Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

2007 iMac 20" upgrades?

M

mzs.112000

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Apr 22, 2015
269
128
I just bought a 2007 iMac for someone as a Christmas present. I would like to know what the best upgrades for it would be.
I am already planning on upgrading the RAM to 6GB, and will put in an SSHD(probably a 1TB one). I know these machines use socketed CPU, I would like to know which CPU is the best one that will work. Will a Core 2 Quad work?
Also, will an Intel 7260 MiniPCIe WiFi+Bluetooth card work? Lastly, can the GPU be changed? If so, will any MXM GPU work or is there a whitelist?

I already intend to use the Dosdude1 patch tool to get Sierra or Mojave working, but only if the CPU and RAM can be upgraded.
 
nambuccaheadsau said:
Do not go with a Fusion or SSHD go pure SSD. They are cheap enough and say a 256GB may well be ample. DO not go with a SATA III drive. Samsung in particular do not like old Macs. Look at OWC and Crucial for a SATA II SSD.
Click to expand...

The person(my mother) who will be using this Mac does a lot of photo editing in RAW. A RAW 4K photo can be 35MB for a single one. On her current computer(A HP with 320GB hard drive) the drive is already about 90% full of photos and videos(most of which are just old un-edited RAW's that she has neglected to delete.)

This computer is also to be used for business, since she runs a business from home(other than photography, which she only does as a personal hobby as of right now)

So 256GB will be far too small for her, that's why I was looking at a 1TB drive. Or, at least, a 500GB internal drive, then put her old 320GB one in a Firewire 800 enclosure.
 
mzs.112000 said:
The person(my mother) who will be using this Mac does a lot of photo editing in RAW. A RAW 4K photo can be 35MB for a single one. On her current computer(A HP with 320GB hard drive) the drive is already about 90% full of photos and videos(most of which are just old un-edited RAW's that she has neglected to delete.)

This computer is also to be used for business, since she runs a business from home(other than photography, which she only does as a personal hobby as of right now)

So 256GB will be far too small for her, that's why I was looking at a 1TB drive. Or, at least, a 500GB internal drive, then put her old 320GB one in a Firewire 800 enclosure.
Click to expand...
Quad-core CPUs won't work in an iMac predating a late 2009 machine.

Without hacks, a 2007 machine will be limited to El Capitan (10.11.6). I know you already purchased the computer, but a late 2009 or better would be a wiser purchase, as they can be updated to at least High Sierra and all apps and programs will be at least up to date. If your mother uses it for a lot of photo work, she will be better off with a newer machine which will stay relevant longer than what the 2007 will offer (which is already overly outdated).

Strive for a 2011 iMac since this one is easily upgradeable... they will be limited to High Sierra (10.13.6), but they are exponentially easier to upgrade VS the 2012 machines (which you have to remove and re-install the screen adhesive).
 
Am I the only one who thinks that using a 2007 iMac for RAW photo editing in 2018 is going to be a terrible experience? I bet the iMac is even slower than her old HP computer (or laptop) - honestly, I don't think you're doing her a favor. The 2007 iMac is hopelessly outdated and barely fast enough for basic office tasks and some light web browsing - that's it.
 
mzs.112000 said:
I just bought a 2007 iMac for someone as a Christmas present. I would like to know what the best upgrades for it would be.
I am already planning on upgrading the RAM to 6GB, and will put in an SSHD(probably a 1TB one). I know these machines use socketed CPU, I would like to know which CPU is the best one that will work. Will a Core 2 Quad work?
Also, will an Intel 7260 MiniPCIe WiFi+Bluetooth card work? Lastly, can the GPU be changed? If so, will any MXM GPU work or is there a whitelist?

I already intend to use the Dosdude1 patch tool to get Sierra or Mojave working, but only if the CPU and RAM can be upgraded.
Click to expand...


I think it should be noted that dosdude1 states on his page that it isn't compatible with any models made before early 2008, so I don't see that patch working on that machine. I think dosdude1 did a great job with this patch suite. But I would encourage anyone on an outdated unsupported Mac product that wants to keep the product working to consider a full change to something like Linux Mint (which fully supports the majority of Intel based Mac products). Just because it cant upgrade to the latest MAC OSX doesn't mean the machine isn't still a great piece of hardware.
 
