riMac relative performance?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by kzhlin, Oct 22, 2014.

  1. kzhlin macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #1
    How does the riMac perform against a fully loaded 2012 rMBP?

    1. base riMac vs. 2012 rMBP

    2. fully upgraded riMac vs. 2012 rMBP

    I want to get an riMac, but not sure how much I need to upgrade it. I would like a bit more power than my 2012 rMBP, but my rMBP has enough power for 90% of my applications.

    Right now I am thinking 16 GB ram and 512 GB flash. However, I'm not sure if I should upgrade the CPU and GPU. I heard the base m290x already performs pretty well, but that I should upgrade to the m295x to promote the longevity... :(
     
  2. macmee Suspended

    macmee

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2008
    Location:
    Canada
    #2
    Why not get 8GB of ram, 256GB SSD and upgrade gfx and cpu? You can buy ram yourself for much cheaper, and better gfx and cpu is probably better than more storage.
     
  3. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #3
    Both riMacs will eat the 2012 rMBP for breakfast.
     
  4. kzhlin thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #4
    I was looking at the after market price for 16 GB and it's more or less the same price as the Apple one.

    ----------

    Even considering the fact that they're driving the massive 5k display?!?! :eek:
     
  5. macmee Suspended

    macmee

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2008
    Location:
    Canada
    #5
    Graphics card is far better.
     
  6. jji7skyline macrumors 6502

    jji7skyline

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2011
    #6
    In the Apple store you pay $200 for 8GB more than standard which is 8GB altogether 16GB.

    On amazon for example, you pay less than $150 for a 16GB kit which will get you a total of 24GB.
     
  7. tillsbury macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    #7
    I'm not sure about eating, but they'll take a bite.

    Geekbench on the top spec iMac is 4438/16407, bottom is 3883/12421.

    On the 2012 rMBP (2.6GHz, not top spec) it's 3222/12428.

    So not a fat lot of difference with the base model, but the 4GHz is a useful step up. Don't expect miracles.

    The 1Tb SSD should be significantly faster than those in the 2012 rMBP.

    The graphics (particularly if you go for the upgrade) will be significantly quicker too.
     
  8. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #8
    GB is hardly the be all and end all when it comes to a reliable indicator of relative performance.
     
  9. tillsbury macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    #9
    No, that's why I discussed ssd speed and graphics a little too. It's sounding like the ssd isn't a lot faster either.
     
  10. hyune83 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    #10
    Definitely iMac is faster, but not sure it will feel so b/c of the 5k monitor it has to drive. Anyone have both?
     
  11. tillsbury macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    #11
    Not yet, but I played with a base model this afternoon (and have a 2012 2.6 rMBP). The riMac certainly feels quicker, but not shatteringly so. There are some stutters here and there, but these could easily be early driver issues such as happened at the beginning of the rMBP's existence.
     

Share This Page