Will it make a difference... iMac 2.93 vs 3.06, for my needs

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by theleveler, Apr 8, 2009.

  1. theleveler macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    #1
    Considering that I'm going to be getting the 4850 gfx card, and an educational discount, I'm trying to decide if 100mhz speed increase between 2.93GHz and 3.06GHz is worth $290 (after taxes on either machine purchased with a 4850 gfx card and applecare, using a discount for my school).

    I really don't need a whole TB of storage, as the 640gb drive is plenty sufficient for my need. Would the 3.4% processor speed make a noticeable difference in the following situations?...

    Photoshop (I do graphics design stuff here and there)

    iPhone application development in XCODE

    WoW (I play when I have some time to kill and I don't feel like leaving my apt)

    Misc Games... I'm not a gamer (I own a Wii) and I don't play a LOT of graphics heavy games. However I do hate bad frame rates. As long as I can turn all of the settings down to minimum and get above 30 fps in games (WoW), I'll be happy.

    From everything I've looked at, it appears as though the two chips are from the same series, using the same bus speed, running the same speed memory.

    Is there anything else I'm not considering?

    Thanks in advance for any advice anyone can offer me!! :D
     
  2. jerseycitymac macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    #2
    I don't know about you, but I rarely notice a 3% change in anything -- quality of sushi, speed of processors, etc.
     
  3. Styxie macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    Location:
    Holland
    #3
    I've had the same dilemma, but for me, the 0.13 GHz increase is not worth the money, so I would go with the 2.93, it's probably fast enough, and I don't think there's anything the 2.93 won't be able to handle that the 3.06 will.
     
  4. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #4
    I wouldn't pay $100 for the increase. Heck, not even $50. I doubt it would make a difference in speed at all.
     
  5. kajitox macrumors 6502a

    kajitox

    Joined:
    May 2, 2007
    #5
    I tend to agree with these guys. The difference is negligible and the money can go elsewhere into more useful hardware upgrades that could actually cause a noticeable change.
     
  6. miles01110 macrumors Core

    miles01110

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Location:
    The Ivory Tower (I'm not coming down)
    #6
    I don't think the difference would be noticeable in any of the applications/uses you mention. I doubt you'd notice much of a difference even in really high-end stuff.
     
  7. theleveler thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    #7
    Ah good! That's what I thought. I like the sushi comparison... 'Man this sushi is 3% better than my previous favorite!!!'

    I also forgot to mention music stuff... I do a lot of work in Reason, but I've never really had any issues with speed until I start running lots of panels (I'm jumping up from an early G5!). Garageband totally blew on my G5 iMac, but I never really had a use for it.

    Thanks!
     
  8. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #8
    The true cost is what you pay ($290 if you did the math right) less what you eventually sell the iMac for some years from now. The faster iMac might sell for $150 more.

    That said, I doubt you would notice a few percent. But Macs do hold around 1/2 their value if you sell them in a 3 to 5 year period.
     

Share This Page