2010 or 2011 iMac?

[asarmiento]

Hey everyone,

I've been looking into getting a 27" iMac (my first mac). My budget tops at $2150 dollars (the local equivalent).

I can choose to get the base 27" 2011 Mac for $2150 or the top-end 2010 one for $1935. Which will be faster? How should I go about choosing?

 

[BlueSchizz]

2011 for sandy bridge processor

 

[iSayuSay]

And Thunderbolt .. and GPU

You would be sorry not to get Thunderbolt .. it's the best external port in the world today

There might be USB3 adapter for those thunderbolts, but not vise versa

Simply because Thunderbolt is better than USB3, have more bandwidth and all

 

[Michael383]

I'd get the base 2011 27" iMac.

 

[NutsNGum]

Another vote for 2011.

 

[Dresevski]

2011 is faster. 2011 has better graphics. I have a 2011...you probably get the point. Plus you can grab a trackpad by ordering the new one (or get lucky and have them throw it in at the store if they need another iMac sale that day)!

 

[rockyroad55]

And Thunderbolt .. and GPU

You would be sorry not to get Thunderbolt .. it's the best external port in the world today

There might be USB3 adapter for those thunderbolts, but not vise versa

Simply because Thunderbolt is better than USB3, have more bandwidth and all

Yeah, hopefully there will be Thunderbolt ready peripherals being released soon.

I vote 2011 also for Sandy Bridge.

 

[TheNakedMan]

I just bought a refurb 2010, high end i7 2.93

I got it for like 1500? versus 2300 for the 27 inch.

here's the kicker, I can install an SSD in the older one much cheaper!



I think compared to my core 2 duo macbook pro, I'll be just fine.

 

[MH01]

And Thunderbolt .. and GPU

You would be sorry not to get Thunderbolt .. it's the best external port in the world today

There might be USB3 adapter for those thunderbolts, but not vise versa

Simply because Thunderbolt is better than USB3, have more bandwidth and all

2011 for SB.

As for thunderbolt, the best external port??? Ease up, it's the only port in the world that has nothing that plugs into it . And if only apple uses the minidp plug, that's going to mess things up more. I wish apple put in USB 3, the jury is out in regards to tb port, not it's technical merit but it actually being picked up by the rest of the industry, just when USB 3 is taking off. I suspect tb might have been released too early and us mac users are stuck with usb2 .

 

[worthingtc]

I recently saw the sale at one of the online retailers and the 2010 model 27in iMac with I7 is only $1499--$700 cheaper than what it sold for. And it is about $400 cheaper than the current 27in i5 models.

I looked at the comparisons between the 2010 i7 and the 2011 i5 and saw that the i7 is faster. Sure, no Sandy Bridge but for what my wife will be doing with it I think I can keep the $400.

I am not sold on TB either, since I don't see her hooking up the expensive (when they finally arrive) devices.

So, I'll keep my money and by a drobo fs and upgrade our 2008 iMac with the 2010 model and increase our Apple family by 1.

 

[Spike88]

What's it going to be used for? Most people "fit to tool to its usage", not "buy the tool that one can afford". Seriously.... If used for typical home usage, some small video, some small photo, some small music recording, etc. etc, then get the 2010 model. When one determines their full needs and learns what the iMac can and cannot do, then get the future release iMacs -> which will be much better then 2011 models. For me, I'd buy the 2010 model and use the saved $200 for external Backup and other "goodies" for it. Fit the tool to its usage....

.

 

[Hamilton1963]

At that price difference I would go for the 2011 model but, if you live USA you can get the 2010 model for $1,500.00 from MacMall or $1,580.00 from BH Photo and at this price difference I would go for the 2010 model. BTW, that's what I bought.

Hey everyone,

I've been looking into getting a 27" iMac (my first mac). My budget tops at $2150 dollars (the local equivalent).

I can choose to get the base 27" 2011 Mac for $2150 or the top-end 2010 one for $1935. Which will be faster? How should I go about choosing?

 

[iamthedudeman]

Hey everyone,

I've been looking into getting a 27" iMac (my first mac). My budget tops at $2150 dollars (the local equivalent).

I can choose to get the base 27" 2011 Mac for $2150 or the top-end 2010 one for $1935. Which will be faster? How should I go about choosing?

Well I am assuming you mean the base 2011 iMac vs the top end 2010. The top end for 2010 was the 2.93 i7 870. The base for 2011 is the Sandybridge i5 2500S at 2.7Ghz.

The top end 2010 iMac i7 2.93 is the second fastest 27 iMac right now. Faster than the SandyBridge i5 3.1 2400. And yes it is faster than the base iMac. Much Faster.

For those that are saying Sandy Bridge, yes against the i5 2.8 i760. The i5 2.7 2500S is faster. Against the i7 860 2.8 the top iMac from 2009 which was the top end is faster than the current base 27 iMac. Heck, it's even as fast as or faster than the current top end retail 27 Sandybridge i5 3.1.

Hyperthreading is your friend. After owning the i7 I would not own a Mac without one. Can you say future proof? A 2009 iMac 27 i7 is probably still the third fastest 27 iMac available.

2011 Top BTO:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/462699

2011 Top:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/460762

2011 Base:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/462599

2010 Top BTO:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/458086

2009 Top BTO:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/460086








You would be crazy not to get the 2010 top end model the i 870 2.93 for $1500.00. That is the best deal of and iMac right now.

I bought a refurb 2.93 27 with SSD. When the 2011's came out. Bought a few 2011 iMacs a 27 base with the 2500S with SSD and a 21.5 with a Sandybridge 2.8 i7 and SSD.

My current 'home' iMac the 2.93 i7 27 with SSD is about as fast as the 21.5 inch 2.8 with SSD I had before. It is faster than my 27 2011 i5 or 'base' 27 with SSD.

 

[iamthedudeman]

Well I am assuming you mean the base 2011 iMac vs the top end 2010. The top end for 2010 was the 2.93 i7 870. The base for 2011 is the Sandybridge i5 2500S at 2.7Ghz.

The top end iMac i7 2.93 from 2010 is the second fastest 27 iMac right now. Faster than the SandyBridge i5 3.1 2400. And yes it is faster than the base iMac. Much Faster.

For those that are saying Sandy Bridge, yes against the i5 2.8 i760. The i5 2.7 2500S is faster. Against the i7 860 2.8 the top end iMac from 2009 which was the top end BTO is faster than the current base 27 iMac. Heck, it's even as fast as or faster than the current top end retail 27 Sandybridge i5 3.1.

Hyperthreading is your friend. After owning the i7 I would not own a Mac without one. Can you say future proof? A 2009 iMac 27 i7 is probably still the third fastest 27 iMac available.

2011 Top BTO:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/462699

2011 Top:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/460762

2011 Base:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/462599

2010 Top BTO:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/458086

2009 Top BTO:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/460086








You would be crazy not to get the 2010 top end model the i 870 2.93 for $1500.00. That is the best deal of and iMac right now.

I bought a refurb 2.93 27 with SSD. When the 2011's came out. Bought a few 2011 iMacs a 27 base with the 2500S with SSD and a 21.5 with a Sandybridge 2.8 i7 and SSD.

My current 'home' iMac the 2.93 i7 27 with SSD is about as fast as the 21.5 inch 2.8 with SSD I had before. It is faster than my 27 2011 i5 or 'base' 27 with SSD.

All good machines. Just pick which one you feel best fits your needs, CPU, GPU, display etc. And you will be good to go.