Buying Imac 2.8 or 3.06 ?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by Babba, Aug 10, 2008.

  1. Babba macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2008
    #1
    Well, i'm buying one tomorrow. But can't decide between models.
    I don't play any games...(never)..I mainly use Photoshop, After effects and some 3d software...
    Does 3.06 worth some extra bucks..?

    btw: i still couldn't understand one thing..in the website of my local applestore, it says 3.06 Core 2 Duo Extreme. And 2.8 Core 2 Duo.
    Does that mean 2.8 is not extreme? does anyone know anything about it ?
    Can any 2.8 owner check if it's extreme or not :) ?
     
  2. NStocks macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #2
    Good question, I want to know the exact same thing !. But I will definitley want the higher grade Graphics, because the main use for the iMac for me is Photo editing, but I'm debating if it's worth the extra £.

    NStock
     
  3. G-Force macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    #3
    Both the 2.8 and the 3.06 are Core 2 Duo processors, so in the current iMac line-up you can't get any Extreme processor.

    If you don't play any games, the 2.8 with ATI graphics is fast enough. :)
     
  4. Babba thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2008
    #4
  5. G-Force macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    #5
    That must be a mistake, because it can't be a Core 2 Duo Extreme. It is a Core 2 Duo or a Core 2 Extreme and according to the US and NL store, it's a Core 2 Duo. Even if it was an Extreme, it wouldn't matter because it's pretty much only a name. Apart from the clockspeed, the processors (2.8 vs 3.06) are both the same.
     
  6. AC773 macrumors member

    AC773

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2006
    #6
    The 3.06 (in terms of clock speed) is 9% faster than the 2.8, and as you mentioned, the better processor is "EXTREME".

    How much is that really worth to you?
     
  7. xpipe macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    #7
    Babba, they have different graphics cards as well (unless you get the 2.8 built to order). That may be something else for you to consider. If you search ATI NVIDIA in this iMac, eMac, Mac mini subforum, you'll find a number of threads about it.
     
  8. AppleMatt macrumors 68000

    AppleMatt

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2003
    Location:
    UK
    #8
    Invest the money you would use on the minor speed increase elsewhere - I'd suggest maxing out the RAM and buying an external drive. You'll appreciate the benefits much more.

    AppleMatt
     
  9. Babba thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2008
    #9
    isn't ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO an ok card? should i waste more for nvidia ?
     
  10. Fonzijr1964 macrumors 68000

    Fonzijr1964

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Location:
    Maryland
    #10
    the 2.8 used to be extreme (thats what i have) but now none of the options are extreme :(

    Oh yeah, get the 3.06 u will never regret it
     
  11. gehrbox macrumors 65816

    gehrbox

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Location:
    Charleston,SC
    #11
    If you don't play games or run a lot of 3d OpenGL apps you will not miss the NVidia (8800). The ATI 2600 out performs the 8800 or comes out the same in most desktop apps.

    That's with today's public version of OS X. Apple may tweak the drivers on the NVidia side in the next update and change the balance some. Nobody knows but Apple.

    The next major release, Snow Leopard is expected to make more use of the GPU for general purpose processes. If this is the case the NVidia, with its extra memory and processing power might see a big performance gain over the 2600 equipped iMac.

    What ever you do, don't buy your extra memory from Apple. It is more then twice as expensive as memory available from places like NewEgg. I paid under $70 for 4GB for my iMac and have seen it as low as $61.
     
  12. CastrolSyntec macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    #12
    Get the 2.8

    The 2.8 option is fine and spending that much money is not necessary for the .26GHz. Anyways, you can overclock the processor to 3.06 by yourself, producing no more heat than the overclocked 3.06 from Apple will. :D
     
  13. ayzee macrumors 6502a

    ayzee

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2008
    #13
    Id say because an iMac is such a significant investment, get the best you can afford. I cant imagine you regretting it and it makes it a little more future proof, because that extra processing power may make all the difference once the new Snow Leopard OS is released and you want to upgrade.
     
