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

iMac 17 vs iMac 20

N

nightelf

macrumors 6502
Original poster
I want to buy a new iMac but cannot decide between the iMac 17" 2.0 (EDU $1100) or the iMac 20" 2.16 ($1400).

Are worth the $300 for the extra 3", .16Mhz, and 90GB of hard drive? If I pick the 17" I would buy an external hard drive.

I cannot BTO de hard drive because im going to travel and I would receive the Mac after leaving.

Thanks.
 
nightelf said:
I want to buy a new iMac but cannot decide between the iMac 17" 2.0 (EDU $1100) or the iMac 20" 2.16 ($1400).

Are worth the $300 for the extra 3", .16Mhz, and 90GB of hard drive? If I pick the 17" I would buy an external hard drive.

I cannot BTO de hard drive because im going to travel and I would receive the Mac after leaving.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Depends on what you're doing with it. I've got a 17-incher and it works fine for my needs (I'm a writer, and I do a little work with photoshop / garageband). Plus the external HD will be excellent for backups.
 
wordmunger said:
Depends on what you're doing with it. I've got a 17-incher and it works fine for my needs (I'm a writer, and I do a little work with photoshop / garageband). Plus the external HD will be excellent for backups.
Click to expand...

I would play WoW, browse, code some PHP, some graphics with Fireworks. My current Mac is a iMac G4, and is working well, only that i have to play on a DELL 😱 because it runs too slow on the iMac.
 
nightelf said:
I would play WoW, browse, code some PHP, some graphics with Fireworks. My current Mac is a iMac G4, and is working well, only that i have to play on a DELL 😱 because it runs too slow on the iMac.
Click to expand...

I don't play, but I'd guess WoW would run better on the 17-incher because of the smaller display size. You've got the same graphics card, so all things being equal, fewer pixels=faster play.
 
I have a 20" iMac and it's just really fine! However if I was brutally honest with myself I could probably have been happy with a 17". I can always talk myself into buying more spec!

I think 17" is the most popular size in computer screens generally - although that probably includes business too.

Maybe a 17" with a full-load of RAM? However is you tend to use the desktop with several windows open at once, so maybe Eye TV running whilst surfing the net or typing a letter then 20" does give you room to spread out a bit!
 
I thought about this for a bit over a year ago when I got my iMac. I thought, hey, I've gotten used to a 12" PB, surely I could do w/ a 17" iMac and I honestly thought the 20" screen was obscenely big (when I saw it in stores)...

But I opted for the 20" and within two days, I couldn't imagine using a smaller display as a primary computer. 😱

I know if you got the 20" you couldn't get the external HD just yet, but that can be bought later-- you can't decide after the fact that you're willing to shell out another $300 and get a bigger display. 😛
 
I was also thinking about a MacBook, but they will get outdated very soon with the new C2D version coming out.

I would buy one if they come out today!!! 😀
 
I don't think anyone can tell you whether those features are worth $300 to you. To me the $300 was worth more, so I went for the 17" model.
 
yeah... to each his own. personally, i would rather have more ram than a 20" screen. i have a 18" LCD screen, and ive worked with a 20" iMac before, but I thought the 20" was just a little too big for me. i like the slightly smaller size on my desk.

i hope to get a core 2 duo 17" imac pretty soon. i love my macbook, but ive missed having a bigger screen and the desktop feel for my primary computer since i sold my pc. plus, the best setup for me is a laptop and desktop.
 
i'd shoot for the 20", if it's going to be your primary computer, having a larger screen size does wonders because you could always buy an external HD but you won't be able to up the screen size
 
i'd go for the 20". 17" seems too small to me nowadays.

actually, i'd go for the 24" personally.. but that's just me. heh
 
well apart from the apparent screen size difference, does anyone know how the 17" 2.16 2gb 128mb x1600 compare to a 20" 2.16 2gb 256mb x1600 in terms of game performace.

could you post some game fps stats?
 
wchong said:
well apart from the apparent screen size difference, does anyone know how the 17" 2.16 2gb 128mb x1600 compare to a 20" 2.16 2gb 256mb x1600 in terms of game performace.

could you post some game fps stats?
Click to expand...

the extra 128MB GPU memory does wonders more for gaming
 
actually...

meepm00pmeep said:
the extra 128MB GPU memory does wonders more for gaming
Click to expand...
i think barefeats noted only a 10-15% boost in performance. If that is "wonders" then id be surprised
 
nightelf said:
I want to buy a new iMac but cannot decide between the iMac 17" 2.0 (EDU $1100) or the iMac 20" 2.16 ($1400).

Are worth the $300 for the extra 3", .16Mhz, and 90GB of hard drive? If I pick the 17" I would buy an external hard drive.

I cannot BTO de hard drive because im going to travel and I would receive the Mac after leaving.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Go for the 20. First of all, its .16 Ghz, or 160 Mhz.

Think about it. In 2 years from now you would be much happier on a 20" with all the goodies than a 17". Trust me. In 2 years from now you won't care if you spent 300 extra dollars. Just do it.
 
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