Last edited:
The post is dated Yesterday, 4:49 pm.
The April 2015 date is the date that OP joined MacRumors.
 
Late 2007 Aluminum iMac, right? If a mid 2007 white, abort and recycle.

Do not use a fusion drive—that's just silly nowadays. A 2TB SSD costs $300 and smaller sizes are less expensive. RAW photo editing will be slow enough on this machine without the additional handicap of keeping an HDD in the mix.

I've had no problem with a SATA III SSD if backwards compatible to SATA I. You do need to check because not all are.

While in there, replace the BR2032 NV RAM battery. If installing a SSD, the common CR2032 medical/electronics battery is fine. The BR is the high-heat version and you'll be lowering the internal temps.

BTW, I don't think that upgrading a 2007 is a good idea. RAW wants to see as much RAM as possible. A late 2009 or newer is much, much better as it can be loaded to 32G. Look for an i7.
 
Last edited:
Okay, I was able to install macOS on it(El Capitan), and I looked at System Profiler. It turns out, the machine is actually a 2009(according to the seller it was a 2007, but he wasn't sure because it had no OS and the model number had been scratched away).

It now has 4GB of RAM(since that's what I have on hand). I was able to install Mojave with dosdude1's patches(which work great by the way). Mojave really works well on this machine(I have already put a 4GB stick in there), it's a shame Apple doesn't officially support it.

Also, I have gotten all of the programs she intends to use, installed and set-up. I tested everything to make sure it all works well(it does, and it is faster than the HP). Of course, the HP was very slow when running any kind of editing, the Mac easily doubles performance compared to the HP.

Now, of course, I would like to replace the WiFi card with a WiFi + Bluetooth card that will allow her to connect a phone(she says she is getting an iPhone next year when she is eligible for an upgrade, so I am sure Airdrop capability will be nice). I do think that the 8GB of RAM that this machine can take would be a big help as well. Remarkably, the machine can handle multitasking as is, you can have 8 tabs open in Firefox, and also have LibreOffice running to write documents, in addition to having music playing in the background and the machine han't bogged down, even with only 4GB of RAM. Of course, that begs the question, if macOS can handle 8 Firefox tabs, 2 Office documents, and music running in the background and still be reasonably fast with only 4GB of RAM, and a Core 2 Duo 2.26GHz, then *why* on Earth is Windows 10 so slow on a computer with 6GB of RAM and a QX9300 Core-2-Extreme?

So, I have gotten the list of upgrades down so far:
It's getting 8GB of RAM.
HDD will be replaced with a Crucial MX500 SSD, 1TB.
WiFi card getting replaced with an 802.11AC one.
 
FlorisVN said:
6gb of ddr2 is the max I think in these macs..

1x 4GB 1x 2GB DDR2-SO-DIMM

Core 2 Quad won't work, only Core 2 Duo's.

with dosdude1 patcher, you can upgrade to High sierra or Mojave
http://dosdude1.com/software.html
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was able to get it started up yesterday. Turn's out it is actually a 2009. It's currently got 2x 2G DDR3 1333MHz sticks in there. It has the Core 2 Duo P7550, nVidia 9400M 256MB, also has a 160GB HDD. I suspect it's the "Education" version. It says iMac 9,1 in System Profiler and About This Mac says mid-2009. Also, Mojave has been installed with dosdude1 patcher. Lastly, I need to go in and install another patch, because brightness changing doesn't work. But apart from that, it is fully functional, and runs almost flawlessly.
 
The iMac 9.1 takes 8GB of RAM. I manage two of them, both running Mojave. With an SSD (you can exchange the superdrive to one and/or the internal one) it is plenty fast, even for Mathematica and Sagemath. I used the Macsales drives.
 
pwm86 said:
The iMac 9.1 takes 8GB of RAM. I manage two of them, both running Mojave. With an SSD (you can exchange the superdrive to one and/or the internal one) it is plenty fast, even for Mathematica and Sagemath. I used the Macsales drives.
Click to expand...

