Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MrMister111

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Jan 28, 2009
3,896
381
UK
Looking at iMac 4K. Couple of options, wonder if these are worth the extra?

There is a 6 core i5 3GHz with boost to 4.1GHz and 560X 4Gb. This against the 3GHz i3 4 core (no boost?), 555X 2Gb.

I’m thinking of dropping the fusion and getting a 256Gb SSD and keep my Photos library (1Tb) on an external USB disk.

I presume the 6 core only comes into its own if the app is designed for it?

So the difference would be £180 more for the 6 core? But it runs at slower speed apart from boost?

Tasks are basic photos and videos, with some 4K basic editing. General day to day use.
 
Last edited:
Day-to-day, you will notice the extra performance of the SSD. Extra cores will make a difference with more demanding workloads, such as video processing and photo manipulation. But in everyday use/apps you won't notice any difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrMister111
Thanks for input. Another reason is that I want this to last a good few years ideally, like 7-8 if possible like last one did.

My Photos library is big, getting beach balls a lot, it’s on a external USB drive, hoping either would stop this.

With a 4K screen, and 4K photos and vids from my iPhone and Dig-Cam was thinking could maybe help with this.

Not sure if it would use 6 cores in general use, or apps have to be specifically written.

Trying to future proof as well, so i3 vs i5 would help with turbo boost. Just strange how the i3 is a 3.6GHz bade, and the i5 is 3GHz.
 
If would definitely stay away from any fusion drive for video work. Go with the ssd.

Think will have to bite the bullet as you say and get a SSD. Ridiculous now really that it’s not even standard in 2019, and the prices are so high.

I even thought this time not getting a Mac because of the cost, I use iPad a lot lot more, but still need a computer at moment, and I’ve added all my Photos and videos to the Photos app.

Wondering if 256Gb SSD will be enough though, as even that’s an extra £180, and the 512Gb even more

Ideally this time to future proof I’d have wanted 16Gb RAM, I had 8Gb standard in 2012, more than 6 tears ago! Again would have hoped 16Gb would have been standard now.

But can afford 16Gb and SSD. From reading it seems as the SSD is so fast that it helps with memory swap so it may not be needed as much?
 
Another vote for the SSD.
The faster drive is something you benefit from greatly and all the time not once in a while.
Pus, yes the SSD being so fast you probably don't need the extra ram.
If you have the money, get both but if it's either or, then 8gb is enough and the SSD will serve you better IMHO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrMister111
Wondering if 256Gb SSD will be enough though, as even that’s an extra £180, and the 512Gb even more

Ideally this time to future proof I’d have wanted 16Gb RAM, I had 8Gb standard in 2012, more than 6 tears ago! Again would have hoped 16Gb would have been standard now.
Yeah, tough one. 256 GB SSD will be good enough to get your apps on it, and sound library, etc. for smooth access (128 GB could be done, but it is very tight). Yes, keep everything else on an external drive, which should be plenty fast these days, especially if you do thunderbolt. SSD also means you won't have any spinning or clicking noise.

But 8 GB RAM is really not good enough. If you do video editing 4K get 16 GB. Really. Also if you use Apple Motion you will need plenty of RAM. Or if you want to have all those heavy pro apps open side by side. Don't do 8 GB. For video editing, don't skimp on RAM.

I hope that next year Apple would finally do 256GB SSD standard across the board for all Macs, but will they? The mini already went SSD. So I would think the next generation iMacs will go SSD too. But will Apple still do 128 GB for the base units?
 
Well spec’d up what will hopefully last a good few years, not even what I’d ideally want (more SSD space really), with 6 core CPU, 256Gb SSD, 16Gb RAM as recommended (starting to think I’d better as had 8Gb 7 years ago!), with AC+ comes to £1700!!

This is for something that won’t get used a whole lot as an iPad normally suffices, but still “need” for Photos library etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Man
Should be a smooth running machine for years to come. About the SSD, I think most people are in the same boat, but at least you can choose your external storage (brand) and maybe run one in RAID 1. And yes, ouch, regarding the price.
 
Should be a smooth running machine for years to come. About the SSD, I think most people are in the same boat, but at least you can choose your external storage (brand) and maybe run one in RAID 1. And yes, ouch, regarding the price.

Hopefully 7-8 years....?

Have to go SSD really this time, it’s just not very large. Will Photos library be ok on a USB3 external drive? I know external SSD better, but it’s 800Gb now so too costly. There’s not much reading/writing but access suppose for the 1000’s of photos and vids?

I wouldn’t have upped the RAM, but think to have a base of 8Gb when they had that 7 tests ago is poor again really, I’m just thinking newer MacOS etc will need more than 8Gb.

The price has gone a lot over budget really, AC+ although not necessary really is something may as well for the cover of 3 years at least. The price is in MacBook Pro territory now as well with some upgrades.....
 
Nobody should be buying computers these days with out SSD. SSD is the single most important thing in your computer. I'd sacrifice, GFX, CPU, just about any metric for faster storage / SSD. It's THAT important. You will see gains in Everything you do all the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrMister111
Hopefully 7-8 years....?

Have to go SSD really this time, it’s just not very large. Will Photos library be ok on a USB3 external drive? I know external SSD better, but it’s 800Gb now so too costly. There’s not much reading/writing but access suppose for the 1000’s of photos and vids?

