I still don't understand why you are how you have decided to go from a barely $400 machine brand new back in the day to a $3500 machine. Give me a ***** break. You still havent answered what you needed it for anyway. The purpose of this thread was for what? You just got a bunch of people to talk. Good grief.
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.
As a first time iMac buyer should I wait for Ivy Bridge?
- Thread starter iRobby
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I still don't understand why you are how you have decided to go from a barely $400 machine brand new back in the day to a $3500 machine. Give me a ***** break. You still havent answered what you needed it for anyway. The purpose of this thread was for what? You just got a bunch of people to talk. Good grief.
Playing the waiting game will get you nowhere and will end up leaving you very frustrated.
If you have the funds and the need for the new iMac, buy it now. It just got refreshed so you have a whole year to play around with the toy before the next gen gets released. More value for your buck versus someone that just bought an imac 2 months prior to release type of deal.
If you have the funds and the need for the new iMac, buy it now. It just got refreshed so you have a whole year to play around with the toy before the next gen gets released. More value for your buck versus someone that just bought an imac 2 months prior to release type of deal.
Rule of thumb on the waiting game.
If the Apple product is less than 90 days released then a "BUY"
If the Apple product is less than 90 days to refresh then a "WAIT"
Anything in between then pros & cons.
Ivy Bridge aint worth waiting for as an Ivy Bridge iMac wont show up until 9-10 months from today.
USB3.0 is as worth waiting for as Blu-Ray burners in a Mac.
If the Apple product is less than 90 days released then a "BUY"
If the Apple product is less than 90 days to refresh then a "WAIT"
Anything in between then pros & cons.
Ivy Bridge aint worth waiting for as an Ivy Bridge iMac wont show up until 9-10 months from today.
USB3.0 is as worth waiting for as Blu-Ray burners in a Mac.
To the thread maker -
Sounds like you're finnicky about having the latest.
Let me recommend something to you, just stop buying technology.
Having the latest and greatest in tech lasts as long as the long term memory of a goldfish.
Do yourself a favor and find another hobby, like collecting porcelain clowns.
Sounds like you're finnicky about having the latest.
Let me recommend something to you, just stop buying technology.
Having the latest and greatest in tech lasts as long as the long term memory of a goldfish.
Do yourself a favor and find another hobby, like collecting porcelain clowns.
Id say he could care less about the latest and greatest.
If a $400 PC (new) has been working all these years, with tiny drives and minimal ram -- then why bother with a $3000 Mac maxed with everything.
any of the basic configurations will last you for years, you will barely scratch its potential at the current rate you are proceeding.
If a $400 PC (new) has been working all these years, with tiny drives and minimal ram -- then why bother with a $3000 Mac maxed with everything.
any of the basic configurations will last you for years, you will barely scratch its potential at the current rate you are proceeding.
I paid $1,074.00 brand new in 10/10/05
It was high end at the time just as the $3500 today. It lasted me almost 6 years just as the $3500 today will.
Yes, I have decided To get the 2011 iMac sorry to have upset you.
Personally I wouldn't expect Ivy Bridge to deliver massive performance gains, seems to be more likely that it'll be used to significantly reduce power consumption rather than go all-out for speed. Plus Intel has for the last few years adopted a 'tick-tock' approach to updates where the tick is a relatively minor performance update and the tock is the big jump. Sandy Bridge was a tock update and, frankly, there's not a lot of competition for Intel at the high end so why would they go all-out for performance with Ivy Bridge when they can keep some of those improvements back for the next update?
As for the thunderblot / USB 3 debate, there's no technical reason (AFAIK) that you can't have a Thunderbolt > USB 3 adaptor or hub. Certainly there's enough bandwidth available to do it and as devices have already been announced to allow you to use a PCIe card via Thunderbolt I can't believe USB3 would be that tricky. Certainly it's going to be interesting to see which way things go over the next couple of years, it'll depend a lot on what the rest of the PC market does I guess.
As for the thunderblot / USB 3 debate, there's no technical reason (AFAIK) that you can't have a Thunderbolt > USB 3 adaptor or hub. Certainly there's enough bandwidth available to do it and as devices have already been announced to allow you to use a PCIe card via Thunderbolt I can't believe USB3 would be that tricky. Certainly it's going to be interesting to see which way things go over the next couple of years, it'll depend a lot on what the rest of the PC market does I guess.
