21.5" 3.33GHz Vs 27" 3.06GHz iMac

Paddy@CIRL

Hey guys & gals,

I'm thinking of adding an iMac to the office as a base machine where most of my heavy post processing and archiving work would be done. My budget is around €1600 and have been debating about which model of iMac to go for.

At the moment I'm torn between a slightly faster 21.5" and the bigger, display of the 27". I'll be speccing either with 8GB of RAM.

Does that extra .27GHz make a huge difference ? Would the 27" be under slightly more pressure in the gaphics card department powering that bigger screen ? Should I just save a bit more and go for the quad core ?

Sad Professor

Paddy@CIRL wrote: »

Does that extra .27GHz make a huge difference ?

You mean on the 21 inch processor upgrade? No. Not worth the money imo.

Would the 27" be under slightly more pressure in the gaphics card department powering that bigger screen ?

Yes. I'm not sure how much, but it would be a concern to me as well.

Should I just save a bit more and go for the quad core ?

Maybe, but it adds a lot to your budget. If you are only leaning towards the quad core because of the graphics card then you might want to consider waiting until the next iMac revision, which should hopefully see the i5/i7s and better graphics cards across the whole line.

Paddy@CIRL

Don't really have the time (or patience) to wait, trying to get everything up and running ASAP. Think I'm settling on the 27', 8GB RAM, 3.06 GHz, 512MB Graphics Card and Applecare. It's €150ish more to go quad core but don't know if I'd need it ? I'm already €200 over budget but I think it's worth it ?

Sad Professor

You're not buying the RAM from Apple, are you? The new iMacs have 4 RAM slots. Just get the standard 2x2GB and buy another 2x2GB from Crucial. A lot cheaper than what Apple want.

You might also want to consider getting the Applecare from Ebay as well. Even if you avoid the ultra-cheap code sellers, you'll still make a saving.

Anyway, for me, the main appeal of the quad core would be the additional longevity it would offer. The C2D chips, while still good, are getting rather old. But on the other hand, by going for a lower end model (and spending less), it's easier to justify upgrading sooner.

Talisman

If you are going to purchase the RAM yourself then I would recommend Mac RAM Direct. They are US based but delivery is quick and works out cheaper than Crucial. Also they supply modules from the manufacturers which Apple use (Hynix, Samsung etc.) so you're not likely to get incompatible memory.

alexlyons

if you were going to get the ram from apple, and are now going to get it from a third party (which you definitely should), then the savings could go towards the quad core... would expect you'd only be paying under €100 to go for the quad which would be a great deal. The i5 doesn't support hyper-threading whereas the i7 does, which IMO makes the i7 a no brainer, but if you were going for the C2D then the i5 will be amazingly fast compared anyway.

Paddy@CIRL

There's around a €60 saving on the RAM from Crucial.

Thanks for the advice everyone so far, it'll definitely be a 27' with 8GB of RAM. Going to have to see what the budget can stretch to and if it's worth paying out that much extra for the i7 over the C2D. Would there be much more of an advantage to the i7 for photo processing work ?

alexlyons

The i7 would destroy the C2D, it''d be like a baby racing Usain Bolt

Photoshop at the minute likes as much ram as it can get, but CS5 will almost definitely take advantage of as many cores as possible, same with all Adobe applications. Apple software on the other hand can already utilise al cores where necessary. Just so you know, hyper-threading effectively gives a 4 core machine 8 virtual cores, so it almost doubles the technical ability for it to process information. It won't be as fast as an octo core machine, but it will be a good load faster than a standard quad, so long as the app's can make use of all cores.

The i7 will last you far far longer than the i5 and the C2D, especially the latter. The iMac is designed to not be upgradable, bar the ram. Get the absolute best you can afford, pushing your budget to the max, within reason obviously, don't be stupid, as it will mean the machine will be able to keep up with the tasks. The future is in cores, and pretty much all programs intensive programs are being written to be able to make use of them, along with more ram, especially apple and their operating systems.

Post back with what one you go for, and any questions

Paddy@CIRL

Going to go with i7 version (Just realised I can reclaim the VAT) but I'm going to order the extra RAM from Crucial. Do I just make sure I get an extra 2 x 2GB and make sure the speeds match what's already in it ?

neversaynever

I'm having the same debate myself 24 vx 27, 27 vs 27 Quad core and i5 vs i7. Any thoughts on how to make these decisions for a non techy photographer?
Cheers

Kbeg3

I got an 27" i7 for Christmas and using it for photo editing and its great:). Have 8GBs of RAM as well super fast compared to my old Dell

Paddy@CIRL

neversaynever wrote: »

I'm having the same debate myself 24 vx 27, 27 vs 27 Quad core and i5 vs i7. Any thoughts on how to make these decisions for a non techy photographer?
Cheers

I went with the plan of speccing what I couldn't upgrade at a later stage so went with the standard 4GB of RAM and the i7.

banquo

neversaynever wrote: »

I'm having the same debate myself 24 vx 27, 27 vs 27 Quad core and i5 vs i7. Any thoughts on how to make these decisions for a non techy photographer?
Cheers

Get the 27" i7. It's more expensive, but a far more powerful computer, better graphics hardware, big lovely really high resolution screen, and you'd get 2 or 3 more years out use out of it than you would the others. Well, well worth the extra saving.