imac 2.8 or 3.1 4k?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by wildernessbob, Mar 10, 2016.

  1. wildernessbob macrumors member

    wildernessbob

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Location:
    Pender Island, BC, Canada
    #1
    I'm looking to buy a new imac and i will be using it for CAD. what i need to know is, is there a performance difference between the 2.8 and the 3.1 4k since they both have the same video card and ram. i know the 3.1 is obviously a faster processor, but is it using up any speed gains over the 2.8 just to drive the 4k monitor or is it still a faster machine? i really have no need to spend extra money for the 4k monitor, just don't need it or care, but if the machine is actually faster, then i think it may be wise.
     
  2. estabya macrumors 6502

    estabya

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    #2
    The performance difference is not going to be huge. If the screen doesn't matter to you, you're probably better off using your budget to change the hard drive to a Fusion Drive. I'd recommend doing 2TB if it's in your budget, as the new 1TB Fusion Drives only have 24GB of flash versus 128GB in the larger ones.
     
  3. wildernessbob thread starter macrumors member

    wildernessbob

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Location:
    Pender Island, BC, Canada
    #3
    Ah. i expected as much. thanks for the info and the tip on the fusion drive.
    thanks
     
  4. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #4
    The 2TB fusion drive is definitely a recommendation but if you live within a 256GB SSD, then that will certainly offer better performance.
     
  5. varian55zx macrumors 6502a

    varian55zx

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #5
    hmm. Look. Both your options are good. ok.

    But if you compare the price of the 3.1 21.5 4k with integrated graphics.

    With any 5K iMac. You'll find the price difference is basically zero. Alright. Just sayin'.

    Now if this Mac is for a smaller enclosed space. Ok. But I'm just sayin'. Hope you find the one that's best for you! Good luck.
     
  6. Sirmausalot macrumors 6502a

    Sirmausalot

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2007
    #6
    Yup. The 4K iMac is not a good buy right now. They went with Broadwell chips and inferior graphics because Skylake wasn't available. Go with a 5K or wait to purchase a 2nd gen 4K.
     
  7. wildernessbob thread starter macrumors member

    wildernessbob

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Location:
    Pender Island, BC, Canada
    #7
    Not sure i follow you on that. there is a $700 dollar difference ($CAD) between similar 4k & 5K. and there in lies another conundrum. if i go all out and get the 3.3 5k i'm sure it's a way faster machine than the 3.1 4k. the extra screen real-estate would be great but not necessary. this is where i'm at. I have a 2009 MBP that i got new and have been using it to run CAD since then. i am running the latest version of that software now and it is starting to show it's age. it's a bit laggy as the model grows. so i'm thinking that any new machine is going to perform really well, and if i buy a faster machine it will run well for longer, but technology changes and it isn't just a matter of being fast enough to run the software. if i buy a mac pro it would be serious overkill and i have to wonder just how long it would be relevant. will the technology advance in the next 5-8 years such that the speed of the mac pro isn't going to be enough, for example, multiple cores where introduced but there wasn't any software that could take advantage of it etc. i'm thinking that in 5 or so years everything may have evolved in such a way that despite how fast the machine is, the software will have evolved with the hardware and the old machine won't be able to keep up. thoughts?
     
  8. varian55zx macrumors 6502a

    varian55zx

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #8
    No, there isn't.

    That math thing still gettin' the better of you, eh?

    Base 5K with 3.2 ghz i5 is $1799.

    3.1 ghz i5 4K is $1499.00.

    = not $700.

    The other option with the 4k is an i7.

    BTW, they don't even make a 4k iMac with 2.8 ghz i5.

    What are you talking about?
     
  9. Samuelsan2001 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    #9
    If your main use is CAD then the hyper threading of an i7 will make quite a performance difference.
     
  10. wildernessbob thread starter macrumors member

    wildernessbob

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Location:
    Pender Island, BC, Canada
    #10
     
  11. varian55zx macrumors 6502a

    varian55zx

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #11
    But this thread was never about the i7.

    The title says 2.8 and 3.1.

    The i7 in the 4K iMac is a 3.3 ghz i7.
     
  12. wildernessbob thread starter macrumors member

    wildernessbob

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Location:
    Pender Island, BC, Canada
    #12
    you are correct, but samuelsan2001 suggested the i7, not me. he made a productive suggestion based on the information in my thread. The intention of this part of the forum is to help those with less understanding of the issues and problems around macs by those with more knowledge and understanding. I humbly apologise and beg your pardon for my error when comparing the 4 and 5k macs in not correctly specifying the the 5k with more closely corresponding specs to the 4k. now if you have nothing productive to contribute, why don't you try and find something useful to do with your time.
     
  13. varian55zx macrumors 6502a

    varian55zx

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #13
    Oh yeah, sure.

    That was a very productive suggestion.

    Anyone considering the 4K ought to certainly take a look at making the jump to the i7, without a doubt.
     

Share This Page