Faster CPU or iPod

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by phillipjfry, Jan 24, 2007.

Most Liked Posts
  1. phillipjfry, Jan 24, 2007

    phillipjfry macrumors 6502a

    phillipjfry

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2006
    Location:
    Peace in Plainfield
    #1
    I'm going to order my new iMac 24'' tomorrow (yay!) and I have two options within my limit.
    I can either get a:
    # 2.16GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
    # 2GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB
    # 500GB Serial ATA Drive
    # NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT 256MB SDRAM
    # SuperDrive 8X (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
    # Apple Wireless Keyboard & wireless Mighty Mouse + Mac OS X (US English)
    # 24-inch widescreen LCD
    with a silver 4gb ipod nano (I won't think about getting vid ipod until touchscreen is out)

    Or I can get the same config above, but with the 2.33GHz C2D for the same price.

    I will use my iMac for light picture editing, moderate use for video conversions, typical dvd burning, WoW, music. So would it be worth having the 2.33GHz processor, or will the 2.16 do me just fine and I can get the nano as well?
    Tomorrow is the big day that I can finally get rid of this senseless XP OS. Also, if I order it before a certain time (like noon PST) does it ship out sooner/faster? Also last question, I swear :), would anyone advise AGAINST having a BT keyboard/mouse?
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  2. gavd, Jan 24, 2007

    gavd macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    #2
    Go for the 2.16 and the Nano. You'll notice more benefit from getting more RAM which you're going to do than having a slightly quicker CPU.

    I'm not sure whether it makes any difference what time you order.

    I have no experience of a BT keyboard or mouse so can't help you there.

    Enjoy your purchase when it arrives anyway! :)
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  3. Carl Spackler, Jan 24, 2007

    Carl Spackler macrumors 6502

    Carl Spackler

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Location:
    Outer Space
    #3
    Sounds like a really nice setup.

    I can't imagine the processor bump would make a real difference to you one way or another. I'd go for the iPod without a second thought.
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  4. Boxer, Jan 24, 2007

    Boxer macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Location:
    Overland Park Kansas
    #4
    If it were me I would definately get the additional processor speed over the ipod. Here is my reasoning...

    You can always buy an ipod any time you like. The next time you get some extra cash, a raise or whatever. But you can't EVER upgrade your chip speed. You can always upgrade the ram and HD later too!

    If you are that set on having an ipod, then why don't you just get the standard amount of Ram or a smaller HD and then later you can get those upgraded, and also have the best chip, and an ipod! I mean the 2.16 and the 2.33 probably don't have that big of a difference, but just remember you can never get bigger in that regaurd.

    Just my opinion. Congrats on the purchase.
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  5. Jht, Jan 24, 2007

    Jht macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Location:
    Manchesterish, England
    #5
    Definitly the iPod, I'd be inclined to say the noticable diff between the processors would be debatable/minimal, go for the iPod, i practically live with mine.
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  6. phillipjfry, Jan 24, 2007

    phillipjfry thread starter macrumors 6502a

    phillipjfry

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2006
    Location:
    Peace in Plainfield
    #6
    That brings me to another point, why is it that upgrading from default ram to 2gb is around 170, but adding another 1gb of ram is around 500+$? that sounds....not right to me heh.

    In a sense, it makes sense to have the 2.33ghz cause when/if they upgrade the imac this year (probably not the 24'') the processor speed i get might end up being "low end". But then again, I might not even need it (seriously, its only 200mhz increase).
    I just cant wait till the true video ipods come out. Until then, I guess I'll "settle" with my 4gb nano :p
    Thank you so much. Hopefully a week from now I will have my new setup.
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  7. extraextra, Jan 24, 2007

    extraextra macrumors 68000

    extraextra

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Location:
    California
    #7
    A 2GB stick is more expensive than a 1GB stick. When you get 2GB of RAM they give you 2x1GB, when you get 3GB of RAM they give you 1x2GB 1x1GB.

    I'm not sure how much a 2GB stick costs though, Apple's prices may be really expensive or they may be reasonable. I know a 1GB stick is maybe around $80-$100 depending, so if they charge $175 for 2x1GB it's not a bad deal.
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  8. SpookTheHamster, Jan 24, 2007

    SpookTheHamster macrumors 65816

    SpookTheHamster

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Location:
    London
    #8
    iPod, 0.16GHz won't be noticeable now or ever, go for as much extra RAM whenever you can.

    Don't put off buying extra RAM when you purchase, Apple's prices are surprisingly good.
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  9. vanzskater272, Jan 24, 2007

    vanzskater272 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2006
    #9
    Get the ipod.
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  10. balamw, Jan 24, 2007

    balamw Moderator

    balamw

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Location:
    New England
    #10
    If you go that route you might still want to have a USB KB around, as some people have had trouble doing Boot Camp installs with BT keyboards only and there might be other occasions when a wired KB is just better.

    What I did when I bought my iMac (pre BT mighty mouse) was got it with the wired KB/mouse and just bought the BT KB separately, it was still $10 cheaper that the full wireless KB/mouse upgrade and I have both wired and wireless KBs for regular use.

    I'm also not a big fan of the current Apple mice (I don't like the scroll ball's lack of tactile feedback), so I'm using a Logitech wired mouse.

    B
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  11. NewSc2, Jan 24, 2007

    NewSc2 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Location:
    New York, NY
    #11
    ipod. waay more functionality than a small performance boost. you can't run and listen to your music with 0.16ghz ;)
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  12. Zwhaler, Jan 24, 2007

    Zwhaler macrumors 604

    Zwhaler

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    #12
    Yet we went to the moon with 0.00Ghz ;)

    While thats not the point, I say go with what is more important to you. If you want a faster computer, get the proc upgrade. If you want the iPod, go for the iPod. It's that simple.
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  13. Umbongo, Jan 25, 2007

    Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #13
    share
    + Quote Reply
  14. dmw007, Jan 25, 2007

    dmw007 macrumors G4

    dmw007

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Location:
    Working for MI-6
    #14
    Go for the 2.16GHz 24" iMac & the iPod Nano! :)
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  15. ezekielrage_99, Jan 25, 2007

    ezekielrage_99 macrumors 68040

    ezekielrage_99

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    #15
    An extra 160Mhz isn't worth the price, however doubling the RAM will make a huge difference.

    Go for the Nano, I got my 4G iPod Nano for Christmas and I love it :cool:
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
  16. acoustics940, Jan 25, 2007

    acoustics940 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    #16
    Ipod all the way!! Your computer will still be blazing without a cpu upgrade and be fast for many years IPODIPODIPOD
     
    share
    + Quote Reply
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)

Share This Page