iMAC Top of The Line or 15" MacBook Pro Top of The Line

Discussion in 'iMac' started by Cantunis, Jan 17, 2009.

  1. Cantunis macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    #1
    Hello folks !

    I have been strongly decided that my next computer will not be a PC . I have been wanting an iMac Top of the line , which is 1800 euro . However I have checked the Apple Online Store and I see that

    iMac is 3.06 ghz right now
    MackBook Pro is 2.8 ghz

    Now I say , What is better , get an iMac or put 1000€ more and get a MacBook Pro with a 24" LED ACD ?

    PS : Right now I use the laptop my mom bought and hardly uses which is a 2000€ Dell Laptop , which runs great , however is a bit bulky to move it around classes at the university and on a trip :)

    What I want to know is if the 2.8 MacBook Pro is similar in power to the iMac 3.06ghz and if it would the job in the same way

    Btw , it would be used for chatting , email , internet , some not heavy photoshopping and developing OpenGL apps , image processing , and all those things you do in computer engineering :D

    Best Regards,
     
  2. animaxcg macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2008
    #2
    i would get the macbook pro and get a dell display if you want an external monitor (i love apple's displays but they cost an arm and 2 legs)
     
  3. Cantunis thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    #3
    another dell monitor ? hmmm no I want to leave back my PC days lolz . My windows computer crashes every ****ing day (no joke).

    What I want to know is if theres much diffrence between the MBP 2.8 and iMac 3.06 , as it always comes in handy to have a powerful and light laptop
     
  4. mattyb240 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    #4
    Getting a Dell Monitor is hardly going PC lol? Its just a cheaper but still effective solution if you cant afford an apple display.
     
  5. Cantunis thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    #5
    nah , just saying that when poeple see the monitor they think you have a PC lolz . And also I am bored of Dells , there are already 1000 Dells at the university !

    So right now , computers are cheap :) And .. im not getting the apple mac pro as I am not a hardcore gamer as I was , I want it basically for doing work

    So you guys please tell me if theres so much difference between those 2 setups .

    PS : My current computer is Pentium D 3.2 Ghz , 7800 GTX Nvidia , 4GB GeIL Ram..
     
  6. mattyb240 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    #6
    Well it comes down really as to whether or not you want portability?

    The MBP is easily a desktop replacement which is how I use it untill I need to take it with me, plus dual screens is a bonus. The imacs are basically a specced up laptop in a monitor.

    Both are excellent machines!
     
  7. Cantunis thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    #7
    yes i know , what im bothering is .. from 2.8 to 3.06 there's not a big spec difference , and I would add portability .

    Also , you can remove your MBP Battery while its hooked up to the monitor and run it thru the AC Adaptador right ?
     
  8. mattyb240 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    #8
    Dont for the love of god remove the battery! You down clock the processor. You are able to leave the ac adapter in without damaging the battery (says my mate who is a mac speacilist and her genius friends). This is what I do for weeks at a time, calibrate it once a month! I took it off power last night and got 5 hours charge out of it so do no worry I've been doing it since september.

    The processor difference is minimal, you will only notice if you do alot of encoding etc and i mean a few seconds difference. The thing that will make it faster noticably would be a difference in RAM.
     
  9. Cantunis thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    #9
    Well , iMac has 4GB Ram and the MBP Top of the line has 4GB Ram . Also MBP Uses DDR3 while iMac uses DDR2 , so is it faster on the MBP ?

    Also about encoding and those things , yeah I will do some renderings aat the university but hey , im not going to be doing 3D graphics every day .

    And I thought that leaving the AC adapter plugged in for long would damage the battery . But if the MBP is intelligent and isnt constantly recharging the battery , then its safe !
     
  10. zedsdead macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    #10
    Spec wise the machines are so close, so the real question is about portability. I personally recommend the Laptop and the LED screen if it is your only computer because I am a big fan of portability.
     
  11. mattyb240 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    #11
    It recognizes when the battery is full and then the laptop powers straight off the A.C. instead of using the battery. As for the ram speed you wont notice the difference between DDR2 and DDR3. I think either one would be evenly matched, and to be honest either would be more then enough for you.

    So it comes back to portability.
     
  12. Cantunis thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    #12
    Well then the choice is clear now ..

    iMac 24" : 1900€ - stuck at the desk -
    MBP+ACD 24" : 3300€

    So 1300€ more (which I have) and I have a fancy LED screen and protability .

    I think im going to take it seriously , as taking it to the school , come to house , hook it up to the ACD and continue working on my tasks on a big screen is a plus!
     
  13. Cantunis thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    #13
    Anyone else ?

    Although I have the money and I paid more than twice the price of the MBP+ACD 24" for my first PC 8 years ago , im like "WTF 3300 euro , my PC from 3 years ago was cheaper and it was the latest kick-ass pc "

    So I want to get more opinions . 3300 euro is not what you get everyday , and I want to be sure the MBP will do the job as nice as the iMac 3.06 before I bite the bullet .

    BR ,
    Alex
     
  14. minik macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Location:
    Bellevue, WA
    #14
    I have been using the 3.06Ghz iMac since May 2008 and it's a treat. My previous Mac were DP 2.0Ghz PowerMac G5 and iBook G4/1.25Ghz, it's a major upgrade.

    I did look at the 15-inch MBP at that time and opted for the iMac since it's slightly cheaper and I planned to have an iPhone 3G. I didn't regret my decision.

