In my opinion the best decision would be the top version with m395 because of the fusion drive (or the 256 pure ssd) and, as fat jez said, a better processor
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The Definitive riMac graphics benchmark thread
- Thread starter fruitpunch.ben
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I was thinking of getting the i7 with m395x, but now leaning towards the i5 with the m395. I don't really do gaming, and in 2 years I could just sell and get the latest and greatest at that time anyway. Still on the fence I guess. Wish there was a more definitive answer on heat with the different cpu and gpu combinations.
Oh well, that's true. These 0,1 GHz will improve the the overall performance dramaticly
But the price differences differ anyway if you add BTO options. If I add a 512 GB SSD on these 3 Models, the price difference between the low end and high end is only 90€.
This is my benchmark (i5-6600 - M395):
I hope the settings were correct. I didn't here any fans. Should I disable sound while benchmarking or doesn't it effect the result?
Edit:
And Cinebench:
I hope the settings were correct. I didn't here any fans. Should I disable sound while benchmarking or doesn't it effect the result?
Edit:
And Cinebench:
Last edited:
That's actually the point: you want at least a Fusion, so the first option it's a nono IMHO (7200RPM drive). The middle one seems reasonable, but the Fusion Drive you are getting has a poor 24GB ssd inside so what's the point? You have to upgrade. At the end the one you want is the third model which all in all gives you the best bang for your buck.Oh well, that's true. These 0,1 GHz will improve the the overall performance dramaticly
But the price differences differ anyway if you add BTO options. If I add a 512 GB SSD on these 3 Models, the price difference between the low end and high end is only 90€.
Now that is something I'm very keen to know. There hasn't been much mention of the new iMac in regards to video editing.
OK - so I did 8 Heaven benchmarks with the settings suggested in the first post in this thread. I have enclosed the results of the 1st and the 8th test - can you guess which is which?
The results of all 8 test are pretty much the same. So as far as I can see there's no throttling. Of course I don't know if a lot more tests will give another picture.
As far as temperature goes, the temperature goes to about 90 after the first benchmark and reaches 97 in the second. After that it is 98-99 and did not once reach 100.
As far as the fan goes, I can hear it when the fan ramps up when the temperature reaches about 99 degrees. But it is not very much - the fan is still very quite. If the sound bothers you then you seriously have a super duper sensitive hearing.
Do you have access to Diablo III, Tomb Raider, and/or Left 4 Dead 2? If so it would be great to compare with http://barefeats.com/imac5k13.html results. We could then isolate what the M395X is doing.
Also do you have boot camp installed? If so, could you please try http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/ GPU-Z? If not could you go to system profiler and take a screenshot of your “Graphics/Displays” screen? (For reference, look at http://www.anandtech.com/show/9276/2015-15inch-retina-macbook-pros-dgpu-r9-m370x-is-cape-verde)
Yeah the terrible hdd performance on the lower two configurations means I think the top end one is the only reasonable base machine too. Arguable with external drive support through thunderbolt 2, the 256ssd might sway me, though initially I was thinking 2TB fusion.
Or for image editing..
I'm almost canceling my order and going with the 395 2GB.
Thing is if I do that, I will only receive my machine by Mid November
0.1ghz along with 0.3ghz in turbo mode and gpu bump for $100 makes the decision harder to make.Oh well, that's true. These 0,1 GHz will improve the the overall performance dramaticly
But the price differences differ anyway if you add BTO options. If I add a 512 GB SSD on these 3 Models, the price difference between the low end and high end is only 90€.
I dont have bootcamp but I can try Diablo 3 tomorrow. I dont know if there is a benchmark function ingame though.
Thanks for posting link. I had been waiting for the new bare feats benchmarks. Some of the best and most reliable comparisons IMHO.
I see some incremental improvements, which is actually pretty surprising considering I was assuming the 395x was simply a 295x rebrand.
Disappointed that they report the 395X seems to climb to similar temps and fan speeds under load as the 295X
Technically, only the first post is supposed to be interesting, assuming that fruitpunch.ben is keeping up.
The Iris Pro doesn't support 5k. Perhaps Apple wanted to take advantage of market segments that consider graphics cards to be an expensive extravagance, but for some reason, won't be satisfied with the 4k. It's an awful lot of money to pay for user accessible dimm slots, so maybe the extra resollution is compelling.
Last edited:
test (French site) of the 3.2 ghz with the M390. Not bad but the gpu seems a little bit slower than the 290x
http://www.macg.co/tests/2015/10/test-de-limac-27-retina-5k-core-i5-32-ghz-skylake-fin-2015-91572
http://www.macg.co/tests/2015/10/test-de-limac-27-retina-5k-core-i5-32-ghz-skylake-fin-2015-91572
I've now got my i7 395X up and running in Windows, after an absolute NIGHTMARE transferring my Thunderbolt SSD Boot Camp partition over to the new iMac from my late 2012 machine. Don't ask…
Anyway, while I don't have any good news for those 'upgrading' from a 295X, I think I've got some positive numbers for those stepping up from the late 2012 680MX.
