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

2017 27" iMac buying help

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

petew89

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jul 9, 2018
12
3
Hi all,

I'll be replacing my old 13" 2012 MBP (2.9GHz i7) soon and looking at a 27" iMac. Looking at some recommendations based on the way I use my Mac.

Most of my work is frontend web dev stuff, so a lot of in-browser Wordpress work. Other than this, and other basic tasks (Mail, Pages, Calendar, Notes, Reminders, etc) I occasionally use Photoshop for super basic editing (resizing, save to web, etc). I also tinker in GarageBand every now and then.

I use a 27" Thunderbolt display as the main screen with my current 13" MBP, and intend to keep using it as a second monitor with the 27" iMac. Not sure if this will have an impact on what processor and/or graphics I'll be needing?

For the new Mac, my initial thought was to go for the base model 3.4GHz i5 2017 iMac with SSD and as much RAM as I can afford.

My main questions are:
1. For what I'm doing, will 3.4GHz i5 be suitable? Is there any reason I'd need a faster processor or to upgrade to i7? I've read that i5 is known to run quieter, which is definitely a plus, and a large part of the reason I'm leaning that way. I'm not doing heavy duty photo/movie/music editing, so I assume i5 will be fine?
2. As above, what specs (if any) do I need to take into consideration if I'll be using the 27" Thunderbolt display as a second monitor to the 27" iMac's 5k display?

Cheers
 
I'm still in process of deciding myself, so can't really help you with performance too much. From my knowledge, I think the 3.4 i5 (7600) would be enough, heat much less and be quieter. (I will go for the 3.8 i5 (7600k) because of the gpu (580) as I also want to do some gaming on top of the day to day stuff.

My advice would be to wait if you can a couple of months until the 2018 models come out. You will get current ones for cheaper of improved ones at the same price.
 
If you are buying because your current iMac is giving you trouble of some sort, go ahead and buy now, and I think the base i5 would be just fine. If you are buying because you can and the old machine is old, I'd agree with waiting for a few months, at least through October. If there are no concrete annoucements or rumors by the end of October, I'd guess that nothing is happening this year.
 
petew89 said:
For the new Mac, my initial thought was to go for the base model 3.4GHz i5 2017 iMac with SSD and as much RAM as I can afford.
Click to expand...
Whatever you do: if you take the 27" model do not, I repeat DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, purchase as much RAM as you can afford directly from Apple! Their prices are ridiculously outrageous (or outrageously ridiculous, ymmv). The 27" iMac has a maintenance opening at the rear for upgrading the RAM yourself, and you can do so in 2 minutes and at a fraction of the costs.

Apple's prices:
16GB total: + $200
32GB total: + $600

Realistic free market prices:
16GB total (aka + 8GB kit, 2x 4GB): + $90
24GB total (aka + 16GB kit, 2x 8GB): + $180
40GB total (aka + 32GB kit, 2x 16GB): + $310
64GB total (aka 2x 32GB kit, 4x 16GB): + $620

In other words: Apple charges you more than twice as much as the memory is actually worth. Get the base 8GB, then upgrade to 16GB, 24GB, 40GB, or 64GB depending on your needs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tn-xyz
mj_ said:
Whatever you do: if you take the 27" model do not, I repeat DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, purchase as much RAM as you can afford directly from Apple!
Click to expand...

Definitely! Looking at OWC RAM. Like you mentioned, my plan is to get the minimum 8GB Apple RAM and then probably install 2x16GB OWC RAM myself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: artfossil
mj_ said:
Don't get OWC RAM either, it's still overpriced. Get a set of Crucial, Samsung, Kingston, or Micron RAM instead (no particular order in this list, any of those four will work perfectly fine). Just make sure it's DDR4-2400 (PC4-19200) SO-DIMM memory like this: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B019FRD3SE/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Click to expand...

I have always used either OWC or Crucial iMac RAM, with 100% success with both. So I usually go by price, and you're correct, OWC's RAM for the 2017 iMac is still a bit pricey, currently running about $347 for 2x16, as opposed to $311 for Crucial 2x16 on Amazon.
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
I like crucial, but so far they are out of 8 GB bits, plus the also don't seem to seel 2x 4 GB for the new iMac in case you just want to update to 16 instead of going 2x8 to 24.

Has anyone tried just keeping the original 2*4 GB and only adding 1 8GB, does it still work ok?
 
"Has anyone tried just keeping the original 2*4 GB and only adding 1 8GB, does it still work ok?"

That should work just fine...
 
mreg376 said:
Ok, here we go again. But the OP should be aware that if he opens the iMac to upgrade the SSD Apple may decline to work on his iMac for warranty repairs.
Click to expand...

No, opening your Mac does not void the warranty.

From the FTC:

The letters warn that FTC staff has concerns about the companies’ statements that consumers must use specified parts or service providers to keep their warranties intact. Unless warrantors provide the parts or services for free or receive a waiver from the FTC, such statements generally are prohibited by the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, a law that governs consumer product warranties. Similarly, such statements may be deceptive under the FTC Act.