I wouldn’t have upped the RAM, but think to have a base of 8Gb when they had that 7 tests ago is poor again really, I’m just thinking newer MacOS etc will need more than 8Gb.

The price has gone a lot over budget really, AC+ although not necessary really is something may as well for the cover of 3 years at least. The price is in MacBook Pro territory now as well with some upgrades.....

With a large Photos library. Having it on an SSD makes a monumental difference in my experience. A Photos library isn't just pictures it's a database. The high IOPS of an SSD helps with a large Photos library. If that library is contained upon an SSD. As soon as you can. You'll want to get a 2TB SSD and USB 3.1 Gen 2 enclosure. 1TB is too small as 800GB is already close to the max useful capacity of an SSD. Since you want to always have at least 10% free, preferably 20%.

Open Activity Monitor while working with Photos right now. See what your CPU load and Memory Pressure is when working in Photos and it starts beach balling.
 
But 8 GB RAM is really not good enough. If you do video editing 4K get 16 GB. Really. Also if you use Apple Motion you will need plenty of RAM. Or if you want to have all those heavy pro apps open side by side. Don't do 8 GB. For video editing, don't skimp on RAM.
Looking at other configurations MacBooks included, shows Apple still ships them with 8Gb, even for example the £1900 13” MacBook.

When I say video editing in 4K, this will be very basic editing of 4K from y iPhone etc, cropping and joining etc.

With a large Photos library. Having it on an SSD makes a monumental difference in my experience. A Photos library isn't just pictures it's a database. The high IOPS of an SSD helps with a large Photos library. If that library is contained upon an SSD. As soon as you can. You'll want to get a 2TB SSD and USB 3.1 Gen 2 enclosure. 1TB is too small as 800GB is already close to the max useful capacity of an SSD. Since you want to always have at least 10% free, preferably 20%.

Open Activity Monitor while working with Photos right now. See what your CPU load and Memory Pressure is when working in Photos and it starts beach balling.

My USB external is 2Tb though and Photos library 800Gb so plenty space.

I was hoping, as it’s impossible to live on the internal now that, a USB would be fine to access. SSD is too expensive for size I require. I do aim once all sorted to trim down library, but it’s getting bigger by the day with iPhone etc.

I’ll have a look at activity monitor thanks.
 
Last edited:
External USB 3 HDD should be good enough for Photos library, and music, but you will notice how everything on internal SSD is just so much smoother. That's just the way it is. (Do make sure you also make regular backups of the external drive, because some people forget.) Besides, when large SSDs will be cheaper, you can swap things out.

I think editing 4K off a normal HDD might not be that smooth, depending on the bitrate of the video file. HDD can go 80 MB/s read/write sequential so theoretically good, but slows down considerably with random stored smaller files. But you can do projects on the internal SSD then store things external when you are done.

Regarding the 8 GB, I know Apple does that even for higher end models. It is questionable. And you can't upgrade at a later time. Simple things are possible with 8 GB, but that is just the current baseline. When you pass it, I believe things will just go so much smoother. Like, there was a time not long ago when Apple had 4 GB as baseline for some models, and it was possible, but once you went 8 GB OS X (MacOS) started to shine. My guess is that 16 GB does that right now.

Besides, even your computer usage might change in the future, who knows? Other apps you might want to use at a later time.
 
Why are Apple SSD prices so high? You can buy 1TB SSD for $160/£130 (samsung evo).

I would definately go for the highest spec cpu you can buy, the ram and SSD can be upgraded later (after warrranty if your DIY).

the cores while not making a lot of difference now, will pay dividends later on as apps are optimised for more cores. Mobile computing pretty much uses multi core extensively and will lead desktop app development that way too.
 
Why are Apple SSD prices so high? You can buy 1TB SSD for $160/£130 (samsung evo).

I would definately go for the highest spec cpu you can buy, the ram and SSD can be upgraded later (after warrranty if your DIY).

the cores while not making a lot of difference now, will pay dividends later on as apps are optimised for more cores. Mobile computing pretty much uses multi core extensively and will lead desktop app development that way too.
I agree they should be a little higher than just buying separate, but the price difference is just so much higher. Ideally I wanted at least 512Gb SSD, but the spec looking at is already up to a mouth watering £1700!!!

Don’t really fancy doing DIY on an iMac tbh, plus I’d get AC+ for the 3 year, and would hope with the spec would last 7-8 years.

As you say the 6 core should help with being relevant for longer, I presume apps have to be written specifically? Do they have to written for multi-core or for 6 core specifically?
 
I agree they should be a little higher than just buying separate, but the price difference is just so much higher. Ideally I wanted at least 512Gb SSD, but the spec looking at is already up to a mouth watering £1700!!!

Don’t really fancy doing DIY on an iMac tbh, plus I’d get AC+ for the 3 year, and would hope with the spec would last 7-8 years.

As you say the 6 core should help with being relevant for longer, I presume apps have to be written specifically? Do they have to written for multi-core or for 6 core specifically?
Multithreaded, it really depends on how optimized they are for multithreading. Also if their workload can be multithreaded. Apps are getting better at it. Also the OS is getting an increasing number of tasks which are performed in the background but in total benefit from multiple cores. Even the web browser benefits. A single web page may have multiple tasks running. Let alone many tabs.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.