2017 mid spec 27" iMac upgrades

[Blythe63]

Hi all
I am looking at replacing the HDD in my old girl with a 1 or 2 TB SSD. I've got my head around what needs to be done, but there are other upgrades available. the i5 core can be upgraded to the i7 7700 and the NVMe can be upgraded, for those with much more knowledge than myself there comes a point of diminished returns, if I upgraded all 3 would it be worth the money or am I better off just doing the SSD upgrade? I have already upgraded from the 8 gig memory to 40 which has helped and if I go down this route I will pull the 8 gig and up it up to 64gig. I use the computer for processing photography and several times have stalled it so I am looking at upgrading it as opposed to saving and buying a new one

cheers

Blythe

 

[konem4n]

I would always replace HDD to SSD.
From tearing down aspect, replacing HDD is with the highest cost-risk-gain ratio

Kone

 

[mj_]

Are you familiar with the Pareto principle, also known as the 80/20 rule? I'm asking because it perfectly applies to your situation. You will be able to achieve an 80% increase in subjective performance by doing 20% of the work required to replace all three components and limit yourself to just replacing the HDD with a SATA SSD. However, in order to unlock the remaining 20% of potential performance boost you will have to do the remaining 80% of the work and replace the NVMe blade and the CPU.

 

[Blythe63]

Are you familiar with the Pareto principle, also known as the 80/20 rule? I'm asking because it perfectly applies to your situation. You will be able to achieve an 80% increase in subjective performance by doing 20% of the work required to replace all three components and limit yourself to just replacing the HDD with a SATA SSD. However, in order to unlock the remaining 20% of potential performance boost you will have to do the remaining 80% of the work and replace the NVMe blade and the CPU.

I haven't heard of the term before but this is what I meant, when cost is factored into it the added improvement for the cost isn't worth it due to diminished returns or as you said the Pareto Principle (I am going to have to look this up now) It is also a big saving by just replacing the HDD with an SSD as the other 2 add about 150% 200% more to the cost and if it is only a 20% gain I can't see the point. If it was as big a gain as the SSD then I would.

 

[EugW]

I would just boot off a USB-C SSD and be done with it. Or even better, Thunderbolt SSD. Then I would do absolutely nothing else you’ve mentioned. Then when you upgrade to a newer machine, take that external SSD with you.

BTW, unless you are doing something truly needing a ton of RAM, going to 64 GB would probably be a total waste of money. You’ll have to tell us exactly what you‘re doing, but I suspect that in 24 GB would in fact have been sufficient for you, and even the upgrade to 40 GB RAM was overkill.

 

[Blythe63]

I would just boot off a USB-C SSD and be done with it. Or even better, Thunderbolt SSD. Then I would do absolutely nothing else you’ve mentioned. Then when you upgrade to a newer machine, take that external SSD with you.

BTW, unless you are doing something truly needing a ton of RAM, going to 64 GB would probably be a total waste of money. You’ll have to tell us exactly what you‘re doing, but I suspect that in 24 GB would in fact have been sufficient for you, and even the upgrade to 40 GB RAM was overkill.

I'm using it for photo processing, light room photoshop etc. I have stalled it in it's current configuration i.e. the screen has frozen in the middle of working on a photo and I have had to close down the computer as it frozen everything. everything is saved on external hard drives

 

[EugW]

I'm using it for photo processing, light room photoshop etc. I have stalled it in it's current configuration i.e. the screen has frozen in the middle of working on a photo and I have had to close down the computer as it frozen everything. everything is saved on external hard drives

If that happened, I have a strong suspicion that memory wasn't the culprit.

 

[Blythe63]

no idea but photo software does use a lot of memory, I know my MacBook Pro has a hernia when I use it, which is why I went to the iMac, it doesn't happen as much but it still does. I have a Nikon d850 the raw files in it are around 100mp, download a couple of hundred photos and that is a lot of space

 

[snow755]

I would get your self a 512GB or 1TB USB SSD drive wish would be the easier way too go