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

IlikeMacsSoMuch

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 30, 2009
346
2
Blainville, Province of Quebec
So, is the iMac basically a big ass screen MBP? I mean, besides some game playing, would the average Joe (me) see any difference, performance wise or else, between using a 2012 27 inches iMac and using 2012 15 inches cMBP plugged into a thunderbolt display?

Without taking into account the portability off course!
 
For what purpose do you use your computer? Which macbook pro are you comparing the 27" iMac.

Display and portability asides
You get two thunderbolt ports which the non-retina macbook pro don't have.
The retina macbook pro offer all flash storage which the imac does offer only as a BTO option.

The iMac offers a nicer video card.
 
For what purpose do you use your computer? Which macbook pro are you comparing the 27" iMac.

Display and portability asides
You get two thunderbolt ports which the non-retina macbook pro don't have.
The retina macbook pro offer all flash storage which the imac does offer only as a BTO option.

The iMac offers a nicer video card.

I'm an IT consultant, mostly for windows clients, I have a 2009 27 iMac and I just upgraded my 2008 MBP to a 2012 15 cMBP, I'm not much of a gamer so I wondered if it was worth it to upgrade my iMac as well or just buy a thunderbolt display.

Apple just changed the HDD of my iMac so I think that I could have a fairly good resale value.

So, mostly I do coding, web site support and network support
 
I'm an IT consultant, mostly for windows clients, I have a 2009 27 iMac and I just upgraded my 2008 MBP to a 2012 15 cMBP, I'm not much of a gamer so I wondered if it was worth it to upgrade my iMac as well or just buy a thunderbolt display.

Apple just changed the HDD of my iMac so I think that I could have a fairly good resale value.

So, mostly I do coding, web site support and network support

I'd just add a display not necessarily the TBD.
 
So, is the iMac basically a big ass screen MBP? I mean, besides some game playing, would the average Joe (me) see any difference, performance wise or else, between using a 2012 27 inches iMac and using 2012 15 inches cMBP plugged into a thunderbolt display?

Without taking into account the portability off course!

No, an average user wouldn't see much difference in use of a MBP and an iMac unless they play games.

For what it's worth, it has a considerably better GPU at the high end and a marginally better processor for quite a bit cheaper. The only downside is lack of portability.
 
So, is the iMac basically a big ass screen MBP? I mean, besides some game playing, would the average Joe (me) see any difference, performance wise or else, between using a 2012 27 inches iMac and using 2012 15 inches cMBP plugged into a thunderbolt display?

Without taking into account the portability off course!

The iMacs use desktop CPUs and, at the top end, under-clocked desktop GPUs, and then there are the connectivity options, 3 terabyte hard drive and fusion drive options, presumably better sound, and other things I'm probably forgetting.

So no, I don't see how the iMac can be considered a big MBP.
 
The iMacs use desktop CPUs and, at the top end, under-clocked desktop GPUs, and then there are the connectivity options, 3 terabyte hard drive and fusion drive options, presumably better sound, and other things I'm probably forgetting.

So no, I don't see how the iMac can be considered a big MBP.

This

I can deal with mobile GPU but the big difference between a laptop CPU and desktop CPU is performance. With a laptop you have a max 35 watt TDP (correct me if i'm wrong I know it's no higher than 45 watt) with the desktop we have 65 watt TDP processors.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.