Difference between an i5 and i7

[comatory]

I am sure I don't need it right now, but I plan on using it for the next 4 or 5 years, and I don't know if I may regret the decision in a couple of months or years.

OK I get that but go ahead and read that ArsTechnica article, it's pretty descriptive. Unless you'll be doing AV stuff profesionally, it's a waste of $$$.
It really depends but if you even don't know what hyperthreading is, that means you even haven't got into these things seriously (no offense).

Also I am pretty sure hyper threading won't be "mandatory" for future OS releases or applications, it's been around few years and developers haven't put much effort in using this technology (well apart from those pro applications). Just go ahead and ask any gamers (most of them run i5s or even i3s). i7 is aimed at niche market really, a bit wider than Xeons but still...

On the other hand, since you'll be spending so much money I guess getting i7 isn't really that big of a deal.

 

[leman]

I'd still rather pay for the GPU upgrade to 680MX instead as it will help drive my second screen more effectively

No it won't.

You are seriously overestimating how little GPU work there is to driving multiple monitors. Even 10 year old cards are able to effortlessly drive multiple monitors. The speed of GPU itself is almost negligible to the performance of the video signal convertors.

Unless of course, you are planning to play games on multiple monitors, then you need a beefy GPU.

 

[comatory]

I'd still rather pay for the GPU upgrade to 680MX instead as it will help drive my second screen more effectively

That made me laugh.

 

[Confuzzzed]

That made me laugh.

Well, the 680 will help me more than the i7 processor that I don't need...

 

[comatory]

Well, the 680 will help me more than the i7 processor that I don't need...

OK - but for "just" driving second display? 15 year old GPUs can do that? Of course if you were gaming on multiple monitors that'd be something different but for just displaying stuff, any GPU will do (even very old integrated GPUs).

 

[Binarymix]

$3,000 computer... $200 upgrade. Who cares?

Exactly. If you have the $3000 to spend, why not just max out all options (within reason, not saying buy the $1300 SSD ). better resale value, and it will keep you plugging along for years to come.

 

[7enderbender]

Here is what I'm still trying to fully understand: how does a i5 iMac compare to the i7 Mac Mini? And does it make a difference for a machine that is mostly running Lightroom/Photoshop and Cubase/Logic/ProTools?

 

[Confuzzzed]

OK - but for "just" driving second display? 15 year old GPUs can do that? Of course if you were gaming on multiple monitors that'd be something different but for just displaying stuff, any GPU will do (even very old integrated GPUs).

Maybe not 15 years but I plan using my machine for a good 5-6. So rather pay for what I need most. Don't think CPU upgrade is necessary for *my* needs. And yes, hopefully dual screen gaming too albeit nothing too serious

----------

Here is what I'm still trying to fully understand: how does a i5 iMac compare to the i7 Mac Mini? And does it make a difference for a machine that is mostly running Lightroom/Photoshop and Cubase/Logic/ProTools?

Had the 2011 Mac Mini with i7 and integrated GPU and found it lacking something. Haven't had the iMac yet so can't comment but would be seriously disappointed if the i5 iMac wasn't outperforming the i7 mac mini...

 

[12dylan34]

Respectfully, I don't understand why you have to ask about the i7 if you do 3D...Unless you're doing something like just modeling and leaving the processor heavy rendering to someone else, in which case the GPU is more important.

Otherwise, ideally you would have a 16 core workstation if you have the means and are dedicated to it.