Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Cannot decide between iMacs...

J

JackE94

macrumors newbie
Original poster
The 5K display looks awesome, however will I use it? Probably not..I only use my desktop to play some games and some basic video editing with Final Cut Pro.

Screen size is not much of an issue, I was thinking either get the.

21.5 Inch - Total Cost £1,195.20

Hardware
2.9GHz Quad-core Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2X4GB
1TB Fusion Drive
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 1GB GDDR5
Apple Magic Mouse
Apple Wireless Keyboard (British) & User's Guide (English)



vs


27 Inch iMac - £1416

Hardware
3.2GHz Quad-core Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x4GB
1TB Fusion Drive
NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M 1GB GDDR5
Apple Magic Mouse
Apple Wireless Keyboard (British) & User's Guide (English)
Accessory Kit


vs

27 Inch Retina 5k iMac - - £1759

3.5GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5
Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz
8GB (two 4GB) memory
1TB Fusion Drive1
AMD Radeon R9 M290X with 2GB video memory


Cannot decide 😡
 
JackE94 said:
Is it aimed at photo editors & video editors, or just every user, is it really worth the extra £££ hmm..
Click to expand...

if you get the 27", and need more memory later, then you can add it, something you can't do on the 21". If you only are interested in the 21", then get it but if you are going for the 27", it seems to make sense to me that the cost difference is small enough to go for the Retina. Either way, you'll have a nice machine.
 
Honestly, I wouldn't go for the 21. The 27" is way better value - both for the display and the internals.

Now between the 27" and the Retina.... it comes down to how much you're willing to pay for that display. To me, Retina is absolutely worth the price difference, no question asked. But it may not be the same for you if the £300+ mean you're going to eat rocks for 3 months to make up for it.
 
pasadena said:
Honestly, I wouldn't go for the 21. The 27" is way better value - both for the display and the internals.

Now between the 27" and the Retina.... it comes down to how much you're willing to pay for that display. To me, Retina is absolutely worth the price difference, no question asked. But it may not be the same for you if the £300+ mean you're going to eat rocks for 3 months to make up for it.
Click to expand...

Just wondering, after a year, do you think it would lose much value?

I won't struggle, but is the £300 difference going to be noticable?

I appreciate all of your replies, guys.:apple:
 
pasadena said:
Honestly, I wouldn't go for the 21. The 27" is way better value - both for the display and the internals.

Now between the 27" and the Retina.... it comes down to how much you're willing to pay for that display. To me, Retina is absolutely worth the price difference, no question asked. But it may not be the same for you if the £300+ mean you're going to eat rocks for 3 months to make up for it.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I ventured into the world of iMac 2.1/2 years ago with a base 21.5" which is a great little machine. Then it was kind of a budget issue but always hankered for a 27". I always found the screen just that bit too small for my photo editing and having multiple windows open for that and my other stuff. Still aware of the 27" cost along comes the retina mac! For the extra cost I think it's worth it and going to my local Apple store later in the week to buy!

If I find it's too big or otherwise I'll have 14 days to return it but don't think I will!

To the Op I'd say bear in mind there'll probably be a 21.5" retina next year and retina will become the norm but you might keep asking yourself, as I do, why didn't I buy the 27" in the first place. Whether or not the extra cost between retina and non retina is worth it only your wallet can answer.

Go for the 27".
 
JackE94 said:
Just wondering, after a year, do you think it would lose much value?

I won't struggle, but is the £300 difference going to be noticable?

I appreciate all of your replies, guys.:apple:
Click to expand...

I think pasadena's advice is spot-on perfect. The 27" (whether retina or non-retina) is a much better value then the 21" iMac. If there's anyway you can afford the retina screen, I would definitely get it! You won't be disappointed.

As for your question regarding value, Retina screens will eventually be standard in all displays, so a regular screen may lose more value (relative to a retina screen) over time. However, with that being said, it's almost certain that Retina displays will come down slightly over time too, so it's a tough call.

