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

Santabean2000

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Nov 20, 2007
1,889
2,053
Anyone considered having two well spec'd i7 iMacs over a single MP?

Price is comparable (when two 27" LED Cinema Displays are thrown in the basket).

Anyone have this setup?
 
Are you actually considering this? If you bought TWO iMacs in lieu of one MP with a pair of ACDs, what you'd really have is two separate computers that for the most part have to be operated separately. What exactly is your intended use?

The most fundamental selling point of a quad-core MP over the iMac has always been the expandability, an area where the iMac is lacking. In such a scenario, the iMac is perceived as the better buy in every other area, considering the drastic difference in price.
 
Are you actually considering this? If you bought TWO iMacs in lieu of one MP with a pair of ACDs, what you'd really have is two separate computers that for the most part have to be operated separately. What exactly is your intended use?

The most fundamental selling point of a quad-core MP over the iMac has always been the expandability, an area where the iMac is lacking. In such a scenario, the iMac is perceived as the better buy in every other area, considering the drastic difference in price.

Thinking basically one machine could be used to off-load heavy processing tasks, renders etc, which would essentially run in the background on second machine.

Perhaps the better scenario would be to have a MP with an iMac in lieu of an ACD..?
 
Thinking basically one machine could be used to off-load heavy processing tasks, renders etc, which would essentially run in the background on second machine.

Perhaps the better scenario would be to have a MP with an iMac in lieu of an ACD..?

Utterly, utterly pointless IMO.

Just get the mac pro :p
 
Thinking basically one machine could be used to off-load heavy processing tasks, renders etc, which would essentially run in the background on second machine.

Perhaps the better scenario would be to have a MP with an iMac in lieu of an ACD..?

That would be quite a pain to do, so I'd just get a Pro 6-core. It's not as simple as just transferring tasks between the two machines.
 
That would be quite a pain to do, so I'd just get a Pro 6-core. It's not as simple as just transferring tasks between the two machines.

Agreed. While you can network multiple machines together for distributed computing in SOME software (Apple QMaster included with FCS comes to mind here), there's really not enough of it out there to totally justify what you're thinking of doing.

Several applications that support multithreaded operation allow you throttle CPU resources, allowing you to perhaps free up 1-2 cores for day-to-day foreground tasks while crunching a render in the background. The Adobe CS5 apps for example, offer this type of functionality.

But again, it's really going to come down to what your specific needs are. What applications will you be running? A 6-core MP may do the job for you, but you might even opt for the 8-core model for situations where the core count is more important than raw clock speed.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.