Intel core i7 - Quad-core i7???

Discussion in 'iMac' started by thatin, Nov 5, 2010.

  1. thatin macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    #1
    Hi, I'm planning to buy an iMac for my interior design works. I will have to do lots of 3D modeling as well as rendering. After swiching from PC to Macbook Pro, I'm totally in love with Mac OSX, I trust the os itself. So now, here me, an Mac fan boy :)).

    My question is last week, my friend purchased a built-to-oder PC, cost around SGD$1700 (screen included).
    Here is her spec
    2.93 GHz Intel Core i7 CPu 870
    4GB DDR ram 2x2GB
    1TB SATA
    NDVIA T220 256MB

    While the iMac 27" that I'm looking at is nearly the same spec but cost SGD$3100
    2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
    4GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
    1TB Serial ATA Drive
    8x double-layer SuperDrive
    ATI Radeon HD 5750 1GB GDDR5 SDRAM

    I know the screen of iMac is nearly unbeatable in the market right now and the OSX is what I'm in love with, but is there anything else that make the different in these 2?

    And why it is Intel core i7 not quad-core i7??
    Its the same rite?
     
  2. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #2
    The CPU is exactly the same in both machines, Intel Core i7-870. It's quad core and due to Hyper-Threading supports up to 8 threads. Apple just likes advertising the quad-core word all the time while other companies don't
     
  3. thatin thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    #3
    Then do you know why there is a huge different in the price
     
  4. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #4
    The screen in iMac is already worth 1000U$ alone. Macs are always more expensive than similar specced PCs. You can call it Apple tax or whatever you want but if you want the best performance for buck, then get a PC
     
  5. TMRaven macrumors 68020

    TMRaven

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    #5
    Because the screen in the iMac you're wanting to get is worth 1300sgd alone.
     
  6. bruinsrme macrumors 601

    bruinsrme

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    #6
    I have been pricing out a PC box for my son which is doing 3d modeling.
    Minus the monitor I am looking at $1300 for the box

    i7 950 3.06 they are running as cheap as $240 box version
    X58 sabertooth mobo
    6G ocz 1333 triple channel ram
    1.5 TB hard drive
    Cooler max 932 case and power supply
    Blueray burner
    haven't closed on a video card yet.

    that still leaves a lot of room for a monitor, keyboard and mouse.

    if you are in college windows 7 is about $50

    For $3100 you can get a pc with the 980 i7 chip 12G of Ram
     
  7. splashnader macrumors 6502a

    splashnader

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Location:
    Via Satellite
    #7
    I agree with others

    I agree with what others have said regarding the difference in price. The iMac's screen is the same screen technology found in Apple's new 27" Cinema Display, and assuming you get the higher end 27" iMac you are getting the same 2560 x 1440 resolution. You figure that Apple is selling that Cinema Diisplay, same size as the iMac 27" for $1K (US-MSRP) and you are actually getting the computer itself at a fairly reasonable price for a Quad-core machiince, with 4gb of RAM & a 1 TB HD.

    You say $1,000 for the monitor of the iMac or the Cinema Display, and then:
    $1,299 for the actually computer if you throw in the i7 option of the iMac. I doubt you could do much better if you bought similar specked high performace monitor and PC's separately.
     
  8. thatin thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    #8
    Thank you all for the replies.

    I know that if I go for windows it will e much cheaper but once I use mac I never want to turn back to that unstable windows. I really love it.

    If I want mac on windows for the buck that I have to do hackintosh isn't it?

    I do a calculate myself take 3000 - 1300 for the screen I actually paid 1700 for the system which is not bad though. Then I got mac osx as well. :)

    But really, does that screen worth it's price? Us1000??
     
  9. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #9
    If you want a big, high resolution screen, then yes. Equivalent monitor is 900-1000$ from Apple or Dell.
     
  10. MythicFrost macrumors 68040

    MythicFrost

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Location:
    Australia
    #10
    Not always, the iMac is actually similarly priced to it's equiv. all-in-one and is somewhat close to a desktop PC if you throw in the screen.

    @OP: The screen does actually cost that much, whether you need a $1000 screen is up to you.
     
  11. Stealthipad macrumors 68040

    Stealthipad

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2010
    #11
    I have to agree with the others and the quality of the screen and overall aluminum package makes the iMac worth the price to me. The iMac looks mighty nice in my home office compared to all the stuff I would need to replace it. Every time I turn it on and see the rich saturated colors on that screen . . . well it makes me smile!:p
     
  12. George Knighton macrumors 6502a

    George Knighton

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    #12
    Apple is just a weird, eclectic company.

    I agree wholeheartedly with what everyone says about the value of the 27" monitor.

    But in addition to that, there's a basic design philosophy that is hard to explain. It's one of those "You get it, or you don't" things. Like Acura's SH-AWD...if you don't "get it" you don't want it.

    Apple's dedication to wireless, certain kinds of ergonomics and all-in-one designs, and resolve to design products as environmentally friendly as possible considering the economic parameters...these are all things you either buy into and understand, or you don't.
     
  13. thatin thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    #13
    how about the graphic card?
    ATI Radeon HD 5750 1GB GDDR5 SDRAM

    I've heard that the 4850 is much better isn't it?

    Can I order my Imac with the 4850 instead?
     
  14. TMRaven macrumors 68020

    TMRaven

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    #14

    No, it is 15-20% faster.
     
  15. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #15
    I sometimes see Apple like some of the HiFi companies.

    They make their HiFi in very nice looking cases, the remote controls are all glass and touch controlled, the speakers are ultra slim and hang on the wall and look beautiful, and there is a certain "I'm special" feeling the owners get due to it's price and most people don't own them.

    However, strip all this away and inside are fairly basic electronics taken from something else thats priced at a much lower amount.
    Also the actual sound quality (due to cosmetic priorities) is not actually as good as a more conventionally designed system with larger deeper speaker and better circuitry in a larger box.

    But then everyone has their priorities.

    Many would buy sneekers that last half as long and are no more comfortable than a pair that's half the price, all because of the logo on the side.

    For some people design is just as important as function, perhaps even more so.

    For me, I've always joked, I would not care if my computer was mounted in a rough wooden box, if it was the fastest computer on the planet :)

    But seriously, I love a nice design, but design comes second to performance every time. If two machines were identical in what they could do but one looked better I'd go with the better looking one.

    If the better looking one was technically worse than the ugly one, then I'd buy the ugly one every time

    It's just a box with electronics in. And I look at the screen, not the case.
     

Share This Page