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.
Jump from i3 to i5 worth the money?
- Thread starter jshelton
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The reasons were to get more cores or extra processing power, but then you already stated you don't need that as you surf, email and do other light computing tasks. Stick with the i3
For $150 the speed difference is considerable. i3 = 2 core ; i5 = 4 core with turboboost.
Even if you don't need it now depending on how long your plan to keep it might be worth considering since different applications in the future will most likely need more power.
http://techjungle.info/which-is-better-i3-vs-i5-vs-i7/
Our Conclusion:
So in the battle between the three i3 vs i5 vs i7, we think that the i5 processors are putting up a higher hand as they have Quad cores for higher speeds,Turbo boost for extra speedy performance and quite a fit in the pocket pricetags than the i7 processors.
I don't have the results from the latest 2011 iMacs but here it is from the 2010. I am sure for 2011 the differences are still similar although all are faster.
http://www.barefeats.com/imac10v.html
The Core i5 is as much as 41% faster than the Core i3 for 18% more cost.
Even if you don't need it now depending on how long your plan to keep it might be worth considering since different applications in the future will most likely need more power.
http://techjungle.info/which-is-better-i3-vs-i5-vs-i7/
Our Conclusion:
So in the battle between the three i3 vs i5 vs i7, we think that the i5 processors are putting up a higher hand as they have Quad cores for higher speeds,Turbo boost for extra speedy performance and quite a fit in the pocket pricetags than the i7 processors.
I don't have the results from the latest 2011 iMacs but here it is from the 2010. I am sure for 2011 the differences are still similar although all are faster.
http://www.barefeats.com/imac10v.html
The Core i5 is as much as 41% faster than the Core i3 for 18% more cost.
Last edited:
But, remember what I use the machine for. I don't necessarily need all the power. I just like screen size. If I needed the power more I would go with the 21.5 i5, which I am also debating (different thread). Argh.
My iMac is i3 and do usual "home user" stuff as well. It runs fast enough for me and my needs. If I used my iMac for "heavy lifting" tasks and/or for business (where time = money), then I might upgrade to new 2011 iMac with i7, internal SSD and 2GB memory Video card. Ya, its a business tool and the business writes off the cost of the office tool. But for "general" home user tasks, my i3 continues to work great. Why upgrade (cost, hassle to transferring data and re-configuring GUI to your wants) when one doesn't need to??? Or as some might say, "if it ain't broke or too slow, no need to fix it".
BTW: For home user tasks such as email, general surfing, U-Tube, Netflix and other video streaming tasks, is the "bottle neck" the CPU or is it one's Internet B/W pipe size?. Me thinks the "pipe size" is the bottleneck area. Upgrading to faster CPU only helps local (standalone) apps response time. For example, gaming, video editing and other "no network" heavy lifting tasks.
BTW: For home user tasks such as email, general surfing, U-Tube, Netflix and other video streaming tasks, is the "bottle neck" the CPU or is it one's Internet B/W pipe size?. Me thinks the "pipe size" is the bottleneck area. Upgrading to faster CPU only helps local (standalone) apps response time. For example, gaming, video editing and other "no network" heavy lifting tasks.
Last edited: