Buying tips for 2012+

[RichardBeer]

The time to consider a new more powerful system is approaching and I find myself in a very tricky position in regards to my next purchase.

Firstly I know that from now until 2012 and onwards is a matter for speculation, due to newer hardware availability around that time period however I think my situation will not change.

I've been using a Macbook Pro (specs in signature) since 2009 and I would like a desktop machine as my next purchase. I love OS X and so I would like to keep using a mac. However this is where the problem begins. I want a desktop GPU, and this effectively cancels out the iMac as they use laptop GPUs. And the Mac Pro is well out of my range and in other respects, it would be overkill.

Therefore the position that I am in is that I cannot justify purchasing an iMac when I would be getting only laptop graphics however powerful they would be. And the result is that there is no middle ground. I would consider building a Hackintosh however this entails the risk of problems and support.

I understand that it's a wild stab in the dark but if anyone has any insight into solving this agonising situation; I would be most grateful.

 

[Vantage Point]

The latest iMacs rival some Mac Pro's for power and the latest MBP's are keeping up well. These are not the C2D CPU's but an entirely new generation with multi cores. I do not think you would be sacrificing anything with the latest models. My 2010 i5 2.4 CPU has a geek benchmark rating of 50% higher than the previous 3.06 C2D CPU's. The 2011 MBP can hit about 50% above that. Power and performance are not serious issues anymore

See this link. Things have come a very long way in the past 2 years and will certainly get even better
https://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/15/27-inch-imac-core-i7-with-ssd-is-fastest-mac-ever/

 

[PatrickCocoa]

Since you asked . . .

Relax.

You seem to be focusing on a "desktop GPU". My advice is to focus on what you want the computer to do for you. If the iMac does that, why do you care that it doesn't have a desktop GPU? If the iMac doesn't do what you want it to, don't buy it.

If you're a guy who buys computers for their specs, rather than what it can do, then you're more of a PC/Windows/Intel guy (not that there's anything wrong with that). Recognize what you want and go for it.

 

[Dark Void]

i would honestly just go with the imac. they are powerful computers and their starting price (21.5'') are that of the mbp line (13'').

 

[RichardBeer]

Well the issue itself is that desktop GPUs are more powerful than a discreet one. It's trying to justify spending money on a desktop whilst getting a laptop GPU. I don't have heavy gaming requirements and I know there's more to an iMac such as the display when it comes to pricing. However it just seems that I'd have less graphical power than would be the case if Apple had offered a headless case.

 

[Dark Void]

there's no sense in stabbing at the fact that it isn't a "desktop gpu" if it can more than handle what you would be using the computer for.

if it does, then just go with it. they are pretty powerful.

 

[alust2013]

Well the issue itself is that desktop GPUs are more powerful than a discreet one. It's trying to justify spending money on a desktop whilst getting a laptop GPU. I don't have heavy gaming requirements and I know there's more to an iMac such as the display when it comes to pricing. However it just seems that I'd have less graphical power than would be the case if Apple had offered a headless case.

So you don't game heavily, but you need a heavy-duty GPU? Buy an iMac, the 6970m is equivalent to a desktop 6790, which is a pretty nice card.

 

[RichardBeer]

It's really just that at the same price point, a more powerful GPU could have been used. But I'll see how things are at the time itself.

 

[alust2013]

It's really just that at the same price point, a more powerful GPU could have been used. But I'll see how things are at the time itself.

The GPU in the $1999 iMac is at least as powerful as the one in the $2499 Mac Pro. Perhaps that's a better perspective. Apple uses high end laptop GPUs so they don't overheat.

 

[iSee]

I think you're worrying too much.

1. iMac updates are surely coming at some point between now and the end of 2012. Maybe the update will include a GPU you find acceptable.

2. There's not really such a thing as a desktop GPU and a laptop GPU. These are marketing labels. What you really want in a GPU that is suitable for your needs. The current iMac may be good enough already. Forget about the labels and check out benchies that you think are relevant to you.

 

[RichardBeer]

Oh I see, so it's as good as a mid range GPU? That's fine then. My worry was that it wouldn't deliver power comparable to what you usually find in a desktop. My main gripe with my current GPU is that whilst it was fine in 09', it's showing it's age now.

 

[Vantage Point]

My main gripe with my current GPU is that whilst it was fine in 09', it's showing it's age now.

The top of the line iMac GPU is a AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB GDDR5, yours is not just older but only 256MB. The new iMacs can also handle up to 32Gb of RAM. Geek test for these models would be about 11,000 + while what you have would be closer to 3,500. The performance comparison is not exactly Apple and Apples - pardon the pun. Plus, you are thinking about the next generation Ivy Bridge CPU's for a 2012 purchase which will be even better. For many people a todays, and tomorrows, MBP and an external monitor will be able to handle just about everything including portability. I was an Imac + 13" MBP guy last year and now I my MBP is even faster than that iMac.