27 inch iMac or Mac Pro?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by boombox15, Feb 4, 2014.

  1. boombox15 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2013
    Location:
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa
    #1
    Hi everyone

    I am in the market to buy a new Apple Desktop to replace my old 2010 27 inch iMac. So I 2 options. The 27 inch iMac or the Mac Pro. I never really have been interested in the mac pro until now, and while I don't think I need it, I would like to hear other members advice. The iMac fits well into my budget, but the mac pro pushes it a bit and if I buy that, I likely won't have enough to buy a Mac Laptop.

    Here are the things I would do on the computer:

    Use all of the pre-loaded apps
    Download More from the Mac App Store
    Store photos in iPhoto
    Edit photos in Aperture
    Make movies in iMovie and export movies
    Use iWork for making documents
    (Possibly edit photos in lightroom 5)


    For a configuration, I would get

    27 inch iMac, 3.2GHz, 8 or 16GB of RAM, 512GB Flash, Ge Force GT 755M

    Mac Pro: $2999 model with 12 or 16GB of RAM, 512GB Flash, AMD 300, Thunderbolt display

    I am not a professional photographer but it is a huge hobby of mine. I also tend to have 1 app in full screen, but switch between them with about 2-3 running in the background.
     
  2. accountforit macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2014
    #2
    I don't understand.

    You stated you don't need the Mac Pro and it's outside your budget. What's the question?
     
  3. boazjoe macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    #3
     
  4. Dav1boy macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    #4
    LoL that's a head scratcher.... For the things he listed I think his current iMac is just fine for his needs.
     
  5. CWallace macrumors 603

    CWallace

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
  6. casperes1996 macrumors 65816

    casperes1996

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2014
    Location:
    Horsens, Denmark
    #6
    Your apps won't use it

    iMovie, iPhoto, and 99% of the built in apps can't actually use the dual GPUs, and can't utilize the CPU either. It would pretty much be the same as throwing money out the window. A lot of this software would actually run faster on an iMac with an i7 and 780m... iMovie for instance would run 40% faster on that iMac over the Mac Pro (number is a rough estimate)
     
  7. Oudinot macrumors regular

    Oudinot

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2013
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL USA
  8. andycho7 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2013
    #8
    To me sounds like Mac Mini with Fusion Drive would do the job just fine.
     
  9. blanka macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    #9
    Get an entry Mini (either with fusion or mount yourself an SSD in the empty slot) with a 27 inch display and take some nice vacation from the benefits. If you pick the quad Mini you can almost touch entry-level Pro speeds for way less money than a 27 inch iMac, which is quite expensive if you get to quad core i7 BTO options.
     
  10. Lauwie macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    #10
    A mac mini is just a laptop in box...

    And for what this guy uses his mac speccing the iMac out like he thinks he would do it, probably is a little overkill. Though it never hurts :p
     
  11. casperes1996 macrumors 65816

    casperes1996

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2014
    Location:
    Horsens, Denmark
    #11
    Wait with mini

    If you're going to go mini, wait for the next model. Current is hopelessly outdated, and the next one will probably feature Iris graphics. I suggest iMac though
     
  12. Georgio macrumors 6502

    Georgio

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Location:
    Essex, UK
    #12
    Mac Pro is only for bragging rights or unless you're setting up a render farm...:D
    Go with the iMac, preferrably the i7/3TB fusion drive/780m GPU and enjoy Apple at it's best.
     
  13. jvette macrumors 6502

    jvette

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2007
    #13
    I'm doing the same thing you are doing and I just got the top line Imac with everything upgraded to the max. I put 32gb ram in it after I got it and it is way overkill for anything I can throw at it. The only reason I did it was I had a 2007 Imac that was maxed out and it lasted 7 years for me and was still working fine. I sold it and got a good price for it. My hopes is to do the same thing with this one and get 7 or 8 years from it. I can assure you that you don't need a Mac Pro.
     
  14. accountforit macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2014
    #14
    Some people take your approach, and others take the following approach.

    Buy the bottom line, or mid level version and then sell and re-buy every two years. This way, you get a new computer every two years and always have the latest tech. You only need to fork over a few hundred every few years instead of a TON of money once every seven years. It all works out.

    For example, geek bench states that this years bottom of the line 21.5" scores just as well as last years top 27" without any upgrades!
     
  15. boombox15 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2013
    Location:
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa
    #15
    I really don't think I need the Mac Pro, but the real reason why I am considering it is because of it's cool looking design. I have never seen a black mac since I sold my Macintosh TV years ago ( yes, you read right). I know it's aimed at pros, but the design of it is just making me stare at amazement. But then again, the iMac looks good to. Either one is a good computer.
     
  16. Lauwie macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    #16
    Unless you're into 3D modelling, music production, movie editing and/or photography. The MacPro will just be a very expensive sexy trash can :p
     
  17. Mac Hammer Fan macrumors 6502

    Mac Hammer Fan

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Location:
    Belgium
    #17
    The awful trash can design with the lack of internal expandability of the new Mac Pro is for me the reason to buy an iMac in the future. But for now I keep my 6 core Mac Pro 2009 as long as I can.
     
  18. Larry-K macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    #18
    I'm all for Apple selling as many nMPs as possible, in the hope they'll keep something alive on the Pro side, but a lot of people buying them seem better off with an iMac, and I think that would be the case for you.
     
  19. hpucker99 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    #19
    Maxed out 2013 27" iMAC

    I did the same, 1 TB SSD with 780M video and upgrade the RAM myself (8 to 24 GB). It replaces a late 2009 that I gave to my wife. The thing screams, don't think I can ever go back to a spinning hard drive again and will upgrade my MacBook Pro to SSD later this year.
     
  20. Serban Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #20
    iMac does your work in x time, the mac pro faster. So..this is the mac pro.Nothing else. And in the future probably more apps will focus on its dual gpu.

    ----------

    in your place, if i want to keep my next mac more than 4 years, i would take the mac pro
     
  21. accountforit macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2014
    #21

    In 4 years the iMac offering will be almost as fast as the current Mac Pro, will be updated cosmetically, be a new computer, and have the latest tech.
     
  22. WMD macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    #22
    It's not actually black; it only looks black on the Apple website. The actual color is closer to the "Space Gray" color used on the iPhone 5S. It's a dark aluminum.
     
  23. xraydoc macrumors demi-god

    xraydoc

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    192.168.1.1
    #23
    The 2013 iMac with the top-end 3.5GHz Core i7 is actually a remarkably fast machine. Keep in mind that the only Macs faster than it are over $4000. It's faster than the base four-core nMP in nearly everything but OpenCL.

    For that much money, you could buy the iMac, sell it in two years and buy a 2015/2016 iMac and come out at virtually the same as you would if you bought the Mac Pro now. And you'd have the newest tech (who knows, could be Thunderbolt 3, more advanced CPUs, dual SSDs in factory RAID 0, GPUs that equal or surpass what's in the Mac Pro today...). My examples are merely speculation, but regardless, it'll be newer than what's in your 2-3 year old Mac Pro at that point.

    So unless you need TODAY all the power of a higher-end $4000+ Mac Pro, the iMac is a better choice.

    I faced the same dilemma and chose to go with the iMac, knowing that I'd likely replace it sooner than a Mac Pro; but I saved money now, and later when I replace it, I'll get newer tech than what would be in the Mac Pro which will be a couple years old at that point. And since I don't need the GPU computing power in the nMP, there was little point in paying extra for what I don't need.
     

Share This Page