I'm deciding between buying a MacBook Pro and and 24" iMac. The mobility of the laptop is not entirely important, but a nice bonus. I'm considering the iMac becauase i like the bigger screen and I know that laptops can never really run at thier full potential because of cooling issues. I was mostly wondering if the same applies for the iMac considering thats it also one unit. If its got similar performance restrictions, I might as well go with the laptop, right? Am I missing anything else in this logic? Any suggestions?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iMac v. MacBook Pro
- Thread starter montgomery
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
it entirely depends. what your planning on using the computer for? if you main plan it for video editing or gaming, then I would go with the imac.
If mobility isn't a primary concern, then go with the iMac. Simple choice, really.
For $1999, you get a 24-inch iMac with a 2.16 GHz processor, 1 GB RAM, 250 GB hard drive, theoretically better graphics chip, and full HD resolution. You can choose to upgrade the processor, RAM, and graphics chip a la carte; although if all you upgrade is RAM, it's the same cost for either.
For the same $1999, you get a 15.4-inch MacBook Pro with the same processor and RAM, only a 120 GB hard drive, a slower SuperDrive, a theoretically worse graphics chip, and noticeably lower resolution. You *HAVE* to spend at least an extra $500 to get a better graphics chip (really just more graphics RAM,) and the faster processor plus more RAM. To upgrade those three items on the iMac is $550, though. (But you do get the decidedly better graphics chip.)
Any processor-related performance issues are identical for both. (I do run a distributed computing app on my MacBook Pro basically 24/7 except while on battery power, and have had no issues.)
All in all, I would say if you want more screen real estate and a larger hard drive, go for the iMac. If you want portability, go for the MacBook Pro. Decide which one you value more.
For $1999, you get a 24-inch iMac with a 2.16 GHz processor, 1 GB RAM, 250 GB hard drive, theoretically better graphics chip, and full HD resolution. You can choose to upgrade the processor, RAM, and graphics chip a la carte; although if all you upgrade is RAM, it's the same cost for either.
For the same $1999, you get a 15.4-inch MacBook Pro with the same processor and RAM, only a 120 GB hard drive, a slower SuperDrive, a theoretically worse graphics chip, and noticeably lower resolution. You *HAVE* to spend at least an extra $500 to get a better graphics chip (really just more graphics RAM,) and the faster processor plus more RAM. To upgrade those three items on the iMac is $550, though. (But you do get the decidedly better graphics chip.)
Any processor-related performance issues are identical for both. (I do run a distributed computing app on my MacBook Pro basically 24/7 except while on battery power, and have had no issues.)
All in all, I would say if you want more screen real estate and a larger hard drive, go for the iMac. If you want portability, go for the MacBook Pro. Decide which one you value more.
don't forget that the imac uses the mobile version of the core2duo (merom), and not a desktop version. this prevents the imac from having much better performance than it's mobile counterpart.
personally, i like having the option of taking my computer on the road if need be. you need to decide for yourself how much this option is worth to you. if you're resolution-thirsty like i am, you could always buy an external lcd. i just bought a 24" dell for $485 (after a coupon), and im sure you can get the 20.1" for sub-300.
personally, i like having the option of taking my computer on the road if need be. you need to decide for yourself how much this option is worth to you. if you're resolution-thirsty like i am, you could always buy an external lcd. i just bought a 24" dell for $485 (after a coupon), and im sure you can get the 20.1" for sub-300.
I am not aware of performance problems with the Macbook Pros. I own a 2.16MHZ 17" MBP, and I find it plenty fast.
I think the "performance issues" that was mentioned refers to performance of laptops vs. performance of desktops.
This is interesting as it seems to effect all who have around the mbp/imac amount of cash to spend, here's how i see it...
they are basically the same computer, with essentially the same c2d processor, same fsb, ram speed etc etc, and at the same price points have very similar specs.
obviously the desktop benefits from a larger screen and hard drive: things not possible to include in a laptop.
whereas the laptop benefits from its portability: which is admittedly easier with an all-in-one system, but still a pain if you need to ever move with it.
That therefore is your choice, they are both great bits of kt, and will serve you well, but each have their specific targets (desktop or laptop). To put the question into context, I had this problem myself, and bought an iMac in december for uni. I had hoped that due to me only needing to move it every now and then (to and from uni each term), that i could manage with moving it: this was not the case, and i returned the iMac and bought a mbp, which serves me much better. I still use the mbp as a desktop machine (i have a 12" pb as my portable), and I have a 500GB HD hooked up to it, and hopefully soon a larger monitor, effectively giving me the best of both worlds.
To conclude, you simply need to choose whether you would move the thing...and this does not necessarily mean around town/the world, but simply that you need to ask yourself whether when working on it do you want to be restricted to a desk, or would you like to use it on the sofa? If you don't, get the iMac and enjoy all the benefits of a larger screen and HD, but if portability of any ind seems like it would be beneficial, go for the mbp.
they are basically the same computer, with essentially the same c2d processor, same fsb, ram speed etc etc, and at the same price points have very similar specs.
obviously the desktop benefits from a larger screen and hard drive: things not possible to include in a laptop.
whereas the laptop benefits from its portability: which is admittedly easier with an all-in-one system, but still a pain if you need to ever move with it.
That therefore is your choice, they are both great bits of kt, and will serve you well, but each have their specific targets (desktop or laptop). To put the question into context, I had this problem myself, and bought an iMac in december for uni. I had hoped that due to me only needing to move it every now and then (to and from uni each term), that i could manage with moving it: this was not the case, and i returned the iMac and bought a mbp, which serves me much better. I still use the mbp as a desktop machine (i have a 12" pb as my portable), and I have a 500GB HD hooked up to it, and hopefully soon a larger monitor, effectively giving me the best of both worlds.
To conclude, you simply need to choose whether you would move the thing...and this does not necessarily mean around town/the world, but simply that you need to ask yourself whether when working on it do you want to be restricted to a desk, or would you like to use it on the sofa? If you don't, get the iMac and enjoy all the benefits of a larger screen and HD, but if portability of any ind seems like it would be beneficial, go for the mbp.
Which nowadays simply means 2.5" drives compared to 3.5' drives and that gap is closing quickly