I currently have a 2010 MacBook Pro with the high res anti glare screen. The primary purpose of that machine is Lightroom and Photoshop raw photo editing, and some occasional video editing. I'm running out of room on that machine, and it's slowish USB 2.0 and Firewire 800 external storage options are killing my Lightroom performance (particularly my old Drobo). I'm thinking of replacing it with an iMac, preferably with a 3TB fusion drive. An i7 and top end graphics card are a must, as while not necessary for my current workflow, they'll extend the useful life of the machine, I noticed that MacMall has a new 2012 27 iMac i7 with 1tb Fusion Drive at 680MX 2gb video card for $1899, which is $100 less than Apple' refurb store. To get a similar 2013 BTO from the apple store, it would cost about $800 more (with 3TB Fusion drive instead). I've read that that 2013 model has about a 10% performance increase, but is that 10% performance increase worth the approximately 40% additional cost over the MacMall 2012 deal? While I would like a 3TB drive, I could always add an external Thunderbolt drive for fast additional storage on the 2012 version. In addition to the storage concerns, my other hesitation is that Thunderbolt 2 and USB 3.1 are on the horizon, but that hesitation applies equally to the 2012 and 2013 models (I don't need 4K or Retina yet, as I prefer for that technology to mature over the next couple of years). Plus the $800 difference between well-spec'd 2012 and 2013 models would pay for an external Thunderbolt array down the road. Am I crazy to consider the 2012 model from MacMall over a 2013 BTO from Apple, especially when money is a bit tight given other photographic equipment priorities?