I get that. I get that people don't mind paying a 500-1000 dollar premium for aesthetics. I just said he should be mindful about the fact.
I appreciate what you're saying. Over the year's I've had a few different apple machines - 2 macbook pros (one I'm currently using as my main computer) and a mac pro back when I was freelancing and needed more power. We've just arrived at a point where we're not looking for a powerhouse anymore. Yes, we play a few games, non of which are super demanding, but mostly it will be used for light graphics work and surfing the web. I'm just so reluctant to over think those needs. It's so easy to say things like "we could bootcamp it, and play newer games" (my partner
😉) but in reality it's unlikely to happen, and certainly not worth basing our buying needs around. The imac just seems to be the most suitable machine for the place we're at. I have no desire for a windows machine (it's been too many years now! I'd never cope) and whilst perhaps it seems superficial, as a mother of little one who is in to everything and someone who does most of the cleaning around here, a nice all-in-one without a tangle of wires does sound like a breath of fresh air.
Basically I want a machine I can do some web design/print work on through the day. Check my e-mails, watch some youtube/twitch. Then perhaps pop a game of League of Legends on in the evening. It doesn't need to be the best of the best at any of those tasks, so long as it can keep up. What I'm really asking is - I have a very vague grasp of the inner workings of the machine, but I have no idea which card is better than which and by how much. I'm happy to spend money on the upgrades, but only if they will be significant upgrades for the tasks I'm likely to perform. A hackintosh sounds like I'd need to have significantly more than a vague grasp on things!
🙂
i5. Unless you're editing a lot of video it's probably not worth getting the i7 upgrade; you won't get any performance benefit in games.
It's really up to you. A purely SSD setup is faster and quieter than a fusion drive, is less likely to die and I am happy to use external storage (3TB) for video files and bittorrent so it fits my needs.
No but it's the most cost efficient way of future proofing your machine. I think it's a must if you intend to keep the machine for more than 2-3 years.
Thanks Aika, these are straight answers to some of the big questions we had and a great help. Is that to say fusion drives are noisy or just that SSDs are unearthly quiet? I've never had either and I am quite excited at the prospect of a SSD but I'm concerned about space. I might take a look later on and just work out how much space is being used currently and perhaps we can have a setup using an external drive for extra storage.
I'm wondering too about getting a iMac. I'd like the best graphics card which I think is the 780 right now for the 27 inch. So is it better to go ssd and use an external USB 3 hd or get a regular ssd inside and go tb ssd external. It'd also be a family computer but gaming would be done regularly so I'd put bootcamp on it
I put windows 7 on my macbook pro once. I had a really exciting week of installing all the games I never normally get chance to play. Then at the end of the week I reverted back to wow/lol/minecraft etc and realised I could probably uninstall windows after all. I think I've just been in mac land so long that I'm set in my ways.
😀
Does that mean you'd be opting for the big one with 2GB of video memory?
Currently, the best bang for your buck is the 2012 refurbished 27" i7/1TB Fusion/gtx 680mx/ 8GB RAM. It is 1949$ in the US refurb store, and I don't know the exact conversion, but I think that is around your price range. The issue with iMacs is that there is a large cost up front for the Apple logo, but the upgrades on the iMac are actually reasonably priced (excluding the Fusion Drive, even though it is one of the best upgrades you can get). This is important to note because on a tight budget, all of your money is eaten up with the Apple tax, and you can get shortchanged on performance. The 2012 computer will outperform any of the 2013 21" iMacs, and most of the 27" iMacs in terms of graphics/CPU performance. If you can fit the 27" iMac on your desk, and you can't afford the maxed out 2013 version, the 2012 refurb model is currently the best you can get.
Best,
Matt
That's really interesting, I hadn't actually considered a refurb. Just had a look and I think I've found it at £1,749.00 in the store.
Which is roughly the same as if I got the 2013 27-inch:
3.2GHz quad-core Intel Core i5, 8GB (two 4GB) memory, 256GB Flash Storage, NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M with 1GB video memory
Is performance significantly better on the 2012 model? Are there any downsides to taking on a refurb?
I'm not adverse to the 27", I just prefer the 21". But it's looking like the 27" might be closer to what we want.
I spend a lot of time designing and laying out books using InDesign. I use a 27" monitor (Mac Pro) and it's hard for me to imagine doing that work on a 21" screen.
You didn't say what kind of screen you're using now. Perhaps you've never used InDesign on a 27" screen at the 2560 x 1440 resolution. It's a great working environment.
I work on a 15" macbook pro but I have an old 23" cinema display (kept from my long dead mac pro) that I plug in when I need a larger working space. I do like the extra space I'm just concerned as it's a big jump and it's a lot of screen when not using it for work. They are beautiful though!