  14. gehrbox macrumors 65816

    gehrbox

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Location:
    Charleston,SC
    #14
    Exactly how do you do that? I'd like to overclock my 3.06.
     
  15. tri3limited macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Location:
    London
    #15
    http://www.macworld.com/article/133332/2008/05/alumimac2008.html

    Halfway down the page is a comparison table with benchmarks. Not sure what tests they did exactly but the 3.06 is quicker, not drastically, but if you're working with large photoshop files or move on to video then it would be worth it.

    Remember i imagine that you'll want it to last a good 3-5 years or so. Therefore the 3.06 would be best if you can afford it. You can always upgrade the RAM at a later date.
     
  16. Fonzijr1964 macrumors 68000

    Fonzijr1964

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Location:
    Maryland
    #16
    Would u tell me how to to this
     
  17. CristobalHuet macrumors 65816

    CristobalHuet

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    Location:
    Montreal
    #17
    Actually, the 3.06 is Core 2 Extreme, at least that's what I picked up on the Apple site the other day and Wikipedia.

    EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMac_(Intel-based)#Models
     
  18. bob vansteel macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    #18
    Really, is that soo....would you mind telling us how you hacked into the EFI to change your clockspeed....oh wait you can't because it isn't possible!
     
  19. iWantiPhone macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    #19
    omg you guys are fighting like noobs. the 2.8 is extreme as well. look up X7900.
     
  20. Fonzijr1964 macrumors 68000

    Fonzijr1964

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Location:
    Maryland
    #20
    yeah there is now way in hell to over clock an iMac
     
  21. Metuas macrumors regular

    Metuas

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Under a rock.
    #21
    Um. That depends. The previous-generation 24" 2.8 was an overclocked Core 2 Extreme, with a stock speed of 2.6 (or 2.66?). The current-generation 24" 2.8 is a Core 2 Duo.
     
  22. gehrbox macrumors 65816

    gehrbox

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Location:
    Charleston,SC
    #22
    Please post a link to the Apple web page that states the 3.06 and the early 2008 2.8 iMac's use Core 2 Extreme chips.

    Your Wiki data does not agree with Apples tech specifications nor with specs provided by Mactracker (These sources state that they are C2D, not Extreme). The chips used are E8235 and E8435 Penryn's
     
  23. CristobalHuet macrumors 65816

    CristobalHuet

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    Location:
    Montreal
    #23
    I could've sworn it said "Intel Core 2 Extreme" on Apple's site when I bought it, can't find the page anymore. :(

    Nevertheless, isn't "Extreme" just a term to show what's the best option available as of now? (in our case the 3.06 model) :confused:
     
  24. vestigo74 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Location:
    Calgary, AB
    #24
    Yeah I was going to say the same thing. When I ordered mine on Wednesday, it said Intel Core 2 Extreme... now it says Core 2 Duo.

    Hmm... Even the article in Wiki gave the model numbers and said they were Extreme.

    I don't think it's that big of a deal, though.

    Edit: Actually, here's the Wiki link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...2Penryn_XE.22_.28standard-voltage.2C_45_nm.29

    It probably is a Core 2 Extreme (unlocked for overclocking, faster FSB), but Apple is choosing to not show the "Extreme" part (anymore) because there's no way to overclock. Instead, they're marketing it as a "Core 2 Duo with a faster FSB." Either way, it's all good to me. It's still the fastest dual-core, mobile processor on the market! (regardless of what they call it)

    Edit 2: Anyway, all that stuff aside. My recommendation is to get the best you can afford. Remember, it's an all-in-one unit... so you can either save yourself $200 now and then spend another $2000 in two years, or spend that $200 now and get something that will last you for 3-4 years. There's no upgrading down the road with the iMac.
     
  25. Namnorkimo macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2008
    #25
    "If you don't play any games, the 2.8 with ATI graphics is fast enough."

    That is wrong. Even if there will always be someone faster, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 2600 XT is pretty good for gaming!

    "there's no way to overclock"

    I do not know if it may be possible to overclock the mainboard, the frontside-bus or the CPU of the iMac, but to overclock the ATI card is easy in Windows!
     

Share This Page