Enjoy the machine mate! I'm wanting to get a similar setup, although, without the SSD (I don't want Apple's SSD). 4x4GB RAM from OWC for $200, i7 3.4, 6970 2GB, 1TB... I can't wait!
Computers was more expensive in 2005.
The cheapest iMac in 2005 was the 17-inch 1.8GHz G5 which costed $1299.
The lowend iMac now is $1199. The Dimension e510 was about as basic machine you could get.
Radeon x300se was about as weak GPU you could get at the given time and high end machines boasted either nvidia 7800 series or ATI x800 series.
The cheapest iMac is a "higher end" machine than the e510 was in 2005.
While I completely agree with the general consensus that if the the OP wants a new iMac this is the time to buy. I don't quite get the hate. He has an old PC, it needs updating, he wants a new iMac, which to be fair is a little more powerful than he needs, but hey I know I've done that in the past. I'm sure most of us who are on this forum would have done that at some point.
In short to the OP, buy the iMac now, there really isn't a better time to do it, and enjoy it.
In short to the OP, buy the iMac now, there really isn't a better time to do it, and enjoy it.
like others said this sounds , not a smart move for anyone in your financial position, if you say you are somewhat broke
1- why consider the a 3.5K system?
2- or itch for the latest and greatest , especially with apple products that are not cheep to begin with
- I would tell someone like that , get another 500$ system that lasts for few years and put $ saved for other things in life
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)
If you do keep waiting, when ivy bridge is out, you'll be wanting a Rockwell chip. Then Haswell.
If you want it now, get it now. You'll always get bigger and better later. It's a vicious cycle. But anything you get, I'm quite sure you'll be happy with.
If you do keep waiting, when ivy bridge is out, you'll be wanting a Rockwell chip. Then Haswell.
If you want it now, get it now. You'll always get bigger and better later. It's a vicious cycle. But anything you get, I'm quite sure you'll be happy with.
Unless you use your computer in work where things like rendering times and such matter you'll pretty much be able to do most your work on a 5 year computer today.
When it comes to watching videos, surfing and email you can come pretty far with an older computer.
For an average user that doesn't have to play the newest games the base iMac will be just as fast as the top end.
I had my i5 MBP on repairs a bit earlier this year and during that time I used a 2008 C2D 2.0GHz Aluminum Macbook 13 with 4GB RAM.
80% of my work there was no difference at all. The C2D did maybe use a second more to open apps, but while using MS Office, Safari, iTunes and such there wasn't much difference at all.
I'm pretty sure that 90% of the users never use anything else than MS Office, Safari and iTunes (or similar apps).
20% of my work is done with photoshop or audio/video apps. Here is where it makes a difference. I can handle twice as many VST plugins on my i5 than on the C2D. Things render more than twice as fast and photoshop is loads faster when I work with large files (some of this is because I have 8GB in the i5).
My point? It seems you want to get an iPad and a new phone and money is part of this equation. You could get an 21-inch for $1299 and buy both iPad and iPhone. You could also opt for the standard 27-inch for $1699.
Unless you are a hardcore gamer you don't need the 2GB graphics card.
My i5 has a nvidia 330m with 256MB and I can play WoW at high at 60+ FPS in Mac OS. I just finished Fallout New Vegas (in Win 7) running on high and doing about 60 FPS at all times. I also played Borderlands at pretty high res and it ran great (also in win7). The 21 inch iMac with 6770m does have to push around 1920x1080 vs mine had to push 1680x1050, but the 6770m has twice the memory and is faster so you'll get pretty decent gaming out of it.
If you are tight on money, which it sounded like in the first post, why blow $3500 on the iMac, when most likely the $1699 or even $1199 probably will do just as good?
It is nice to have a 2GB 6970m card, if you are into serious gaming or CAD/3D work, but does it justify the extra cost? The $1699 27 inch will in most task be just as good as the $3500, and no one but you will know it's a 27 inch with 6770m and not 6970m with 2GB etc etc etc.
Anyway, it's your decision and I'm sure you'll be happy with the outcome!
When it comes to watching videos, surfing and email you can come pretty far with an older computer.
For an average user that doesn't have to play the newest games the base iMac will be just as fast as the top end.
I had my i5 MBP on repairs a bit earlier this year and during that time I used a 2008 C2D 2.0GHz Aluminum Macbook 13 with 4GB RAM.
