Another....Which iMac for me...2.8/2.4/2.33...Yea...I know two versions..Help!

Discussion in 'iMac' started by wpwj40e, Aug 16, 2007.

  1. wpwj40e macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    #1
    Okay...I have read every thread since the alumiMac was announced. Been to the Apple store a few times and am still in a quandry....Sold my 20"iMac a few months ago (and bought a macBook which I LOVE) anticipating a new iMac. Thought about a PRO - but just don't need the extra power and hubby is getting one anyways when they refresh.

    So back to my iMac quandry...

    I don't really play games....not the kind that get benchmarks anyways. (poker and bejeweled don't count!)

    I use the internet (with dozens of windows open), heavy user of office 2004, photo edit and play with "optimizing" all my photo's. Music and DVD'd - use an elgato 500 and record TV and edit and move to ipod/xbox 360 formats.

    Cannot stand a slow computer and will max out memory as I consistantly page out with the 2 gig on my Macbook and did the same on my 20" iMac. So 3-4 gig depending upon version regardless.

    Typically keep a computer 2-3 years - but will sell if I think the next gen/version has some worthwhile features.

    I can afford any of the models - but am always watching my dollars for a good value/best resale etc.

    Am concerned (a little) about getting dead pixels and having to do the mail exchange thing(done that ...been there...with both my original iMac and MacBook - not for pixel issues - but dead drives etc - and you cannot take and exchange an online order in the apple store)

    Also is it worth it upgrading the HDD? I have two external 500GB Mybooks firewire/usb. Stores most of my video and music collection as well as imgaes of my Mac's.

    Oh and obviously these are all 24" considerations - one of the main reasons for selling and wanting a new iMac!!!

    So...Help me out which one do I get...
    2.8 - which HDD - 320/500/750? (Would upgrade the 2.4 to 2.8 as I will order ram seperately) Is this over kill?

    2.4 - would be tempted to just get the base if I went this route and buy it locally (if they ever show up in stock again!). Would I get really hurt on resale not having the faster processor? Will Leopard make a difference...as in will the faster processor be more helpful with Leopard?

    2.33 - white iMac - with the 7600 256 card. Can get this for about $200 less than the base alumiMac - albeit used - but with warranty - which I would then add applecare too.

    I like the new design, not love - but like and am OK with the glossy screen. AGain - not earth shattered by it and either design/screen works for me.

    I would like to purchase in the next week (actually wanted to purchase 4 months ago!!! and waited for the "new"iMac!)

    And while I LOVE my MacBook - it is not fast enough, and cannot fulfill all my needs - as in dvr - streaming to my xbox 360 etc - so just adding a 24" monitor to it doesn't help. I use it too much as a portable and miss having a dedicated Mac in the house for music/tv/ etc. And hubby will use his new Mac Pro when he gets it for work - no other stuff will be allowed on it:(...

    So there you have it - what would you do? Need opinions, different points to ponder, advice!!!

    Thanks
    Therese
     
  2. l33r0y macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    #2
    2.8 will certainly help with your video encoding

    2.4 is generally considered to be the best bang per buck

    You can never have enough disk space or memory!

    Oh and if your concerned about residuals, stay clear of the white iMac - most people will be looking to buy the AluMac from now on so they'll hold their value better.
     
  3. glennyboiwpg macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    #3
    Just wanting to comment about the:

    "You can never have too much disk space or memory" comment...


    For the most part I believe this statement, being a programmer some of our IDE (programmer's tool) takes up quite a bit of memory. (you designers aren't the only ones who use big tools. :p)


    But think about this. You can ALWAYS add more memory later. And external hard drives are getting cheaper and bigger all the time.

    just something to think about.
     
  4. wpwj40e thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    #4
    I think I have narrowed the decision slightly:)

    Gonna take the "old" white iMac off the table. Of interest was the graphics card and the matt screen. But since it is unlikely I will have need more than waht is in the current offering and the glossy new screen doesn't bother me (at least not alot)...then I am down to...

    2.4 upgraded to 2.8 and potentially a HDD upgrade to 500/750 or
    2.4 base....

    I really like having a bootable image on my mybook externals - you have no idea how often that has come in handy:) Which if I upgraded the harddrive would require me to get another external big enough to hold the image. Well...maybe not right away - but not gonna fit a 750GB on a 500GB external sooner or later.

    So as far as the HDD - keep on wavering in my mind - although it sounds nice to have a larger cache and buffer in the larger HDD's. I "feel" the slowness:):) of I/O

    If I am gonna upgrade and have to get a CTO for the CPU - might as well do the HDD. If I am not gonna upgrade the CPU - then will just take the base locally so I do not have to deal with shipping and return hassles.....

    I am close - someone push me over the edge!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Therese
     
  5. rainydays macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    #5
    2.8 won't help a lot with the video encoding though, but it will help. A 10 minute job on the 2.4 should take about 8.5-9 minutes on the 2.8. It's not a huge difference like with a Mac Pro.

    And you can have enough RAM really :) If you have 4GB and only use 2GB then you have the other 2GB are a waste of money since it won't make the computer any faster.
     
  6. Aea macrumors 6502a

    Aea

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Location:
    Denver, Colorado
    #6
    CPU power scales quite linearly into performance when encoding, so I'd except about a 15% advantage to the 2.8 GHz Machine.
     
  7. roland.g macrumors 603

    roland.g

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Location:
    One mile up and soaring
    #7
    get the 2.8 with 1GB and the 750 and add more RAM yourself. Go on, order it.
     
  8. rainydays macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    #8
    As I said, a 10 minute job on the 2.4GHz will most likely be 8.5-9 minutes on the 2.8GHz, which is a 10-15% performance increase.

    Based on the Geekbench score that roland.g (I think) provided it is about 12% faster. But then again, that's just Geekbench.
     
  9. l33r0y macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    #9
    Like I said, it will 'help' ;)
     
  10. roland.g macrumors 603

    roland.g

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Location:
    One mile up and soaring
    #10
    10, 12, 15% is nothing to sneeze at.
     
  11. oduinnin macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2007
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    #11
    I do mostly photography and some video editing ......

    I ordered the 24" with 2.8GHz Core 2 Extreme CPU and 750GB HD.

    After 35 years of using desktop, mini and mainframe computers, I've learned that you can never have enough Speed, RAM or storage. Five years ago, I could not have conceived needing this much power. I'll use every bit of it now! :D
     
  12. marcg007 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2003
    Location:
    Boston area
    #12
    Actually, ...

    If you order either 24 inch model, you can get up to a Terabyte of drive space. The 20 inch model takes up to 750GBs. Sounds like you have plenty of external drive space. You might want to add up all your external space and do an approximation of the same amount of internal drive space so that you can have a full backup. Good luck.
     
  13. rainydays macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    #13
    Certainly not. But not everyone will benefit from it. A photoshop user usually never have long rendering times, so it's perhaps a question of milliseconds there. It's still helpful, but perhaps not worth the money.

    And while you save a couple of minutes with video/3D rendering it might not matter to you since you are doing other things while the video is rendering.

    For some users it will be worth the money, especially if you make money using the computer.

    As I've said before, I regret not going with the 2.8GHz, because it would allow me to use more real time effects in my music production. And that's probably the kind of things where it makes most sense to spend the extra money.
     

Share This Page