Ok, so the machine is now ready. I've gotten everything all set-up. The only things that need to be done at a future date are, 1st upgrading the RAM to the full 8GB, 2nd is, it needs an SSD(I think a Crucial MX500 1TB should work). Also, I will likely replace the built-in WiFi card with a Bluetooth+WiFi one(Intel 7260 is the best MiniPCIe one there is right now). Also, the superdrive will stay, though I am researching replacement slot-loading drives, hopefully ones that will read Blu-ray discs.

Last question is, do any 2009 iMac's have multiple MiniPCIe slot's? I am interested in purchasing another one(but the new one isn't going to be a gift for, it will be a replacement for my 24" TV), I want to know if those MiniPCIe-eGPU(just look up "MiniPCIe to eGPU") things, will work with an iMac? Though, some modifications would need to be done to the back case to run the eGPU cable.
 
OP wrote:
"The person(my mother) who will be using this Mac does a lot of photo editing in RAW. A RAW 4K photo can be 35MB for a single one."

Ummmm....
For handling files like that, you should have bought your mom a 2017 iMac, and NOT a 2007 one...
 
I wouldn't invest too much in this machine given its age and limitations. Now, if you were to buy an iMac newer than, say, 2010 or 2012, I can see upgrades and such.
 
Fishrrman said:
OP wrote:
"The person(my mother) who will be using this Mac does a lot of photo editing in RAW. A RAW 4K photo can be 35MB for a single one."

Ummmm....
For handling files like that, you should have bought your mom a 2017 iMac, and NOT a 2007 one...
Click to expand...

Read the part of the thread where I said I found out that it's actually a mid-2009....
And the CPU is faster than the one in the HP. It's got a real GPU(the HP had an Intel GMA with 128MB of shared VRAM, iMac has nVidia 9400M with 256MB of dedicated VRAM). Lastly, right now it's got the same amount of DDR3 RAM as the HP.
 
Last edited:
IMO, Mojave on that machine is a half-assed Mac experience. You've already encountered some of the issues with Mojave on that machine. You haven't mentioned the graphics anomalies, but they are there too.

I would highly recommend High Sierra or possibly Sierra. SSD and 8 GB RAM preferred. In contrast to Mojave, those OSes run near identically to fully supported machines.

If it were just for yourself for a hobby machine, that would be fine, but this is for your mom for her primary photo editing machine and business, and for Christmas no less.

nambuccaheadsau said:
Do not go with a Fusion or SSHD go pure SSD.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

DO not go with a SATA III drive. Samsung in particular do not like old Macs.
Click to expand...
Both the Samsung 840 EVO and 850 EVO (both SATA III) work fine in my 2009 MacBookPro5,5 which, just like the OP's iMac, has the Nvidia 9400M and Core 2 Duo 2.26 GHz. (In my case it is the P8400 but that is exactly the same performance as the P7550.)

BTW, RAW photo processing will be quite slow. In fact, even just surfing can be laggy at times, although it's usable.

mzs.112000 said:
Remarkably, the machine can handle multitasking as is, you can have 8 tabs open in Firefox, and also have LibreOffice running to write documents, in addition to having music playing in the background and the machine han't bogged down, even with only 4GB of RAM. Of course, that begs the question, if macOS can handle 8 Firefox tabs, 2 Office documents, and music running in the background and still be reasonably fast with only 4GB of RAM, and a Core 2 Duo 2.26GHz, then *why* on Earth is Windows 10 so slow on a computer with 6GB of RAM and a QX9300 Core-2-Extreme?
Click to expand...
In my experience, such a CPU should feel faster in Windows 10 than the Core 2 Duo 2.26 GHz in macOS. That's no surprise though, since the QX9300 is more than twice as fast as the laptop oriented P7550. I had an Athlon X3 435 which is slower than that QX9300, and IMO it felt faster in Windows 10 than my Core 2 Duo 2.26 GHz in macOS (both machines endowed with SSD). The Athlon X3 435 wasn't fast by any means, but it was still noticeably faster than the Core 2 Duo. I eventually upgraded the Athlon to a Phenom X6 1055T though, just because I could. That machine now feels like a modern machine.

Passmark scores:

1500 - Core 2 Duo 2.26
2500 - Athlon X3 435
3500 - Core 2 Quad Q9300 (which is slower than Core 2 Extreme QX9300)
5000 - Phenom X6 1055T
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back