Trying to justify replacing HP desktop with iMac

Discussion in 'iMac' started by subroutines, Jan 24, 2010.

  1. subroutines macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2009
    #1
    I currently have an HP Desktop the basic specs are:

    AMD Athlon - 3GHz
    512 mb Nvidia GC
    3 GB Memory

    It only cost about 400 - 500 dollars to purchase and upgrade. I don't do any gaming but I do HD video editing.

    I am looking at a general iMac with roughly about 3 GHz, 4GB RAM and it appears to be 256 MB card (either shared or discrete). So I am wondering if I am losing any performance by going to an iMac considering the it costs a bit more and the graphic card is somewhat questionable?

    Thanks in advance and I appreciate any feedback or comments.
     
  2. thegoldenmackid macrumors 604

    thegoldenmackid

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Location:
    dallas, texas
    #2
    I would upgrade the iMac's video card, but in general you should have a faster machine with the iMac because of OSX's efficiency compared to Windows.
     
  3. archipellago macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    #3

    trying to justify a purchase 4 times the price of the machine its replacing when the performance will be the same..??

    good luck.....


    just buy Win 7 for the existing PC... to get the best OS and value for money!

    with the change.... have a nice vacation..! ;)
     
  4. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #4
    You should either get a quad-core iMac or build/buy a PC because C2D iMac isn't really an upgrade in performance as it's about as fast as your current. So if your budget allows you to get quad-core iMac, get one, they are amazing, but if it doesn't, you can build a very decent PC for less than 1000$ and it'll crush any iMac.

    By the way, how intensive is your editing? Something light with iMovie? Or something heavy with e.g. After Effects?
     
  5. Bulldog3777 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    #5
    Replace HP

    I had an HP, 4 gig RAM, 500 gig HD and Vista. Got a MBP and loved it. Bought the 21.5 IMAC and it is fabulous. I hardly ever touched the HP due to Vista and Windows. My son put Windows 7 on it and I have to admit, it runs 100% better, but, you can't beat a MAC. Just working with photos is reason enough for me to stay with the MACs.
     
  6. subroutines thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2009
    #6
    Thanks for the responses.

    I use Adobe Premiere Pro and After Effects.
     
  7. subroutines thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2009
    #7
    Yeah I guess I could customize the purchase of Imac through the store...didn't realize that. But overall I am just looking for the same performance or better with an iMac.

    Also is there much of a difference in performance with the Quad Core? I have heard rumblings that most people don't even use all of Dual Core power
     
  8. iShater macrumors 604

    iShater

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #8
    Yes, you will get more power with QuadCore, as you have more cores available for other apps in the system.

    Don't forget to factor in the cost of purchasing the software for your iMac as well (Premier, After Effects, etc.)
     
  9. HLdan macrumors 603

    HLdan

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2007
    #9
    Adobe allows you to transfer the license from Windows to OS X. There may be a small fee but the OP won't have to re-buy his Adobe software.
     
  10. subroutines thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2009
    #10
    excuse my ignorance on processors, but when I look at the listings they have quadcores rated at 2.66?

    Also would there be much of difference between 2.66 and 2.8 Quad Core processor or is the difference very minimal?
     
  11. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #11

    That 2.66 is Giga Hertz which is the frequency of the processor. While dual core is available at 3.33GHz it has only two cores while the quad core has four. Because you're a newbie with processors we can do it in this way (this isn't realistic but gives you an idea of it):

    2 x 3.33GHz = 6.66GHz
    4 x 2.8GHz = 11.2GHz

    If you have the money, 2.8GHz is worth it as it has Hyper-threading
     
  12. iShater macrumors 604

    iShater

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #12
    The extra cores allow you to do more things while you are rendering or importing, exporting, etc. i.e. the processor is available to do more parallel tasks. Unless your application can use all 4 cores (I thought some Adobe apps use only 2?) then it can get more performance boost.
     
  13. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #13
    I think Premiere Pro and After Effects support quad core. In addition, quad core has Turbo Boost which boosts the 2.8GHz quad to 3.46GHz so even if the app can only support one or two core(s), it'll be faster than C2D
     
  14. talmy macrumors 601

    talmy

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Location:
    Oregon
    #14
    The quad-core processors boost their clock rate when not using all cores so are basically never slower than the 3GHz C2Ds. It's really difficult to keep all the cores busy, and there are other factors involved (display performance, disk performance) so it is hard to quantize the real world performance boost of the i5 or i7, but it sure seems fast!

    So far the biggest improvement has been with Handbrake, which really flies, and running multiple virtual machines. The Hyperthreading in the i7 is only good for maybe a 25% speed boost if you can manage to utilize more than 4 simultaneous threads. Ho-hum. But if I can get an extra year of life out of the i7 over the C2D, or a few months extra over the i5, it will have paid for itself.
     
  15. bossxii macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    Location:
    Kansas City
    #15
    If you are going to do mostly gaming and just looking for more power to process video. I'd personally just buy/build a Quad PC and save yourself some cash while getting a better graphics card. OSX/Windows aside the same i7 860 Quad chip, 6 gigs of ram, 1TB HD, and a 5870 ATI 1gig ram card (plus PS, Case etc..) can be had for around 1200 bucks or less. Then your just have to find a monitor that suits you. IPS panels are very nice and I love mine but it's not the end of the world for gaming and video. If it's professional photo work then the IPS panel and the iMac may make sense.

    While I'm not a fan of windows OS, you can't compare the mobile version of the 4850 to a desktop card like the 5870 in a gaming rig. I have a 2yr old 8800 GTS w/768mb ram with a 2.4 duo core that can run higher FPS in games than the iMac. If gaming is what your really doing, I'd have to suggest building a rig specific for your needs. The video editing can be done on either machine and since your using Windows based software now it would work on either platform.
     
  16. subroutines thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2009
    #16
    thanks for the explanation.:)
     
  17. pionata macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Location:
    Montreal
    #17
    Hey you may want to keep your pc and plug it in the iMac through the video in.

    Then using cmd-F2 you can switch between both computer.

    Also look at the geekbench benchmarks, iMac i7 beats even some 16 cores pc, scoring around 9000.

    Latest iMac score: Intel Core i7 860 @ 2.80 GHz (1 processor, 4 cores, 8 threads) = 9765

    http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/mac-benchmarks/ (new iMac 27" i7 not yet in that page / 9765 means above Mac Pro 8 cores (2008-2009)) - Only the 16 cores or latest 8 cores Mac pro beats it.
    http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/pc-benchmarks/
     
  18. archipellago macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
  19. MacHamster68 macrumors 68040

    MacHamster68

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    #19
    you just cant justify purchasing a mac on pure performance aspects , its like buying a car only because of the spec ,
    despite i'm not a fan of huge screens and flat panels in particular , the iMac 27" i7 looks damn good for a flat panel AIO system ,
    so compare it with a car again , a ferrari , you dont purchase a ferrari because of the pure spec and performance , you buy it for its design and you know it has sufficient performance as its a ferrari
    same for the iMac you buy it for its design and you know it will have sufficient performance


    but good design comes at a premium price
    but we dont talk about money as money should not be something to take in consideration when buying a new mac ,
    as we all know we could get better performance for half the price , but without the brilliant design of apple......and without osx
     

Share This Page