Rec on best 27" iMac for the money?

lukester

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 2, 2009
422
4
RI
Im using a 15" pro 2014 MacBook now with a Cinema display which are working fine for my photography business.. The cinema has been great and still works good.

How much better do you think the 5K iMac will be over the Cinema and is it worth jumping ship for?

I see B&H has a sale on some 2017 iMacs and a base model 27" 2019..

Is the savings on the 2017 the way to go or is the 2019 worth the extra cost, or just keep what I have till something goes?

thanks
 

lukester

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 2, 2009
422
4
RI
I just read some reviews on the base 2019 iMac that one photorapher complained that its much slower than is 2014 MBP..
thats what I have.. I have a 2.5 ghz For I7 with 16gig of ram ddr3

How does that compare with the new iMac?

Whats the deal with software from the MBP not running on the iMac.. are you kidding??
 

mikehalloran

macrumors 68000
Oct 14, 2018
1,600
390
The Sillie Con Valley
It depends on the file size, your apps and how much time you need to save over what you're doing now.

Be$t bang for the buck is a sliding ratio. For some, the iMac Pro is the only real choice. Apple has an inventory glut right now which means there are many choices in the Refurb Store right now—Apple's way of lowering the price without "officially" lowering the price. This i the Mac made for graphics and AV pros (till the Mac Pro ships in September, at least).
https://www.apple.com/shop/refurbished/mac/imac-pro
That $4,249 base model iMP will be a big step up from what you are using now.

You want an SSD as graphics files involve writing to disk. The tiny SSDs in the Fusion drives off-load these tasks to the HDD and that can't be helped. The 3TB Fusion has a larger SSD but still...

When Time saved=Money earned, the true bargain is rarely the least expensive option.
[doublepost=1561150412][/doublepost]
I just read some reviews on the base 2019 iMac that one photorapher complained that its much slower than is 2014 MBP..
thats what I have.. I have a 2.5 ghz For I7 with 16gig of ram ddr3
Without context, no one here will know but that can easily be possible. If it is the base model with a fusion drive or an SSD that is too small, not hard to believe at all.
[doublepost=1561151406][/doublepost]If you have never replaced the SSD in your 2014 MBP, you can give it a nice performance boost for $150(1TB) – $250(2TB) including tools and a new keyboard cable. If the battery is getting too old, this is the time to do that, too.

The original SSD is a very slow (relatively speaking) AHCI blade. Because of the PCIe 2 bus, a fast NVMe 3 x4 blade like the Aura X2 Pro or 970 EVO ($500) is a waste of money in these. A slow NVMe 3 x4 blade costs a lot le$$ and still runs 2–3x faster. The Crucial P1 ($127 1TB) and Intel 660p ($228 2TB) are the ones to look at since they're still faster than the bus.

The keyboard cable in these is quite fragile and can be disturbed just by removing the back which makes it go bad. It has to be removed when replacing the battery anyway. Fortunately it's $9 on Amazon.
 

robgendreau

macrumors 68040
Jul 13, 2008
3,286
229
The newer iMacs have a wider gamut display than perhaps your older displays; DCI-P3 vs say sRGB. That can help in photo editing and printing, and so can the 5k retina screen.

It would be faster as well. But really hard to say how much, practically. Some stuff like certain Lr operations or Ps adjustments might really benefit; other stuff not so much.

The one area where clearly you'd get more oomph is doing say video on the iMac Pro, and maybe even the iMac i9.

Keeping a machine till something goes is perilous, even with a backup, since you might still need the machine to do business, and having to buy immediately can mean missing out on the meagre sales or more importantly refurb deals that Apple has at times. And since you are going to upgrade at some point, just a matter of amortizing the cost and whether increased reliability and perhaps speed and even warranty make a difference to your business.
 

lukester

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 2, 2009
422
4
RI
The newer iMacs have a wider gamut display than perhaps your older displays; DCI-P3 vs say sRGB. That can help in photo editing and printing, and so can the 5k retina screen.

It would be faster as well. But really hard to say how much, practically. Some stuff like certain Lr operations or Ps adjustments might really benefit; other stuff not so much.

The one area where clearly you'd get more oomph is doing say video on the iMac Pro, and maybe even the iMac i9.

Keeping a machine till something goes is perilous, even with a backup, since you might still need the machine to do business, and having to buy immediately can mean missing out on the meagre sales or more importantly refurb deals that Apple has at times. And since you are going to upgrade at some point, just a matter of amortizing the cost and whether increased reliability and perhaps speed and even warranty make a difference to your business.
thanks.. I just dont want to buy a machine that is slower than my MBP 2014 2.5 ghz I7, 16 gb ram gt 750 2 gb nvidia
 

jwhazel

macrumors regular
Sep 22, 2005
195
24
Similar boat, although I’m a software developer who only does graphical stuff on occasion (I have a cc subscription). I had a 2014 15” maxed out from work. They replaced it recently with a 2018 15” lowest spec. I connected both to my old Thunderbolt Display. I also just bought a 2017 27” mid level (with the 575 gpu) for work and personal use at home.

*how much better is the 5k over the cinema?
IMO, *way* better. Like I said, my graphic work is minimal but still it’s so much nicer to use. I tend to try to use my iMac for work stuff as much as possible now. And if something happened to my iMac, I’d push work to replace my thunderbolt with some sort of 27” 5k display.

*is the saving on the 2017 vs 2019 worth it?
IMO, yes providing you can find the right deal. Bestbuy had an even better one a month or 2 ago where I picked up the midrange for $500 off making it $1499. I think b&h even with the sale is still $100 more for this model. With sale prices there is no way I would consider a 2019. It’s pretty much the same exact computer with the differences on the regular models (i.e. not the custom order ones) providing no tangible benefit for most folks in the pro world.

*i don’t want to buy a machine that is slower than my old one.
I upgraded my iMac to a 1tb ssd and 24gb ram. In everyday usage, it’s noticeably faster than both of my MacBook pros, the 2014 and now the 2018. Not that my macbooks are slouches by any stretch of the mean.
 

Fishrrman

macrumors P6
Feb 20, 2009
17,182
5,536
My opinion only, but I believe "the best value" (which is always "a compromise") in the iMac line usually lies "in the midrange offering".

Not the entry-level model, and not the high-end model, either.

It seems like those who buy "the highest spec'd" models (iMacs, MacBook Pros) often end up having a higher percentage of problems with them -- perhaps because the machines are "operating closer to the edge of reliability".

There are those who NEED the top-spec models due to their work. But this usually IS "for work", and the computers represent a business asset, rather than something that is used for personal pleasure (as ALL my Macs have ever been).

So... again... usually "something in the middle" is "the best compromise" between $$$$, power, and... reliability.