24" imac 2.4 or 2.8

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by macrumorsMaster, Mar 27, 2009.

  1. macrumorsMaster macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    #1
    I saw the 2.4 the other day(now out of stock) and almost pulled the trigger, it was only $1049 vs. $1199 vs the 2.8

    However the 2.8 has faster FSB, more cache, and an extra gig of ram.


    What do you think?

    I'll be using FC, Adobe's suite, etc. (video editing and graphics)

    I can wait till june for the free student offer, but even if I sold the touch(or nano, or whatever they give) or kept it, I don't think I could get such a good deal as the 2.4, however it isn't expandable to 8gb like the new ones.


    decisions, decision :)
     
  2. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #2
    I'd go for the 2.8 as it is not that much more expensive.
     
  3. Demosthenes X macrumors 68000

    Demosthenes X

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    #3
    2.8. Not only is it faster, but the technology is newer, too. It'll render your work a bit faster, which is a bonus. RAM is immaterial since you'll want to upgrade to 4GB, and the iMac will ship with 2x 1GB, not 1 x 2GB, so you'll be chucking it anyway.

    That said, the 2.4 will still run everything you need it to, so if price is a big concern then go with it.
     
  4. opera57 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    #4
    Definately the 2.8. Its gotta be worth the extra $150!
    [​IMG]
     
  5. techfreak85 macrumors 68040

    techfreak85

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    Location:
    Places
    #5
    yea go for the 2.8. for 150 more bucks u get a lot more stuff. not just processor.:p
    you will thank your self.:D
     
  6. suburbia macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    #6
    Definitely the 2.8. What's the golden rule when it comes to processor speed? Always buy the most powerful machine you can afford, right??? And at only $150 difference... Do it!
     
  7. Blakely028 macrumors regular

    Blakely028

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2008
    Location:
    Scotland
    #7
    +1 on all of them :p

    Yeah, the 2.8 would be a whole lot better in the long run, and a worth the extra $150 I would have thought.
     

Share This Page