    The 24-inch iMac offers a 1920x1200 pixels display (94.34 PPI) out of the box and 15.4-inch MBP has a 1440x900 pixels display (110.27 PPI).

    Personally, I'm all for simplicity. Since Apple ditched the ADC connector, the 3-cable style on the Cinema Display and LED Cinema Display really bug me.

    Having an external display with a notebook is great, but will you connect to it all the time and fully utilize this feature?
     
  15. Cantunis thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    #15
    Yes , I know , theres a huge price difference . And of course it wouldnt be plugged 24/7 to the external monitor , it is not what it was meant to :D
     
  16. iStress macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2007
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #16
    I had a really hard time deciding between the 3.06Ghz iMac or the 2.53 MBP + ACD....I ended up with the iMac.

    I don't regret it, but I do wish that I can have the MBP 4 days of the week and the iMac for rest of the 3 days.

    Being restrained at a desk 24/7 isn't a fun thing to do/see, sometimes you'd want to use facebook and watch TV in your lounge room - that can only be achieved with the MBP.

    Keep in mind that you get the extra 0.28Ghz, bigger HDD, better graphics card (1.5x) and bigger screen with the iMac (unless you get the ACD).

    With the things you're going to do with the Mac, I suggest you get the MBP+ACD, why? Because you mentioned "portability" and "not so heavy image processing...engineering."

    Not sure if this helps, but it's worth a look!
    http://www.barefeats.com/mbpp05.html

    Just keep this in mind: portability + 2 screens + power = MBP + ACD

    unity + extra power = iMac

    In fact, I think portability and power is worth all that money ;)

    Good luck!
     
  17. Cantunis thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    #17
    That is interesting . Also MBP has 2 graphics cards . You can use the powerful one while its plugged at home and to the ACD , and use the basic one for googling things and looking the powerpoints as the teacher talks and enjoy 5 hours of battery ! ( Wow , I get 2 hours of battery on my mom's 2000$ 1y old Dell Laptop ) .

    Also , MBP's were updated just recently , which means they won't be updated next day ,so if I choose that I can bite the bullet right away .

    Another thing is that I would get LED monitor , and I would have no chin !!!

    Not the same with the iMac . I would be so pissed off if they updated it the next month . Really I dont buy a new PC every week .
    And on top of that , we are not going to see Quad-Cores on Imacs on next update , so just Monetvina CPU's like the MBP !
     
  18. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #18
    For that 3300€ you can get MacBook and iMac if you have that money.
     
  19. Cantunis thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    #19
    The point is that i want either that

    MBP + ACD 24" LED + Applecare: 3300 €
    iMac 24" + Applecare : 2000€

    an iMac + an MBP would be 4400€ which is not what I want to spend .

    My First Computer was 5500€ but that was long ago and I was a hardcore PC gamer . Now I have an Xbox 360 and I buy only original games . Much cheaper , smoother play and great games!

    So I will be clear . I have 3500 € to spend right now . I could go with a Mac Pro , but I don't need that beast power nor heat my room ( Spain is hot already )

    a MBP would come very handy for university . Much lighter than the Dell Vostro , and I don't have to carry the bulky AC Adaptor as it has a loooooong battery . Also it is smaller , so just throw it in on your shool bag and go.
     
  20. chibamac macrumors 6502

    chibamac

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    #20
    iMac + Netbook

    How about Imac for home and a netbook for school. Lugging expensive laptops around can be a pain. A cheep netbook you wouldn’t have to worry about losing or getting stolen as much as the MBP. + it's much lighter and still fully functional for internet/ word processing. Then you have the top of the line iMac at home for everything else. It's quite nice to work on a 24" screen..

    Just my take..
     
  21. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #21
    Netbooks are crap. My sister has one those and it doesn't even open all web sites. Never buy one of those they are just for little kids.

    Cantumis: I meant that you could get top of line iMac (which I think you could be fine with 2.8GHz with best GPU) so 2000e for iMac and 1200e for MacBook (no MBP) and get 1 or 2 extra batteries for that... Just my idea but I would do that if you really need desktop and portability
     
  22. chibamac macrumors 6502

    chibamac

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    #22
     
  23. Cantunis thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    #23
    Yeah netbooks are crap . They are just to surf the net and period . Don't ever pretend to do ray tracing , and renderings on a 300e netbook .

    About the option of iMac and MB , i presonally prefer to just pop in my MBP to the ACD and keep on the work .

    At my university we are just 15 persons per class , so easy to control the laptop :DDD

    There's already lots of people with MBP's and MB's there , even the teachers and no one ever tries to steal your laptop... if you don't leave the class and leave the laptop here , of course

    It just seems so easy to use with the ACD , just plug in one cable and keep running stable . No need to even use the MBP AC Adapter .
     
  24. Lava Lamp Freak macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    #24
    I bought an iMac 3.06 and MacBook 2.0. It cost the same as what the MacBook Pro 2.8 and 24" LED would have cost. I have a faster desktop and lighter portable. I'm happy with the duo, though I do like the LED screen better. Of course once the new iMacs comes out it will have the LED too.
     
  25. dcmike macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Location:
    DC
    #25
    Why do you care if anyone thinks you have a PC or not? It's a freaking COMPUTER. If the actual performance of the monitors is different, if one is superior to the other, then you have a reason. Just buying the apple product because you're concerned everyone might not realize you have an apple hooked up to it is silly.
     

Share This Page