New iMac or a i7 920 Quad Core System??

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by Yamcha, Jan 16, 2009.

?

iMac or i7 920 Quad Core?

  1. iMac 20"/24" (2009) Upcoming priced at $1500-1600

    12 vote(s)
    27.3%
  2. i7 920 Quad Core System

    32 vote(s)
    72.7%
  1. Yamcha macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    #1
    Im in a real dilemma now, I was thinking about buying an iMac, but for the same price I could get an amazing PC machine..

    Should I get the New iMac Or :

    ASUS P6T X58 ATX LGA1366 DDR3
    Intel Core i7 920 Quad Core Processor LGA1366 2.66GHZ Bloomfield 8MB LGA1366 4.8GT/S
    G.SKILL F3-10666CL9T-3GBNQ 3GB DDR3
    EVGA E-GEFORCE 9800GT 512MB
    Antec Nine Hundred Mid Tower Gamer Case 900 ATX
    Antec Earthwatts 650W Power Supply
    Samsung 2053BW 20IN Widescreen LCD Monitor Black 1680X1050
    Logitech Internet 350 USB Keyboard Black
    Logitech Optical Wheel Mouse OEM USB/PS2 Black
    Western Digital SE16 500GB SATA2 7200RPM 16MB Cache 8.9MS
    $1550CAD ($1,242.34USD)
     
  2. neiltc13 macrumors 68040

    neiltc13

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #2
    The system you mentioned is light years ahead of the iMac. You'll get better performance all around with it and won't have to think "hey, what if?" in future, because you'll know you bought the best machine you could at the time.
     
  3. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
  4. kastenbrust macrumors 68030

    kastenbrust

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    Location:
    North Korea
    #4
    The iMac is on a comparabile level with the machine you mentioned, the only thing the Asus has which is better is the processor, which may i add is only slightly better as its a 1st gen i7 (12% faster) but then you've got to put up with Windows.
     
  5. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #5
    Don't forget the video card...

    Where did you get 12% from?
     
  6. kastenbrust macrumors 68030

    kastenbrust

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    Location:
    North Korea
    #6
    I replaced the Core 2 Duo in my WINDOWS :eek::eek: server at work temporarily with an i7 (both 2.6GHz) to see the actual speed increase, i used geekbench and ran a few other tests to find the actual speed benefits and found the i7 was about 12% faster. According to Wikipedia and Intel it should be 17% faster but actually with latency, a smaller cache, and increased heat issues it really wasnt.
     
  7. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #7
    Don't forget to mention you changed sockets and boards as well...

    At least you have something to backup your claims, unlike other users.
     
  8. neiltc13 macrumors 68040

    neiltc13

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #8
    Your Windows server at work had the same laptop Core 2 Duo chip as the current iMac?
     
  9. kastenbrust macrumors 68030

    kastenbrust

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    Location:
    North Korea
    #9
    obviously not but thats not the point, the i7 is a complete waste of money because its so new, its well overpriced for the actual speed benefits that you really get, especially with Open CL and Hybrid SLI around the corner for Mac OS X, when they come out in Snow Leopard the Core 2 Duo iMac will be faster than the i7 PC he described for day to day tasks.
     
  10. neiltc13 macrumors 68040

    neiltc13

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #10
    Again, total nonsense. I checked Futuremark:

    My 2.4GHz iMac gets a CPU score of 2125 in 3D Mark 06. A system with the same Core i7 CPU as Yamcha mentioned gets a score of 5024. That's more than double the performance.

    [​IMG]
    Red line is the Core i7, green line is my iMac. I think this chart speaks for itself.

    Further checking of two benchmarks of similar machines shows:

    CPU Image manipulation test
    Core 2 Duo: 2.44MB/s
    Core i7: 5.59MB/s

    CPU gaming test
    Core 2 Duo: 4889.85 Operations/s
    Core i7: 34267.13 Operations/s
     
  11. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #11
    Maybe if you're gaming or using single thread and instance applications. Are you comparing the whole package + DDR3 as well?

    I'll give you OpenCL but please don't going around saying you can't do that on Windows.
     
  12. kastenbrust macrumors 68030

    kastenbrust

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    Location:
    North Korea
    #12
    i didnt say you cant do it on Windows. You can :) not easily mind.
     
  13. kastenbrust macrumors 68030

    kastenbrust

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    Location:
    North Korea
    #13
    so your telling me an i7 is 7x better at gaming? bull.
    i think you need to check your 'tests'.
     
  14. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #14
    Now if Apple only supported GPU decoding hardware on OS X like they did in OS 9.

    If you're just using the CPU I can understand it.
     
  15. hajime macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    #15
    It depends on your applications. If you need to run stuffs under Mac OS, get an iMac. Otherwise, get the i7 system.
     
  16. Yamcha thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    #16
    I checked some benchmarks, it is quite fast, faster then any other Core 2 Duo obviously, Im an advanced pc users, so I know this thing is way better then any iMac that's going to come out in the coming months, I can be quite sure of that. but the reason Im having second thoughts is I've wanted an iMac since i was like 12 :p lol. So it's def a hard choice for me... I will have to think about it. For me the smart choice is clearly go for PC...

    Anyway I will think about it I suppose.
     
  17. neiltc13 macrumors 68040

    neiltc13

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #17
    If you wait long enough then iMac will get a much, much improved processor (possibly from the Core i7 line).
     
  18. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #18
    Next year...
     
  19. Yamcha thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    #19
    oh i forgot to add dvd drive +28CAD on the price.. added a Poll :], it'll help me decide.
     
  20. kastenbrust macrumors 68030

    kastenbrust

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    Location:
    North Korea
    #20
    I'd wait 5 months then buy an iMac, or get a cheap PC for now and iAtkos, Kalyway it.
     
  21. Yamcha thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    #21
    Btw the price on the poll is in $1500-1600CAD so about $1200-1250USD
     
  22. vendettabass macrumors 6502a

    vendettabass

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Location:
    Seoul, South Korea
  23. chaosbunny macrumors 68000

    chaosbunny

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Location:
    down to earth, far away from any clouds
    #23
    I say it depends on what you want to do with the machine. If your primary needs are gaming, rendering, encoding video or similar hardware intensive stuff get the i7. If not you won't notice much difference and you might as well get the iMac.
     
  24. timestoby macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Location:
    north devon,uk
    #24
    the quad core sounds good,but its pc. ither you want mac or you dont. and id wait for a imac refresh to get one tho.
     
  25. Yamcha thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    #25
    Well I'd like to do some minor gaming, but its mainly for Web/Graphic Design. I think i might just get an iMac, I already have a pc and its decent. But am gonna wait for the new ones to come in to see what the specs are, Im def gonna go for the cheapest one because they are far too overpriced, I can get cheaper ram and add it myself :]...
     

Share This Page