until it's no longer usable, I'd go with the 2.8. If you have the money for it.

    Otherwise, the 2.4 would probably be fine.
  20. gord macrumors newbie

    Aug 20, 2007
    2.4 gig imac vs 2.8gig

    I noticed that the general recommendation by most was 2.4 gig. In my situation I was planning on purchasing a canon hv20 hd camcorder to make videos of my grand children. My current machine is a 1.6 gig G5 and it is not powerful enough to run the new iphoto 8. I'm not sure whether it has enough power to edit hd video using iphoto hd 5. Most of my videos are 3 to 5 minutes in length. Grandchildren and their parents have short attention spans. Do I need to upgrade?
  21. BWhaler macrumors 68030


    Jan 8, 2003
    All I know is the 2.8 absolutely screams.

    I loaded up the memory, and I just can't get over how fast this computer is.

Share This Page