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

iMac 24" maxed out vs 2.66Ghz Mac Pro

Schroedinger said:
Mac Pro without a doubt... etc, etc, etc.
Click to expand...

freddiecable said:
you should def. get a MacPro! Especially when rendering video etc.
Click to expand...
Good points! The thing that is killing me at the moment is the extra cost, and I will probably NOT be using a student ADC for it... also the bigger screen is good for editing.

I do like the fact that I can get the quad 2.0 to save money and later make it an octo 3.5 if I so desire...

So confused. :eek:
 
I'm in the same position but in web development and already have a 17" Apple Studio Display.

Which...makes the iMac 24" even more desirable. :D However, I don't need 24" right now and my current screen is fine for what I do.

I'm pretty much set on a base 2.0 Mac Pro. Wayyyy enough speed and I like to buy for upgrade ability. The graphics card being soldered to the board in the iMac puts a real stamp of 'finite life span' on it for a lot of people.

I lent towards the iMac 24 for the screen, the elegance, and the fact I was paying for what I'd be using. What I'm doing wont be running dual processors to any degree. I also read that even some of Apples own software doesn't utilize dual processors fully. The article mentioned exporting in Quicktime I think.

But I also need professional color accuracy. And several have said the iMac's screen was not made for that.

Also, what isn't a selling point for me, is the amount of internal stuff going on in the Mac Pro. I have no problem with external hd's. I have no problem with external optical drives.

So it's really back, forth, back, forth for me. An iMac is plenty fast enough. Think it's gonna be a Mac Pro though. It also has the benefit of the unknown....if what you do (work, or whatever takes your fancy) changes, it will cover your ass to the nth degree. Ability to change screen later, USB 3.0, Firewire 1600 :D, graphics card if my needs change.....are all selling points. Plus, 60lb of aluminum is an investment if our country gets invaded and we're at war. I can throw it at the opposition. They will surely die.
 
upgradability is over rated. besides, it helps convince the wife to let you buy all new gear. more fun that way.
 
I'll have to agree with that. While the idea of upgrading is initially appealing, the reality of the situation is that one can only upgrade 'so much'. That is to say, you can add harddrives, increase ram, maybe even pop in some slightly faster chips. But by the time I want to start doing that, a few years will have passed and there will be some excellent new systems out that will be money better spent. Where upgrading is nice though is adding in minor yet rewarding technology improvements, such as upgrading to e-sata when it's available or future wireless networking solutions. Those are upgrades usually only well implemented through internal additions...a solution offered only by the Mac Pro.

My unfortunate update is that my current monetary situation has put a new computer purchase on hold until June. I suppose the bright side is that June is a big Mac month. I may just do the decked out iMac and give myself a reason to buy another machine in 4 years :) .
 
jesteraver said:
I am more then likely going to get a Mac Pro now than getting a iMac 24" seeing I can upgrade easilly :) cost more but will be worth it in the long run
Click to expand...
A very wise decision. :)

The ability to expand your system is very desirable ....... no, essential. :cool:

FJ
 
I haven't read through all the posts here, but I faced a similar question earlier this year. In the end, I decided on the mac pro mainly because it is easy to upgrade ram and HD. I think that the iMacs are very impressive machines though. They are very fast, and I have to say that some things like opening apps and surfing the web feel like they are faster on my wife's iMac 2.16 C2D than they do on my MacPro. That said, I can blaze through video editing (rendering etc) like nobody's business! Also, for both machines, note that the price of RAM is reasonable now....

Not sure if this helps, but...
 
with the Mac Pro you get loads of fast (more than CS2 needs, for sure). The things that'll make a difference is keeping a load of free drive space open and having lots of RAM. If you want to have pretty much teh fastest PS machine you can get, but a 36/72 GB 10,000 RPM Raptor drive, and set it as Photoshop's Scratch disk, combined with 4+ GB of ram... Soooo fast.

Here's something sweet about the Mac Pro–you can buy another HD for cheaper than an external one would be, and stick it inside. When HD DVD/BluRay become cheap enough, you can put in an internal burner. Sweet.
 
I'll be in the same boat next year.

I'm no expert on the subject, but I've also had to consider power consumption. The 24" imac is listed on the apple site as 220w, whereas I've read about the mac pro drawing up nearly 1kw! (actual figure not shown on apple).

Just thought it was worth a mention, coming from quite a green person its one of the elements that is drawing me to the iMac!
 
vendettabass said:
...The 24" imac is listed on the apple site as 220w, whereas I've read about the mac pro drawing up nearly 1kw! (actual figure not shown on apple).

Just thought it was worth a mention, coming from quite a green person its one of the elements that is drawing me to the iMac!
Click to expand...

Compare that to the Macbooks which max out at 85 watts (I guess that's a 17" chugging as hard as it can...)
 
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