iMac or Mac Pro? Advice please

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by gazfocus, May 21, 2008.

  1. gazfocus macrumors 68000

    gazfocus

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2008
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #1
    Ok, so I've just sold my Macbook Pro and I'm now looking for a Mac desktop.

    Do I buy an iMac or a Mac Pro?

    I do web design, and some graphics work (flyers, etc).

    I kinda think the iMac will be ok apart from the lack of expandability (hard drives, etc), and I'm a bit concerned about the screen quality.

    I already have a 23" ACD which would minimalise the cost of owning a Mac Pro but is it really worth the extra money (in comparison to the 2.8GHz 24" iMac)?

    Thanks
     
  2. brn2ski00 macrumors 68020

    brn2ski00

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    #2
    Sell the ACD and just buy the 3.06 iMac. This beast will certainly suite your needs. You won't need another monitor when you already have 24" of pure bliss. :D
     
  3. EricNau Moderator emeritus

    EricNau

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #3
    Yes, the iMac sounds like it will suit your needs best. I wouldn't worry about expandability too much; you can always add more RAM later (up to 4 GB) and you can always buy external Firewire 800 storage drives (keep in mind, you can order the iMac with up to 1 TB).
     
  4. DadHatter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #4
    I would buy the Mac Pro. It's worth having the Matte screen for your design work, methinks.

    Mike
     
  5. DadHatter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #5
    On second thought, what about the iMac with the ACD as a second monitor?

    Mike
     
  6. gazfocus thread starter macrumors 68000

    gazfocus

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2008
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #6
    Thanks for comments so far.

    I don't really like messy cables that external drives would create. One alternative would be a NAS drive or something connected to my router.

    I would only have 2 displays if they were both the same (i.e. 2 ACDs). I know this may be picky but that's me :)

    Are there still problems with the screens on the 24" iMacs?
     
  7. teleromeo macrumors 65816

    teleromeo

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Location:
    kidnapped by aliens
    #7
    nothing picky about that.

    I'm planning to buy a MacPro to sit next to a 4 year old pc. I will check if my new monitor works with the pc and eventually buy a second one so my desk looks real neat.
     
  8. gazfocus thread starter macrumors 68000

    gazfocus

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2008
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #8
    Another thing that crossed my mind is would I notice much difference between the dual core in the iMac and the 8 core in the Mac Pro for what I'll be using it for?
     
  9. mperkins37 macrumors 6502a

    mperkins37

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    #9
    Go for the macpro, Big difference in performance over the Imac.
     
  10. neiltc13 macrumors 68040

    neiltc13

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #10
    No, it doesn't take two cores let alone eight to save an HTML file.
     
  11. gazfocus thread starter macrumors 68000

    gazfocus

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2008
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #11
    What about the graphics work? (I use fireworks and photoshop) and also use flash for some websites.
     
  12. MattZani macrumors 68030

    MattZani

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #12
    most programs arent coded to use more than 2 cores (mac will have to wait until CS5 probably) but if you have 4 apps open, then you would definitely notice the difference!

    Go Mac Pro, the ACD is so much better than the imac screen
     
  13. iToaster macrumors 68000

    iToaster

    Joined:
    May 3, 2007
    Location:
    In front of my MacBook Pro
    #13
    At the moment, it would be better to get an iMac. A Mac Pro is faster in processor heavy multi-threaded applications, but there isn't any noticeable difference between an iMac and Mac Pro whilst one is doing graphics work.
     
  14. gazfocus thread starter macrumors 68000

    gazfocus

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2008
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #14
    Thanks for the advice received back so far. My only reluctance to buying the iMac at the moment is the popular screen faults. I have a 23" ACD which I am very happy with and that I know works 100% (although being 2 1/2 years old now).

    I was originally concerned about upgradability/expandability for RAM and Hard drives, etc, but I think my max RAM would be 4GB anyway, and I can always use NAS hard drives etc.

    What about graphics card? Would I need an 8800GT to do graphics work? I rarely touch photoshop files that are larger than a couple of hundred megabytes, so obviously, if I stuck with the ATI graphics on a Mac Pro, it would keep the cost down (I'm a student so get it a bit cheaper anyway).

    Please keep the advice coming :):):)
     
  15. jdavtz macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Location:
    Kenya
    #15
    The 8800 won't help with any 2D graphics work.
     
  16. akm3 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    #16
    Get the quad-core mac pro. Saves you $500 and still gets you a very very good, very very expandable machine, and maximizes the investment in ACD you already have.
     
  17. neiltc13 macrumors 68040

    neiltc13

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #17
    I know this might be a little weird to suggest in this topic given the computers you've had in the past, but have you considered a Mac mini?

    From what you've said, you'll be using the computer for 2D graphics work and web editing. The current Mac mini is more than capable of this (even if it is a little underpowered compared to the iMac). Give it enough RAM and it will easily cope with Photoshop and Illustrator.

    There really isn't any need for you to spend all of that money on a Pro machine IMO. You can save a HUGE amount by just getting a Mac mini instead. £588.99 gets you 2GHz Core 2 Duo, 160GB HDD and 2GB RAM. This is way more than the Photoshop/Illustrator system requirements.
     
  18. gazfocus thread starter macrumors 68000

    gazfocus

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2008
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #18
    To be honest, I wouldn't even entertain the idea of a mini. My issue with something like that is my Windows PC is far more powerful, and I'm reluctant to pay £600 for a computer with less power than I already have. (If I was going to consider a Mac Mini spec, I'd go for the Macbook instead)

    I really want a machine that will last a while and I do a bit of sound recording and video editing (although a hobby and nothing professional), and I know the Mac mini won't be enough for me.
     
  19. mlblacy macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Location:
    the REAL Jersey Shore
    #19
    Hi, I agree... expandability is overrated. Another way to look at it is you can upgrade to a new iMac in 2 years and still be in the same ballpark dollarwise. I moved away from a pro tower into a 24" loaded iMac, and have not regretted it one whit. CS Suite, Quark, Aperture, etc. etc, all run fine. If you were doing intensive video I would consider a pro, but I have a busy design studio and work every day on mine (as a pro).

    I don't miss the clunky box with a million wires either. I have a couple of firewire drives up on a shelf out of the way, and minimal clutter. I used to have both wireless mouse and keyboard, but replaced the keyboard (I am a bit tough on them). I don't agree with the decision to only offer the wireless keyboard in a non-extended form, and went with the wired one. Mixed blessing I guess, I wish (slightly) that it was wireless too, but overall think the "feel" is the best keyboard I have ever had...

    cheers,
    michael
     

Share This Page