2009 i7 2.8 vs 2011 i7 3.4 w/ encoding and FCE. NovaBench score?

[feeth]

I do a lot of Handbrake encoding and HD video processing with FCE.

How much of a performance increase will I see with the 2011 model?

Is the ram interchangeable between the two?

Looks like the 3.4 at the refurb store is the best deal by far.

TIA!

Here is my Nova Bench score

 

[OptyCT]

I don't use NovaBench, but on Geekbench the comparison is as follows:

i7 2.8 iMac - 2009
9800 (64-bit)
8600 (32-bit)

i7 3.4 iMac - 2011
14500 (64-bit)
12000 (32-bit)

 

[feeth]

I don't use NovaBench, but on Geekbench the comparison is as follows:

i7 2.8 iMac - 2009
9800 (64-bit)
8600 (32-bit)

i7 3.4 iMac - 2011
14500 (64-bit)
12000 (32-bit)

Thank you!

Anybody with a 3.4, can you download NovaBench and post up the results?

TIA!

 

[hhaydenn]

Doing it now
3.4Ghz Quad Core i7
4GB 1333Mhz Ram
2GB AMD Radeon 6970HD Graphics
10.7

 

[hhaydenn]

There you go.

 

[feeth]

There you go.

Thank you!

Madness got the better part of me and I ordered a 3.4 with the 256ssd from the refurb store.

 

[88 King]

Here is my result with a ssd, I noticed the CPU was idling between 73% to 84% during the test, and never pushed all the available threads. Also the RAM and hard drive scores seems to be based on the amount of free space and not hardware performance. Overall, I don't think you should base your buying decisionon the score of this benchmark.

I normally use HandBrake in Windows because unlike OSX version, you can have more than one encoding at the same time. Depend on the settings, I can encode 3 movies at the same time on the new i7 with average 70 fps per encoding.

My last Windows PC had an i7 960 @ 3.2GHz, i really did not saw too much performance increase in HandBrake with the i7 in imac.

The ssd would not help much in HandBrake as you are likely to store movies on normal hard drive.

 

[carrako]

Here are my results:

iMac (iMac12,2)
Intel Core i7 @ 3400 MHz
16 GB - DDR3 @ 1333 MHz
AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB
256SSD + 1TB HDD

 

[88 King]

Here are my results:
256SSD + 1TB HDD

Can I ask did you got the ssd with Apple BTO? Reason I ask is Apple charges £480 (>$700) for the additional ssd option in the UK, and at that speed its nothing but a ripoff as the performance looks like a ssd from 4 years ago. You can find current generation ssd with 3X the performance for less money.

 

[carrako]

Can I ask did you got the ssd with Apple BTO? Reason I ask is Apple charges £480 (>$700) for the additional ssd option in the UK, and at that speed its nothing but a ripoff as the performance looks like a ssd from 4 years ago. You can find current generation ssd with 3X the performance for less money.

I did notice your SSD speed is insanely faster then the BTO one in mine (96mb/s more). However, I did not want to mess with installing the ssd myself and have something go wrong/void a warranty. So i thought i would sacrifice some speed for peace of mind and warranty. Either way, coming from my old 2008 iMac, the BTO ssd is faster than i need at the moment.

Also, the BTO Apple ssd is $500 in the US, so after looking online at other 256 ssd options, the price was actually more understandable.

What ssd are you running?

 

[feeth]

I did notice your SSD speed is insanely faster then the BTO one in mine (96mb/s more). However, I did not want to mess with installing the ssd myself and have something go wrong/void a warranty. So i thought i would sacrifice some speed for peace of mind and warranty. Either way, coming from my old 2008 iMac, the BTO ssd is faster than i need at the moment.

Also, the BTO Apple ssd is $500 in the US, so after looking online at other 256 ssd options, the price was actually more understandable.

What ssd are you running?

In the outlet is was $420 more for the 256GB SSD in place of the 1TB standard.

 

[88 King]

I'm running Crucial RealSSD C300 256GB divided between OSX and Bootcamp. It is one of last year's top dog, so not the fastest out there but it was half the cost of Apple BTO in UK.

I think the test result was for maximum sequential write speed, it not something we do every day on a ssd like transfer large files. The random write speed result will be much closer and reflect better on what ssd does day to day like open programs and access small files. I don't think there are much difference between the ssd in every day usage.

 

[aliensporebomb]

For comparison...

For comparisons sake:

my 2009 27" iMac Corei7 with 16 gigs of 1333 mhz ram:

I'll have to try that Novabench.