iMac, i7 2009 vs i5 2011 w/ssd

Discussion in 'iMac' started by dwd3885, Jul 21, 2011.

  1. dwd3885 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    #1
    I have a late 2009 27" iMac i7 and it is loaded. I'm currently trying to sell it but here's my dilemma. Should I try to sell this mac and get a Thunderbolt with SSD iMac, or should I try to put an ssd in it myself, or should I Just be content with what i have (lol).

    Even though I have 8gb ram and am on an i7, I feel slowness when opening some apps. I feel an ssd would improve just about everything and make my computer one that will last me for a very long time.

    I do a lot of photo editing and video encoding with Final Cut, rip blurays often, so I like the cpu power. But I'm not sure if something like a new 2011 i5 w/thunderbolt and ssd would be faster than my 2009 i7 with no thunderbolt/no ssd. Maybe my i7 with ssd would be the fastest, and it would be my first preference, it's just that I'm a little timid about opening the mac up!

    Any advice?
     
  2. Dresevski macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 6, 2011
    Location:
    Minnesnowda
    #2
    Put an SSD in for now. Much cheaper than losing money on the sale then buying a new computer. Not to mention all the saved time involved with switching computers. I know you want to hear that you should get a new computer (I would) but honestly if you're nearly content keeping the computer as-is then you will love it with the SSD installed.

    Taking it apart isn't the worst thing in the world as long as you have some knack for dissembling things. You could also pay a shop ~$120 to install whichever SSD you get. Get a SATA II SSD and install it yourself, best/cheapest option.
     
  3. GimmeSlack12 macrumors 603

    GimmeSlack12

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2005
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #3
    Put the SSD in yourself. Your machine still has 2 years of life at least and an SSD install is a little tough but if you take your time none of the steps are in any way hard.
     
  4. dwd3885 thread starter macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    #4
    It seems that the 2009 model is easier to put ssd in place of the optical drive, instead of putting an ssd on the new 2011 models where you have to completely remove the logic board among other things.

    I'm a technician for our school district and routinely take apart HP laptops, just never dealt with taking apart Macs before.
     
  5. Dresevski macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 6, 2011
    Location:
    Minnesnowda
    #5
    You will be fine doing the job. Just follow a guide or two. I did the install on my 2011 iMac and I have never built/been inside a computer before. You don't have to replace the optical either, it'll fit in there just fine. Plus with your older model you may be able to pick up the correct bracket to mount everything up as Apple would have.
     
  6. dwd3885 thread starter macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    #6
    so the other performance improvements in the 2011 iMac would be negligible? For instance, my 2009 2.8 i7 vs 2011 2.7 i5? I like to have a lot of apps open at a time and I know the Hyper Threading is good for that as well as multi-core apps. I'm not sure I would care about Thunderbolt or FaceTimeHD camera and those appear to be the only two things different besides architecture.
     
  7. InfoTime macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    #7
    What did you decide to do?

    I'm in the same boat. Got a 2009 27" iMac i7 2.8. It's feeling a little sluggish. I've got a 256GB SSD that came out of a recent MacBook Pro. My 1TB drive is nearly full. Trying to decide what to do, itching to upgrade.

    I've got 8GB RAM right now. Looks like 16GB can be had for about $100 from Crucial.com.
     
  8. aliensporebomb, Aug 24, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2011

    aliensporebomb macrumors 68000

    aliensporebomb

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2005
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN, USA, Urth
    #8
    A thought...

    You also might consider going from 8 gigs of memory to 16. Made a difference for me.

    My geekbench went from high 9000s-low 10,000 to almost 10,200 and there's more "snap".

    I believe the internal drives could have been better specced possibly.

    The SSD will help as well with the speed.

    i7 trumps i5 - it's just a fact.
     
  9. nicroma macrumors 6502a

    nicroma

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Location:
    Midwest, USA
    #9
    Wrong. The 2009 does not have the room that the newer models have. If you want to keep the regular HDD in the computer along with an SSD, the optical drive has to go.
     
  10. aliensporebomb macrumors 68000

    aliensporebomb

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2005
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN, USA, Urth
    #10
    Actually!

    Actually that's a great idea Nicroma! - get an external BluRay burner (much faster than the internal models on the iMacs from what I hear) and then use the optical drive cavity for the SSD on the 2009 models.
     
  11. zarathu macrumors regular

    zarathu

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    #11
    Final cut as well as Aperture are GPU intensive applications. The fact that the new mid 2011 iMacs have a substantially faster GPU will make a big different in those applications. Additionally even for applications that are not quad core aware, the CPU in the new sandy bridge chips have a turbo b uilt in. When the application is using only one core it will jump a 2.5 ghz core to almost 3.4 ghz. You can see it on activity monitor whenm you know that the application is only 2 core aware but that its using 250% of cpu power.
     

Share This Page