Advice on Difference between 2.93 and 3.06 Ghz

Discussion in 'iMac' started by rch5181, May 13, 2009.

  1. rch5181 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    #1
    Is the bump in speed from 2.93 to 3.06 Ghz worth the money? I will be using the iMac for audio processing- mainly Pro Tools with virtual instruments, plug-ins in surround sound. I will be buying 8 gigs of RAM separately and installing them after I get the computer.

    Also, about the video card. In light of this being a computer used for audio, should I bump up the video card or is the baseline NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 256MB good enough? I know nothing about video cards.

    Thanks in advance.
     
  2. rgarjr macrumors 603

    rgarjr

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Location:
    Southern Cal
    #2
    I think most dudes here just get the 2.93 one with the 4850 video card.
     
  3. Battlefield Fan macrumors 65816

    Battlefield Fan

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    #3
    Ask yourself two questions.

    1. Will keep the computer for a long time? (4-5 years)
    2. Will you be earning profit off the computer?

    If you answered yes to just one question then I would seriously consider it.

    If you answered yes to both questions then with out a doubt I would go for the increase.

    Personally I would order the 3.06 Ghz, 4 gb of ram(wait for the price to drop on the 8Gb of ram), 640 GB hdd and the 4850
     
  4. LagunaSol macrumors 601

    LagunaSol

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2003
    #4
    The jump in speed seemed so negligible for the money, I went for the 2.93 with the Radeon 4850. Should arrive tomorrow! :D

    I'll spend my savings on a LaCie RAID drive.
     
  5. spencecb macrumors 6502a

    spencecb

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    #5
    I would agree that there would be very little performance increase between the two processor speeds.

    The real value of the higher end iMac is the increased HDD to 1 TB. Would you make use of the extra storage? If so, I would still go for the 2.93 and upgrade the HDD to the 1 TB.

    I think the nVidia 120 would be just fine for you.
     
  6. meagain macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2006
    #6
    I'm weighing all this also.

    Laguna, which specific LaCie are you getting? I'm in dire straights with my external storage situation. Big time. Mostly because I don't understand all the options clear enough. Just know that LaCie is used by many Mac users. For some unknown reason.
     
  7. LagunaSol macrumors 601

    LagunaSol

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2003
    #7
    I think I'm going to go for the 2TB 2big Quadra, $320 from NewEgg. Pricey, but it's RAID, and will give me redundant backup for the 1TB drive in my new iMac. And it's one of the few good-looking external drives out there.
     
  8. meagain macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2006
    #8
    Laguna - I'll look at that as I like the RAID concept. I agree they are handsome. Thank you.
     
  9. jmpage2 macrumors 68030

    jmpage2

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2007
    #9
    This isn't a "value" at all. For the price bump to go from 640GB to 1TB you can get an external 1TB drive and an enclosure and still have the 640GB drive that the 2.93ghz mac ships with.
     
  10. cocky jeremy macrumors 68040

    cocky jeremy

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    #10
    I'd go 2.93GHz for sure. The speed difference is very minimal and you'd never notice the difference. Especially if you upgrade to 8GB of RAM later on.
     
  11. rgarjr macrumors 603

    rgarjr

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Location:
    Southern Cal
    #11
    I have a question, can you only get the 2.93GHz, with the 4850 from :apple: or can you get it from amazon too?
     
  12. jmpage2 macrumors 68030

    jmpage2

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2007
    #12
    You can't get it from Amazon, but there are other Apple resellers that can order it in that configuration.
     
  13. LagunaSol macrumors 601

    LagunaSol

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2003
    #13
    This is true, but for a "sealed" box like the iMac, sometimes you want as much onboard storage as possible to avoid the "external hard drive shuffle." So I upgraded to the 1TB drive, knowing that I was taking it in the shorts.

    I'll add a 2TB RAID enclosure from LaCie for backup and dump the 3 (!) external hard drives currently junking up my desk.
     
  14. mstam macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #14
    If you you have some *nix knowledge a separate Linux box works very well also. I don't need TBs of storage so I opted for the 640GB (soon to be replaced for a 256 or 512GB SSD) iMac, a 1TB WD Green/Icy Dock external drive and an extra 640GB WD Green in my Linux box for TM backups over Gb ethernet about 40MBs. I have Avahi and Netatalk installed which I also use for sharing websites I develop.
     
  15. whooleytoo macrumors 603

    whooleytoo

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Location:
    Cork, Ireland.
    #15
    I'd guess a 3.06 might hold its value a little better (just by having the "3" - in the same way as prices are set at 99.99 and not 100), so if that's important to you, you might consider going for that machine.

    If it's just for your use, go for the lower end machine and better graphics card, and a RAID if you can stretch for it. The difference is immense.

    p.s. I feel funny saying that. There's a 130MHz difference between the two machines! My first Mac was a 16MHz powerhouse... I feel old....
     
  16. LagunaSol macrumors 601

    LagunaSol

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2003
    #16
    Get off my lawn, whippersnapper! My first Apple (the Apple II+) had a 1MHz processor. :D

    OK, it was the family computer, and I was like 12 at the time, but the "getting old" thing still applies...
     
  17. jmpage2 macrumors 68030

    jmpage2

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2007
    #17
    My C-64 was also 1mhz. That thing was considered quite studly back in the day!
     
  18. NYCMacFan macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2007
    #18
    Video Card

    My question is related to this, but also inclues the video card. I'm planning on buying a new imac for use as a home office computer.

    BUT, I have one of those new digital tuners to get the new digital broadcast signals. Sometimes I also watch HD videos off itunes and sometimes I watch other video stuff. Don't edit, but could see myself editing some light home videos.

    How much of a difference will I experience with the different processors and naturally most importantly, what is the daily difference I'd see between the

    -NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 256MB
    -NVIDIA GeForce GT 130 512MB [Add $135.00]
    -ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB [Add $180.00]

    Notice I have to go with the 2.93 over the 2.66 just to get the video processor choice. Everyone seems to recommend the 4850. Does it help?

    I'm a bit sketchy on the GT 120 (doesn't even seem dedicated), but didn't know if I should care.
     
  19. MacAndy74 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Location:
    Australia
    #19
    I also agree however, I'd go straight for the 1TB drive. Worth the upgrade cost IMHO.
     
  20. mstam macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #20
    The GT120 will play all your content back fine...
     
  21. Hugh macrumors 6502a

    Hugh

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2003
    Location:
    Erie, PA
    #21
    Don't feel bad, my first Mac was an SE/30. :D

    Hugh
     

Share This Page