Optional 3.33GHz Core 2 Duo v 2.66GHz Quad Core i5

Discussion in 'iMac' started by urbanmacUser, Oct 21, 2009.

  1. urbanmacUser macrumors regular

    urbanmacUser

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    #1
    I was interested to see what the difference between the optional 3.33Ghz Core 2 Duo and the 2.66GHz Quad-Core i5 is.

    Here in the UK the 27" iMac with the 3.33ghz added is £1,509.00 while the 2.66GHz Quad-Core i5 is £1,599.00, so only £90 more for the i5 plus you get better graphics.

    A quick search I found this post asking similar question:
    http://sillydog.org/forum/sdp_98328.php

    Looking at the charts the £90 extra is well worth it!
     
  2. costabunny macrumors 68020

    costabunny

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Location:
    Weymouth, UK
    #2
    I would agree with that - the i5 should in theory kick the pants of the dual core (in apps that are multi-core aware anyways). The dual core is a no-brainer unless you are trying to shave off the ££.
     
  3. sfmountainbiker macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    #3
    I have the same question. I posted this in the "buying guide" section, but to no response yet:

    This is exactly what I am trying to figure out. What about the custom configurations available online? I've been waiting to purchase an iMac, and frankly I don't know if I can wait until the end of November for the new quad-core (I don't really know when in Nov. they are supposed to ship).

    The Duel-Core is available at 3.33GHz on the 27in iMac. How will this compare to the Quad-Core i5, which is supposed to only go up to 3.2GHz with the Turbo Boost feature? The two are nearly the same price, but of course the Duel-Core is available today and it's a little cheaper. Also, I don't want to have to buy a new computer in the next few years so I'd like something that won't become obsolete. Could this happen with a Duel-Core? Also, what about the cache? Does it make any difference that the Duel-Core is 6MB L2 cache while the Quad is an 8MB L3 cache?

    Really, I don't tend to run many programs at the same time, and my primary functions for the new computer will be hard-core gaming and amateur photography.

    Any advice is greatly appreciated.
     
  4. zedsdead macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    #4
    The Quad-Core processors are much better for video encoding and multi-threaded apps. It is far more future proof and if you can afford it, get it.
     
  5. sfmountainbiker macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    #5
    Thanks, I just finished pricing it out online.

    After the education discount and CA taxes, the 27" 3.33 duel-core with upgraded graphics will cost $2,242.14 compared to the base model 27" 2.66 quad-core which would cost $2,225.72 or actually $16 cheaper. So it's really not a question of price, but more of functionality.
     
  6. opera57 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    #6
    Yep, definately well worth the extra £90 in my opinion! [​IMG]
     
  7. VicX macrumors member

    VicX

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Location:
    California
    #7
    i got the duo too yesterday, except the the processor with 3.06GHz and 8G RAM(maybe u have that too)
     
  8. Arcadie macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    #8
    Resale value people, That $90 now will turn into an extra $200-$300+ when you go to sell it when it comes time for a new machine.
     
  9. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #9
    Turbo Boost makes that Core i5 750 a 3.2 GHz dual core when needed. :p

    Don't forget the architectural differences.

    I wouldn't want to make that gamble. Look what happened to the 3.06 GHz iMac from the previous generation.
     
  10. G-Force macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    #10
    It doesn't work like that here in The Netherlands. Those "old" iMacs are pretty hard to sell at a reasonable price.

    I would never choose something just for resale value.
     
  11. madwolf macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2009
    #11
    Did you say that you're a hardcore gamer? then get a PC if you'll be mostly running windows on your machine...
     
  12. DDave macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Location:
    Texas
    #12
    Wow hard to sell, at least in my part of the country (Texas) used iMacs get a pretty good price.
     
  13. johtaja macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Location:
    London
    #13
    Seriously specboy, grow some tits and get the top spec i7.
     
  14. sfroom macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    #14
    I'm curious. What did happen to the 3.06 Ghz iMac form the previous generation? Has it not held it's resale value? If anything, I'd think that the resale value on the 3.06 8800GS would be higher than the 2.93 GT 120?
     
  15. sfmountainbiker macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    #15
    Damn you johtaja! This is exactly the kind of encouragement I don't need. Now I'm pricing out the i7...it comes in at $2,422.82...which is about $400 more than I wanted to spend, and about but only $200 more than the i5. So tempting.... :cool:
     
  16. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #16
    Refurbished the 3.06 GHz, GT130 model is $1,349 now or you can get the new 21.5" model for $1,199.
     
  17. cloudmac macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2009
    #17
    Buying 21.5" iMac in the morning

    I don't have the headroom in my office for a 27 inch so am going to go with the 21.5" with the 3.33GHz, 8GB, and 1TB hard drive. I had same concerns of staying with the core 2 duo for next 4 years vs. the i5 or i7 processor on the 27".

    Came to the conclusion that I can future proof with top of the line 21.5" for next 4-5 years. Most of my use is online research, e-mail and photos so I probably wouldn't notice the difference. I still have the capacity for gaming, etc. if I should want that later. Besides, the good thing is I'm moving over from a Dell desktop to the iMac.
     
  18. MythicFrost macrumors 68040

    MythicFrost

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Location:
    Australia
    #18
    I'd push a little more out of your pocket if you can and get the i7 2.8GHz.
     
  19. cloudmac macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2009
    #19
    Buying 21.5" iMac in the morning

    I would but don't have the space. Besides, going from my 19" Dell the 21.5 will be even better. Wonder why Mac doesn't offer the i5 and i7 in the 21.5? Not everyone wants a 27" screen. Do they need the extra space for cooling? I feel penalized that I can't get the latest tech in a big screen (21.5").
     
  20. rtrt macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2008
    #20
    best username i've seen in a long time :D

    bit too subtle for most people on here tho ;)
     
  21. MythicFrost macrumors 68040

    MythicFrost

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Location:
    Australia
    #21
    Something like that.
     
  22. urbanmacUser thread starter macrumors regular

    urbanmacUser

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    #22
    I'll be ordering when I see some real world test, until then its back to the G5
     
  23. cloudmac macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2009
    #23
    ordered 21.5" today

    I ordered the 21.5 today with 3.33GHz and 8GB, ATI 4670 with 256MB, extended keyboard and magic mouse. I would have liked to have had access to the i5 or i7 chip and more advanced graphics card but for what I do I think I'll be happy for the next 3-4 yrs. and it will be light years ahead of my nearly 5 yr. old Dell desk top in all respects. Now I just have to relearn the Mac OS and its capabilities - actually look forward to that vs. the MS OS.
     
  24. rrijkers macrumors 6502

    rrijkers

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #24
    Untrue.

    :cool:
     

Share This Page