I benchmarked Batman Arkham City and Company of Heroes 2, and at 1440p under the exact same settings (everything essentially on 'maximum', with Vsync off) on both machines, I got…
Batman, 680MX:
Minimum FPS: 20
Maximum FPS: 30
Average FPS: 29
Batman, 395X
Minimum FPS: 17
Maximum FPS: 58
Average FPS: 29
So, apart from that weird maximum, kinda meh. However…
CoH2, 680MX
Minimum FPS: 7.28
Maximum FPS: 20.25
Average FPS: 13.26
CoH2, 395X
Minimum FPS: 8.70
Maximum FPS: 30.04
Average FPS: 20.05
So, while the 395X doesn't appear to be any kind of giant leap beyond the 680MX in the 2012, it is a bit of an upgrade. And man, that screen…
Hope that helps. I'm certainly sold, anyway.
Anyway, while I don't have any good news for those 'upgrading' from a 295X, I think I've got some positive numbers for those stepping up from the late 2012 680MX.
I benchmarked Batman Arkham City and Company of Heroes 2, and at 1440p under the exact same settings (everything essentially on 'maximum', with Vsync off) on both machines, I got…
Batman, 680MX:
Minimum FPS: 20
Maximum FPS: 30
Average FPS: 29
Batman, 395X
Minimum FPS: 17
Maximum FPS: 58
Average FPS: 29
So, apart from that weird maximum, kinda meh. However…
CoH2, 680MX
Minimum FPS: 7.28
Maximum FPS: 20.25
Average FPS: 13.26
CoH2, 395X
Minimum FPS: 8.70
Maximum FPS: 30.04
Average FPS: 20.05
So, while the 395X doesn't appear to be any kind of giant leap beyond the 680MX in the 2012, it is a bit of an upgrade. And man, that screen…
Hope that helps. I'm certainly sold, anyway.
Last edited:
I've now got my i7 395X up and running in Windows, after an absolute NIGHTMARE transferring my Thunderbolt SSD Boot Camp partition over to the new Mac. Don't ask…
Anyway, while I don't have any good news for those 'upgrading' from a 295X, I think I've got some positive numbers for those stepping up from the late 2012 680MX.
I benchmarked Batman Arkham City and Company of Heroes 2, and at 1440p under the exact same settings (everything essentially on 'maximum', with Vsync off) on both machines, I got…
Batman, 680MX:
Minimum FPS: 20
Maximum FPS: 30
Average FPS: 29
Batman, 395X
Minimum FPS: 17
Maximum FPS: 58
Average FPS: 29
So, apart from that weird maximum, kinda meh. However…
CoH2, 680MX
Minimum FPS: 7.28
Maximum FPS: 20.25
Average FPS: 13.26
CoH2, 395X
Minimum FPS: 8.70
Maximum FPS: 30.04
Average FPS: 20.05
So, while the 395X doesn't appear to be any kind of giant leap beyond the 680MX in the 2012, it is a bit of an upgrade. And man, that screen…
Hope that helps. I'm certainly sold, anyway.
Finally some light at the end of the tunnel. I am still waiting for my 395x machine (should come Thursday). I am also upgrading from the 2012 machine...How about the heat issue and the noise. Did you notice any difference to the 2012 machine? If you have any more comparison between the 680MX and the 395x, pleeeaaasseee share!
Finally some light at the end of the tunnel. I am still waiting for my 395x machine (should come Thursday). I am also upgrading from the 2012 machine...How about the heat issue and the noise. Did you notice any difference to the 2012 machine? If you have any more comparison between the 680MX and the 395x, pleeeaaasseee share!
Haven't run anything long enough to get into heat and noise yet, but given that my 2012's fans ramp up to full-on roar after any meaningful amount of gaming, I'm expecting the 5K's to do the same.
I'm comparing 3DMark between the two at the mo – back soon…
Oh well, that's true. These 0,1 GHz will improve the the overall performance dramaticly
But the price differences differ anyway if you add BTO options. If I add a 512 GB SSD on these 3 Models, the price difference between the low end and high end is only 90€.
When you add the i7 processor, the difference between the i7 M395 with 512 GB SSD and the M390 with i7 512 GB SSD is only $50.
Even more interesting is when you use the education store, the i7 M395 512 GB SSD is actually cheaper than the i7 M390 512 GB SSD ($2504 vs $2529)
Have you run gfxbench? Have you looked at the visuals?
T-rex on screen is limited to 60 fps, meaning that quite a few cards will produce the same results: 59 point whatever fps.. The m380 is not in that class though, but then it's oriented towards people who wonder why Apple couldn't just have used an Iris Pro and saved them some cash.
From a visual perspective, T-rex is quite ordinary-- a last generation game, perhaps.
It's Manhattan that produces such interesting disparities.
M380: 14 fps
M390: 26 fps
M290x: 28 fps
M395: 31 fps -- getting into the playable range
M395X: 32 fps -- obviously 4 GB VRAM doesn't make a difference in this instance. It might in other games.