Each company used different language, but here are examples of questionable provisions:
Click to expand...
​



    • The use of [company name] parts is required to keep your . . . manufacturer’s warranties and any extended warranties intact.
    • This warranty shall not apply if this product . . . is used with products not sold or licensed by [company name].
    • This warranty does not apply if this product . . . has had the warranty seal on the [product] altered, defaced, or removed.
“Provisions that tie warranty coverage to the use of particular products or services harm both consumers who pay more for them as well as the small businesses who offer competing products and services,” said Thomas B. Pahl, Acting Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.
​
Click to expand...


Section 102 (c) of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act

(c) No warrantor may condition the continued validity of a warranty on the use of only authorized repair service and/or authorized replacement parts for non-warranty service and maintenance (other than an article or service provided without charge under the warranty or unless the warrantor has obtained a waiver pursuant to section 102(c) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 2302(c)). For example, provisions such as, “This warranty is void if service is performed by anyone other than an authorized ‘ABC’ dealer and all replacement parts must be genuine ‘ABC’ parts,” and the like, are prohibited where the service or parts are not covered by the warranty. These provisions violate the Act in two ways. First, they violate the section 102(c), 15 U.S.C. 2302(c), ban against tying arrangements. Second, such provisions are deceptive under section 110 of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 2310, because a warrantor cannot, as a matter of law, avoid liability under a written warranty where a defect is unrelated to the use by a consumer of “unauthorized” articles or service. In addition, warranty language that implies to a consumer acting reasonably in the circumstances that warranty coverage requires the consumer’s purchase of an article or service identified by brand, trade or corporate name is similarly deceptive. For example, a provision in the warranty such as, “use only an authorized ‘ABC’ dealer” or “use only ‘ABC’ replacement parts,” is prohibited where the service or parts are not provided free of charge pursuant to the warranty. This does not preclude a warrantor from expressly excluding liability for defects or damage caused by “unauthorized” articles or service; nor does it preclude the warrantor from denying liability where the warrantor can demonstrate that the defect or damage was so caused.
Click to expand...

From MacSales/OWC:

Unfortunately though, there exists a misconception among some users and even technicians that opening the machine voids the warranty.

We address this topic directly with customers via our support portals and are happy to inform you here of the same fact: upgrading your Mac does not void its warranty.

This consumer protection is owed to the little known Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act of 1975. Put simply, the act states that a company can’t require you to upgrade with only its own branded parts to retain the warranty. This important act protects your rights as a consumer and allows you to install upgrades with peace of mind confidence.

However, the warranty doesn’t cover any damage incurred while installing upgrades.
Click to expand...
​
 
Last edited:
Back to the same broken record. I didn't say it voided the warranty. I said that the OP should know that Apple will likely decline to work on his iMac if he brings it in for warranty work and they determine that the machine was opened. Then the OP can take his unvoided "warranty," put it in a frame and hang it on the wall, next to the framed Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. And then he can call @tubeexperience who I am sure will be happy to pay for his lawyer to sue Apple, as the OP stares at his broken iMac, all the while being extra thankful for having taken @tubeexpereince's advice.

OR the OP can be smart, and not open his iMac until his warranty is over, and make use of the iMac's extensive and super fast Thunderbolt 3/ USB-C expandability to add storage.
 
Last edited:
kaintxu said:
Has anyone tried just keeping the original 2*4 GB and only adding 1 8GB, does it still work ok?
Click to expand...
It will technically work, but it likely will slow the memory down since it will not be utilized as dual channel. Dual channel memory requires identical amounts on both channels.
 
mreg376 said:
Back to the same broken record. I didn't say it voided the warranty. I said that the OP should know that Apple will likely decline to work on his iMac if he brings it in for warranty work and they determine that the machine was opened. Then the OP can take his unvoided "warranty," put it in a frame and hang it on the wall, next to the framed Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. And then he can call @tubeexperience who I am sure will be happy to pay for his lawyer to sue Apple, as the OP stares at his broken iMac, all the while being extra thankful for having taken @tubeexpereince's advice.

OR the OP can be smart, and not open his iMac until his warranty is over, and make use of the iMac's extensive and super fast Thunderbolt 3/ USB-C expandability to add storage.
Click to expand...

Also, there's a thing call small claims court (if necessary).

Have you heard of it?
 
tubeexperience said:
There's a thing call small claims court (if necessary).

Have you heard of it?
Click to expand...
And have you heard of the fact that small claims court (certainly the place where everyone wants to be instead of just using their iMac) is just for minor money damages and cannot force anyone to do anything?
 
tubeexperience said:
I thought you said it "cannot force anyone to do anything".
Click to expand...

The court didn't. If you actually read it, it says that the judge award money damages AFTER Apple acknowledged there was a defective part. This had NOTHING to do with denying warranty work after opening the machine.
 
mreg376 said:
The court didn't. If you actually read it, it says that the judge award money damages AFTER Apple acknowledged there was a defective part. This has NOTHING to do with denying warranty work after opening the machine.
Click to expand...

It's easy to prove in court that replacing that a hard drive with a SSD does not void the warranty.

It's literally what the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act said about using third-party parts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back