Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
27-Inch iMac Core i7 With SSD Is Fastest Mac Ever
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think you are wrong. I think the standard high end i5 21.5 would be slightly better then the standard low end i5 27. Why? The 21.5 has less pixels to push out at native resolutions. It's the SSD vs HDD thing that makes these imacs go really fast.
That's not really the point though. I guess this is more about macs officially configured by Apple. Otherwise I'd just one-up your SSD Mac Pro with an iMac that houses a small farm of hamsters or a nuclear plant... staffed by hamsters.
EDIT: Just noticed the Mac Pro can be CTO'd with SSDs, I do apologise. That's pretty silly.
Some 2011 imac Geekbench benchmarks. And yes the geekbench just added in 21.5 i7 results. So you can see how good they are.
http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2011/05/imac-benchmarks-mid-2011/
Clock for clock, SB is showing incredible improvements over previous gen CPUs. The lesson learned is that for all things consumer oriented (non workstation tasking), the SB i7 iMac is the best choice...you cant argue there (especially for the price differential).
That said, different applications/testing criteria could grant wins on either side. Theyre different machines made for different reasons. The Pro certainly has some capabilities the iMac cant touch (More Cores, Desktop Graphics, PCI-E Capable SSC's...though OSX doesnt make booting from them easy)
That said, different applications/testing criteria could grant wins on either side. Theyre different machines made for different reasons. The Pro certainly has some capabilities the iMac cant touch (More Cores, Desktop Graphics, PCI-E Capable SSC's...though OSX doesnt make booting from them easy)
As fast as the i7 core may be, this is more about how slow mechanical drives are for accessing data. Here's to looking forward to TB size SSD and the end of slow drives, crashes and battery power sucking mechanical devices. For the younger members out there, imagine accessing data off of tape or 5 1/2 floppy disks. My first Apple had a 20MB hard drive. An upgrade to 80 MB was a couple of thousand dollars. The future looks bright.
Im still in awe of all the Dual Hexacore MP owners with SSD in raid.
It's totally a mark of geek honor when your computer costs more than your car.
It's totally a mark of geek honor when your computer costs more than your car.
Doesn't YouTube have like a 10 minute video runtime limit?
I have a 2.8GHz i7 27" iMac and it's still mighty fast for what I do (which is just fluff), but I have to admit this looks tempting.
Still not a 12-core
Sure this was said, but the above MacPro is a quad-core...well i guess technically a 3.33GHz 6-Core processor, but still not a 12-Core. Besides how practical of a test is this anyway. Who needs to open every application they have? Not a professional that invest in a 12-core machine that requires a lot of ram, shared storage, render farms, external peripherals, etc. Seems like a great computer for a consumer, like my 80yr old grandmother, who never closes anything...or even shutdowns for that matter. Lol Not meant to be a harsh response, but essentially what I want to say is an iMac is great, but not the best. Booting apps is not a test of overall comparability to a real beast, like the soon to be outdated 12-Core Unless opening apps a few seconds faster really makes a difference in your workflow. That may change in a years tho as SSD's really get battle tested.
Sure this was said, but the above MacPro is a quad-core...well i guess technically a 3.33GHz 6-Core processor, but still not a 12-Core. Besides how practical of a test is this anyway. Who needs to open every application they have? Not a professional that invest in a 12-core machine that requires a lot of ram, shared storage, render farms, external peripherals, etc. Seems like a great computer for a consumer, like my 80yr old grandmother, who never closes anything...or even shutdowns for that matter. Lol
Not meant to be a harsh response, but essentially what I want to say is an iMac is great, but not the best. Booting apps is not a test of overall comparability to a real beast, like the soon to be outdated 12-Core Unless opening apps a few seconds faster really makes a difference in your workflow. That may change in a years tho as SSD's really get battle tested.Not to mention the MP has 4 internal drive bays for RAID arrays, more slots for powering graphics cards, more RAM capability and dual drives. I love being able to rip from two sources at once or rip and burn or dual burn.
Possibly my favorite MP aspect is what it lacks...a display. I loves me my matte 30" ACD. I'd go nuts with the glossy 27" iMac. Doing color work on that would be really difficult in my type of lighting environment.
Possibly my favorite MP aspect is what it lacks...a display. I loves me my matte 30" ACD. I'd go nuts with the glossy 27" iMac. Doing color work on that would be really difficult in my type of lighting environment.
Awesome specs.
Is also has a "FaceTime HD camera." Hopefully the iDevices will get the same treatment soon. iPhone 5 perhaps.
Is also has a "FaceTime HD camera." Hopefully the iDevices will get the same treatment soon. iPhone 5 perhaps.
Unless you want to do SSD raid, PCI-E is unnecessary and too expensive. Get a SATA III controller for cheaper price and attach a OCZ Vertex 3.
But then again, you are paying a lot of money for something the iMac already has.
Sure this was said, but the above MacPro is a quad-core...well i guess technically a 3.33GHz 6-Core processor, but still not a 12-Core. Besides how practical of a test is this anyway. Who needs to open every application they have? Not a professional that invest in a 12-core machine that requires a lot of ram, shared storage, render farms, external peripherals, etc. Seems like a great computer for a consumer, like my 80yr old grandmother, who never closes anything...or even shutdowns for that matter. Lol
You really need to read the article again. The tests were not just opening apps. iMac performs faster on several CPU tasks such as iTunes encoding which has nothing to do with SSD.
And the article again states that when it comes to paralleled tasks such as rendering, a hexacore will obviously perform faster.
Anyway, this is not the first time an iMac performs faster than the fastest Mac Pro on unparalleled tasks. The same thing happened last summer before Mac Pro's were updated as well.
What a giant misinterpretation and idiotic headline from MR. It's not the fastest mac EVER, it's the fastest mac they've ever TESTED. And it's obvious from looking at this graph that they're only comparing it to the SIX core MP when there's a TWELVE core version available. Gee, you think that one might be a bit faster, having twice as many cores?
And the MP is also available with SSD, the fair test would be to include it for that model as well. Yeesh, can't believe you guys blew it in such a big way on this one, is it really that hard to understand what they posted or did you just forget there's a 12 core machine available?
And the MP is also available with SSD, the fair test would be to include it for that model as well. Yeesh, can't believe you guys blew it in such a big way on this one, is it really that hard to understand what they posted or did you just forget there's a 12 core machine available?
Awesome specs.
Is also has a "FaceTime HD camera." Hopefully the iDevices will get the same treatment soon. iPhone 5 perhaps.
To be honest will it make much difference seeing as the iphone can't output 720p?
Nevertheless when will the Imac have a touch screen? With Windows 8 looming Apple better get their act together.
I agree with you that its an idiotic headline. BUT, I think they're right about testing the hexacore instead of the 12-core. I think the six core is actually faster at unparalleled tasks bc its clock speed is 3.33 GHz vs. the 12 core's 2.93 GHz. Thus, unless you're using an application that will actually use all 12 cores, the processor with the high clock speed is actually going to be faster.