I would only worry about value if you want to sell the computer in one year and then buy the next version. If you're going to hold on to this computer for the next 4-5 years, then I wouldn't even worry about it.

Hope this helps,
Bryan
 
seroposi said:
Agreed. I ventured into the world of iMac 2.1/2 years ago with a base 21.5" which is a great little machine. Then it was kind of a budget issue but always hankered for a 27". I always found the screen just that bit too small for my photo editing and having multiple windows open for that and my other stuff. Still aware of the 27" cost along comes the retina mac! For the extra cost I think it's worth it and going to my local Apple store later in the week to buy!

If I find it's too big or otherwise I'll have 14 days to return it but don't think I will!

To the Op I'd say bear in mind there'll probably be a 21.5" retina next year and retina will become the norm but you might keep asking yourself, as I do, why didn't I buy the 27" in the first place. Whether or not the extra cost between retina and non retina is worth it only your wallet can answer.

Go for the 27".
Click to expand...

Thanks for your time, I think I'll get the retina 27!

Cheers guys

----------
Bryan Bowler said:
I think pasadena's advice is spot-on perfect. The 27" (whether retina or non-retina) is a much better value then the 21" iMac. If there's anyway you can afford the retina screen, I would definitely get it! You won't be disappointed.

As for your question regarding value, Retina screens will eventually be standard in all displays, so a regular screen may lose more value (relative to a retina screen) over time. However, with that being said, it's almost certain that Retina displays will come down slightly over time too, so it's a tough call.

I would only worry about value if you want to sell the computer in one year and then buy the next version. If you're going to hold on to this computer for the next 4-5 years, then I wouldn't even worry about it.

Hope this helps,
Bryan
Click to expand...

Thanks man. Think I'll stick with it for 2/3 years and then upgrade!
 
Go for a mac mini, they're much faster. 😀

----------
JackE94 said:
The 5K display looks awesome, however will I use it? Probably not..I only use my desktop to play some games and some basic video editing with Final Cut Pro.

Screen size is not much of an issue, I was thinking either get the.

21.5 Inch - Total Cost £1,195.20

Hardware
2.9GHz Quad-core Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2X4GB
1TB Fusion Drive
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 1GB GDDR5
Apple Magic Mouse
Apple Wireless Keyboard (British) & User's Guide (English)



vs


27 Inch iMac - £1416

Hardware
3.2GHz Quad-core Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x4GB
1TB Fusion Drive
NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M 1GB GDDR5
Apple Magic Mouse
Apple Wireless Keyboard (British) & User's Guide (English)
Accessory Kit


vs

27 Inch Retina 5k iMac - - £1759

3.5GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5
Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz
8GB (two 4GB) memory
1TB Fusion Drive1
AMD Radeon R9 M290X with 2GB video memory


Cannot decide 😡
Click to expand...

:O the Retina 5K iMac doesnt come with the Magic Mouse and Keyboard? :O
 
File sizes with new 27in Retina iMac

I am considering the new Retina display but can anyone advise regarding the size of photographic files because of the display. Will the files be huge even for still photos, compared to my present iMac as below? I believe all the other internal specs are the same as the non-Retina 27in iMac.

I have a late 2009 27in at present which has been running very slowly with Mavericks - suspect that is the way it works - slow running drives one to upgrade!

Any valid advice appreciated, thanks.
 
Dillyew said:
I am considering the new Retina display but can anyone advise regarding the size of photographic files because of the display. Will the files be huge even for still photos, compared to my present iMac as below? I believe all the other internal specs are the same as the non-Retina 27in iMac.

I have a late 2009 27in at present which has been running very slowly with Mavericks - suspect that is the way it works - slow running drives one to upgrade!

Any valid advice appreciated, thanks.
Click to expand...

Photo sizes vary depending on compression levels. Can be almost any size you want them haha. But if you mean raw photo files, they'll be the same no matter which iMac they're on (if they're the same resolution)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back