Question about the GPU

[divergirl]

I was originally going to get a Mac Mini, but since seeing the refresh and the faster SSD, I'm kind of tempted by the 27" iMac.

I've decided if I do get an iMac that I will be getting a 512GB SSD and will upgrade the RAM to 32GB aftermarket. I also do some video encoding via Handbrake so I decided I would go with the i7 to take advantage of the hyperthreading.

I was wondering, however, if I could get away with the GTX 775M 2GB, since I don't game at all, and I don't edit video or photographs. However, I AM thinking of running my iMac with a 1280x720 HiDPI resolution because I like to sit almost four feet away from my monitor and I have bad eyesight.

It'd be nice to have everything be absolutely huge so I can read it, like in these screenshots:
https://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=346227&d=1341231609
https://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=346221&d=1341227958

But I've read that HiDPI mode is more intensive on the GPU than regular resolutions. I don't currently understand WHY, but with that in mind, do you think the 775M would have enough power to run HiDPI mode for at least the next four years without stuttering at all with OS X animations? I will NOT be doing any gaming whatsoever, I just want to make sure I have the option to blow everything up without having all the OS X animations stuttering a few years down the road. If I would need the 780M to do that, so be it, but if it's not necessary I think that money would be better spent towards getting a good UPS for the computer.

 

[rds]

775M is a high end mobile chip, shouldn't have any problems whatsoever.

 

[leman]

Even a 4 years old integrated graphics wouldn't have any trouble with that. Using a 775M to render a HiDPI 1280x720 desktop is like shooting a fly with a 50 caliber naval gun

 

[divergirl]

Even a 4 years old integrated graphics wouldn't have any trouble with that. Using a 775M to render a HiDPI 1280x720 desktop is like shooting a fly with a 50 caliber naval gun

I'm so relieved to hear that! Because if I did end up getting the base model in the end, that means even the 755M should be fine for these purposes. This is very good to know.

Because the truth is, since I won't be really utilizing the GPU very much, the upgrade from the base model to the i7 is really only a CPU upgrade for me and costs an extra 400 dollars. I can see the benefit of a fast SSD, because it would speed up EVERYTHING I do on my computer. But with the i7, the only time I would get ANY benefit from it is when I'm using it with Handbrake. I don't buy THAT many movies that I need to back up, you know? On the other hand, it takes my current computer over an hour and a half to encode a 30 minute standard definition video into an mp4 and I CANNOT stand it. HD encoding isn't even an option, with how long it takes. If buying an i7 means I will never have to feel this kind of frustration again, I'd do it in a heartbeat!

All the benchmarks I've found for Handbrake are for less than three minutes of encoding, which doesn't really give me a real-world idea of how long it would take me to encode via Handbrake (using the H.264 codec) a 90-minute MKV (that's been ripped from a Blu-ray with MakeMKV) using the 3.2 i5, 3.4 i5, and 3.5 i7 CPUs respectively. It's these kind of real-world statistics that would help me decide whether the upgrade would be worth it to me.

Anyways, sorry for getting off-topic. Just thinking to myself again. I've been brooding ever since the iMacs got upgraded. I'm not one to make rash decisions; I really tend to spend a long time hemming and hawing first. I don't want to regret not getting a more powerful machine if I needed it, but I don't want to spend money needlessly either. For four hundred bucks I could buy a nice UPS AND a decent NAS to put my media on, after all.