Need Help With Deciding on 2019 Imac

aman88

macrumors regular
Original poster
Mar 21, 2019
110
17
I am either looking at the 21.5 inch with the Vega 20 for $1850 or the 27.5 inch with the pro 570x for $1800...

My question is: Which is the better buy? I plan to eventually add a razor core x eGPU with a vega card within the next two years. I cannot find much data on the 570x or vega 20, but what I could find it seems the 570x is the more powerful graphics card... therefore, why is the larger screen with the better card less expensive?

Thanks!
 

ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTVWXYZ

macrumors newbie
Feb 6, 2019
25
0
the 27 inch is much better deal. i think 21 inch is horrible size in 2019. i don't even want to go back to 24 inches.

part of what makes an iMac a good value over the mac mini is that it has a discrete GPU but if you're going to buy an eGPU, then you might want to do some math while considering the mac mini
 

aman88

macrumors regular
Original poster
Mar 21, 2019
110
17
Yeah I love the iMac... I still have one from late 2010. It works, but cannot update anymore.

Mainly I want to know which is the more powerful graphics card between the vega 20 and pro 570x? I do not get why the 21.5 inch with the vega costs more than the 27.5 inch with the 570x...
 

SkiHound2

macrumors regular
Jul 15, 2018
164
111
I am either looking at the 21.5 inch with the Vega 20 for $1850 or the 27.5 inch with the pro 570x for $1800...

My question is: Which is the better buy? I plan to eventually add a razor core x eGPU with a vega card within the next two years. I cannot find much data on the 570x or vega 20, but what I could find it seems the 570x is the more powerful graphics card... therefore, why is the larger screen with the better card less expensive?

Thanks!
Curious why you are so interested in the comparison between the Vega 20 and 570x? I have no idea how they compare, but it strikes me that if you're using applications that are really gpu demanding you'd be looking at higher end gpus. Even the integrated gpu on intel chips is fine for many uses. Unless you have specific uses that are very gpu intensive, I think the 27" is overall a much better value. And if you do have uses that are very gpu demanding, neither of these options is likely going to be satisfactory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nouveau_redneck

aman88

macrumors regular
Original poster
Mar 21, 2019
110
17
That makes sense... when I bought my 2010 iMac the first thing that became obsolete in terms of playing games was the GPU. I was looking for a GPU that could play games at at least medium to high settings? The other thought was to in a year or so get a eGPU (razor core x plus radeon xr vega 64).
 

adamk77

macrumors 6502a
Jan 6, 2008
510
149
I am either looking at the 21.5 inch with the Vega 20 for $1850 or the 27.5 inch with the pro 570x for $1800...

My question is: Which is the better buy? I plan to eventually add a razor core x eGPU with a vega card within the next two years. I cannot find much data on the 570x or vega 20, but what I could find it seems the 570x is the more powerful graphics card... therefore, why is the larger screen with the better card less expensive?

Thanks!
I would personally go with the 27", especially if an eGPU is in your future. I'm not sure how the Vega 20 and the 570x compare. The 570x may very well be more performant (at least on paper it is according to the shader counts, clocks, etc), but the Vega 20 may be more expensive because it is the new and shiny kid on the block using the latest technology (HBM2 and 7 nm process).
 

aman88

macrumors regular
Original poster
Mar 21, 2019
110
17
I would personally go with the 27", especially if an eGPU is in your future. I'm not sure how the Vega 20 and the 570x compare. The 570x may very well be more performant (at least on paper it is according to the shader counts, clocks, etc), but the Vega 20 may be more expensive because it is the new and shiny kid on the block using the latest technology (HBM2 and 7 nm process).
That’s what I figured and could deduct from comparing benchmark scores and what little I understood of how a GPU works lol... it’s like you are paying more for the brand name. I plan to stick with the base 6 core i5 on the 27 inch. I would only really be using it for daily use and gaming. Gaming wise it seems that’s all GPU dependent as a lot of games run fine on processors from nearly a decade ago...
 