80% of my work there was no difference at all. The C2D did maybe use a second more to open apps, but while using MS Office, Safari, iTunes and such there wasn't much difference at all.
I'm pretty sure that 90% of the users never use anything else than MS Office, Safari and iTunes (or similar apps).
20% of my work is done with photoshop or audio/video apps. Here is where it makes a difference. I can handle twice as many VST plugins on my i5 than on the C2D. Things render more than twice as fast and photoshop is loads faster when I work with large files (some of this is because I have 8GB in the i5).
My point? It seems you want to get an iPad and a new phone and money is part of this equation. You could get an 21-inch for $1299 and buy both iPad and iPhone. You could also opt for the standard 27-inch for $1699.
Unless you are a hardcore gamer you don't need the 2GB graphics card.
My i5 has a nvidia 330m with 256MB and I can play WoW at high at 60+ FPS in Mac OS. I just finished Fallout New Vegas (in Win 7) running on high and doing about 60 FPS at all times. I also played Borderlands at pretty high res and it ran great (also in win7). The 21 inch iMac with 6770m does have to push around 1920x1080 vs mine had to push 1680x1050, but the 6770m has twice the memory and is faster so you'll get pretty decent gaming out of it.
If you are tight on money, which it sounded like in the first post, why blow $3500 on the iMac, when most likely the $1699 or even $1199 probably will do just as good?
It is nice to have a 2GB 6970m card, if you are into serious gaming or CAD/3D work, but does it justify the extra cost? The $1699 27 inch will in most task be just as good as the $3500, and no one but you will know it's a 27 inch with 6770m and not 6970m with 2GB etc etc etc.
Anyway, it's your decision and I'm sure you'll be happy with the outcome!
I can't believe this has started already, just shows the vicious circle of technology, ivy bridge will come out and then something else will be on the horizon...frustrates me
So? It will be faster at the same power consumption or use less power at the same performance. Same thing that happens with every new generation, no matter how they achieve it.
You can wait 'til 2012 to get a 22nm CPU instead of 32nm CPU.
Or you can wait 'til 2013/14 to get a 15nm CPU instead of a 22nm CPU.
Or you can wait 'til 2015 to get a 10nm CPU instead of a 15nm CPU.
.
.
.
There is always something newer and better on the horizon.
But the fact is: For the stuff most people do with their iMacs, even the base model is already way overpowered.
Even for heavy stuff like professional audio production, the current iMacs will be fine for years to come.
And if you want a major speedboost in real-world applications right now (more than any of Intel's incremental updates will give you): Get an SSD drive.
This is why I need at least the base 1,999 27" I have started gaming in the past few years. If the 21" had atleast the 1GB GPU I'd go for the cheaper models but can't. I'm lucky to get 8-10 frames per second average is 40-50 in the games I play. The main game I play is an online game with really high resolution life like textures when set on the highest settings. So I need the 6970 and for the extra 100 go for the 2GB.
and yes budget wise it is going to be tight but it is better than getting the so-called $400-$500 PCs every 2 years when this high end will last me over 5-7. And I'll get to enjoy the benefits of Mac OSX vs headaches with Windows.
So my decision to buy this is
1) graphics
2) Mac OSX
3) longevity
It's either this or Alienware and after my experience with my iPhone i choose Mac thank you!
Last edited:
You just confirmed your ignorance of computers sir. You don't compare the machine you just picked out. You either buy a high end maxed Mac...or you build your own PC. There is no other comparison. If you are buying to primarily game, build a computer. Chances are you are going to be gaming in Bootcamp or the likes anyway. Hope you can pay it off in 13 months because Apple slaps you with retro interest at 22%. Just sayin...since you mentioned you were strapped for cash.
Which game?
If your old machine gets 8-10 FPS, then the low end iMac prolly will do 200
USB 3 is useless.
Ivy Bridge will bring faster processors and lower heat. This is critical for Notebooks, not for desktops.
Every year, computers will get faster.
After owning a 2011 MBP, that is one system that you should wait for IVY bridge on, unless you like gaming at 99C.
only one answer was necessary to this thread and it was this one (the first one)
And it brings a (drumroll) 20% increase in speed. That's it. Neat, but.....
I'd be more interested in what AMD can bring to the table at 28nm. I'd speculate on some 30-50% at the same power draw. Is it worth waiting a year for? Next lithographic shift is another 2 yrats down the line again, so no major change then until 2014.