adamk77

macrumors 6502a
Jan 6, 2008
510
149
That’s what I figured and could deduct from comparing benchmark scores and what little I understood of how a GPU works lol... it’s like you are paying more for the brand name. I plan to stick with the base 6 core i5 on the 27 inch. I would only really be using it for daily use and gaming. Gaming wise it seems that’s all GPU dependent as a lot of games run fine on processors from nearly a decade ago...
I'm sure you have budgetary constraints, so I'm not trying to convince you. I'm just sharing a personal anecdote.

So I have a nearly decade old self-built PC that I use for gaming. I was playing one of the modern games and was only getting around 35 FPS. So naturally, I upgraded the GPU thinking that it will give me a nice boost. I was disappointed that the FPS only increased to 40 FPS though the GPU was a lot more powerful than my old one. I was CPU bound. Fortunately for me, I was able to overclock my CPU, which bumped the FPS to 50 FPS.

As you would be forever stuck with the CPU, I would bite the bullet and get the fastest CPU I can afford. The GPU can be upgraded through the eGPU route so I am less concerned about that.

For me, I've decided to go with a Mac Mini with the Core i7 CPU for $1499. Then later down the road, I plan on adding an eGPU. I'm sure the price will come down. As much as I love the iMac's screen (I have a 2017 27" iMac), the Mac Mini is simply more flexible. And it is no slouch according to https://browser.geekbench.com/mac-benchmarks -- it scores near the top of the pack in both single- and multi-core performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smarterbits

aman88

macrumors regular
Original poster
Mar 21, 2019
110
17
That all makes sense... It is more of a budgetary constraint. It seems like the standard 3.0 ghz 6 core i5 should suffice for games? Even the most taxing games seem to require a lot less.
 

adamk77

macrumors 6502a
Jan 6, 2008
510
149
That all makes sense... It is more of a budgetary constraint. It seems like the standard 3.0 ghz 6 core i5 should suffice for games? Even the most taxing games seem to require a lot less.
Yeah, I think so. FYI, for games, single-core performance matters more than multi-core performance.
 

aman88

macrumors regular
Original poster
Mar 21, 2019
110
17
The i5 seems to have good performance or at least the specs... currently I have a 2010 21 inch imac with a 3.2 ghz i3 (I believe this was gen 3). From what I read on game specs, this current imac is largely hampered by the crappy ati radeon 5670 512 mb gpu, not the cpu.
 

escargot3

macrumors newbie
Oct 22, 2013
7
2
I plan to eventually add a razor core x eGPU with a vega card within the next two years.
Just note that for gaming, to get the full performance of the eGPU in a computer with a built in display like the iMac, you would need to connect a second external monitor directly to the video output ports on the eGPU and play the game on that monitor instead of the iMac's built in display. Some games will allow you to use the eGPU to power a game playing on the iMac's built in display, but this ability must be explicitly enabled by the game's developer (not very likely for games from Steam etc) and will still suffer a significant performance hit compared to running the game on an external monitor attached directly to the eGPU.

See here, under "eGPU support in Apps":
https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT208544
 

aman88

macrumors regular
Original poster
Mar 21, 2019
110
17
Just note that for gaming, to get the full performance of the eGPU in a computer with a built in display like the iMac, you would need to connect a second external monitor directly to the video output ports on the eGPU and play the game on that monitor instead of the iMac's built in display. Some games will allow you to use the eGPU to power a game playing on the iMac's built in display, but this ability must be explicitly enabled by the game's developer (not very likely for games from Steam etc) and will still suffer a significant performance hit compared to running the game on an external monitor attached directly to the eGPU.

See here, under "eGPU support in Apps":
https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT208544
I am going to get an Acer 23 inch monitor for around $150... thanks for your response you answered my other question about if the second display connects to the eGPU or the iMac itself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: escargot3