New To Mac-Forums?

Welcome to our community! Join the discussion today by registering your FREE account. If you have any problems with the registration process, please contact us!

Get your questions answered by community gurus Advice and insight from world-class Apple enthusiasts Exclusive access to members-only contests, giveaways and deals

Join today!

 
Start a Discussion
 

Mac-Forums Brief

Subscribe to Mac-Forums Brief to receive special offers from Mac-Forums partners and sponsors

Join the conversation RSS
Apple Desktops Discussion of Apple's desktop machines including Mac Pro, iMac, Power Mac, and mini

iMac - iMac Penryn: tell me why.


Post Reply New Thread Subscribe

 
Thread Tools
blankenship

 
Member Since: Sep 06, 2007
Posts: 19
blankenship is on a distinguished road

blankenship is offline
if you had $2200 to spend on an iMac, why in the world would you get the 3.06Ghz with 2GB RAM and a 500GB drive and GeForce video card
when, for the same price, you could get the 2.8Ghz version with 4GB RAM, a 750GB drive, and upgrade to the same Geforce card?
QUOTE Thanks
Kash

 
Kash's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 03, 2006
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 9,385
Kash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant future
Mac Specs: Black Macbook C2D 2GHz 3GB RAM 250GB HD iPhone 4 iPad 3G

Kash is offline
Some people want the faster processor?


June 2007
July 2009
QUOTE Thanks
blankenship

 
Member Since: Sep 06, 2007
Posts: 19
blankenship is on a distinguished road

blankenship is offline
but, what i'm asking is: why?

with the options i laid out, wouldn't the 2.8Ghz ultimately be the faster / better setup?
QUOTE Thanks
D3v1L80Y

 
D3v1L80Y's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 02, 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 12,459
D3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: MacBook

D3v1L80Y is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by blankenship View Post
but, what i'm asking is: why?

with the options i laid out, wouldn't the 2.8Ghz ultimately be the faster / better setup?
I find that it is fruitless venture to figure out why some people like some things and others don't. You'll never get a straight answer, no matter how you phrase the question. You think the one setup is better... someone else may not.

A popular 80's television show theme song said it best:

"Now, the world don't move to the beat of just one drum,
What might be right for you, may not be right for some....
So what,
They'll have theirs, and you'll have yours, and I'll have mine."

__________________________________________________
Posting and YOU|Forum Community Guidelines|The Apple Product Cycle|Forum Courtesy

mac: a waterproof raincoat made of rubberized fabric
MAC: a data communication protocol sub-layer, also known as the Media Access Control
Mac: a brand name which covers several lines of personal computers designed, developed, and marketed by Apple Inc.

QUOTE Thanks
blankenship

 
Member Since: Sep 06, 2007
Posts: 19
blankenship is on a distinguished road

blankenship is offline
hee hee.
i should phrase it differently. how about this:

for $2200, you could either get an iMac with 3.06Ghz processor, 2GB RAM, 500GB drive and a GeForce video card.
OR
for the same price, you could get the 2.8Ghz version with 4GB RAM, a 750GB drive, and upgrade to the same Geforce card.

which setup is faster / better, and why?
QUOTE Thanks
Kash

 
Kash's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 03, 2006
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 9,385
Kash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant future
Mac Specs: Black Macbook C2D 2GHz 3GB RAM 250GB HD iPhone 4 iPad 3G

Kash is offline
I would have to say the first one as it provides more potential than the second one, which is essentially maxed out. You can upgrade the RAM on the first one for dirt cheap, making it a faster computer for slightly more than $2200


June 2007
July 2009
QUOTE Thanks
D3v1L80Y

 
D3v1L80Y's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 02, 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 12,459
D3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: MacBook

D3v1L80Y is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by blankenship View Post
hee hee.
i should phrase it differently. how about this:

for $2200, you could either get an iMac with 3.06Ghz processor, 2GB RAM, 500GB drive and a GeForce video card.
OR
for the same price, you could get the 2.8Ghz version with 4GB RAM, a 750GB drive, and upgrade to the same Geforce card.

which setup is faster / better, and why?
"Faster" is easy to answer. The 3.06 Ghz processor is physically 260~ Mhz faster than the 2.8 Ghz processor.

"Better" is subjective. The definition of "'better" relies solely on an individual's perspective. It all depends on what a person would use the machine for. Different people would have different opinions on what makes one better than the other.

I have used and owned both and still think that PPC Macs are "better" than Intel models, regardless of their processor clock speeds.

Like I said in my last post:
Quote:
You'll never get a straight answer, no matter how you phrase the question. You think the one setup is better... someone else may not.


An individual is the only one that can determine which is "better" for his needs. Other people's input is simply opinion and their own personal preference.

__________________________________________________
Posting and YOU|Forum Community Guidelines|The Apple Product Cycle|Forum Courtesy

mac: a waterproof raincoat made of rubberized fabric
MAC: a data communication protocol sub-layer, also known as the Media Access Control
Mac: a brand name which covers several lines of personal computers designed, developed, and marketed by Apple Inc.

QUOTE Thanks
blankenship

 
Member Since: Sep 06, 2007
Posts: 19
blankenship is on a distinguished road

blankenship is offline
looks like it costs $200 to upgrade the 3.06Mhz to 4GB RAM, and another $100 to get up to the 750MB drive.

so, one way to look at is is:
if you had these same options on the 2.8Ghz, you'd be paying $300 to upgrade to the faster 3.06 processor. think it's worth it?

what i really AM interested in IS exactly
Quote:
Other people's input...opinion... and their own personal preference.
like, for instance, why D3v1L80Y do you feel the PPC Macs are better?
QUOTE Thanks
Zoolook

 
Zoolook's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 24, 2006
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 2,751
Zoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud of
Mac Specs: 15" MacBook Pro, i7 2.66Ghz, 8GB RAM, 512GB SSD; iPad 3, iPhone 5

Zoolook is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kash View Post
I would have to say the first one as it provides more potential than the second one, which is essentially maxed out. You can upgrade the RAM on the first one for dirt cheap, making it a faster computer for slightly more than $2200
Bingo.

Having said that, when I was building gaming rigs in the later 1990's and early 20's, anyone doing that always knew that getting the very fastest processors was a complete waste of money, and the real trick was RAM and a decent gfx card. The same still applies today, although if you don't intend to game, a slightly faster CPU is peferable to a killer GPU.

In terms of real world performance, the 3ghz model will five you about 3 or 4% more speed.

Now the really exciting thing to look for is Nehalem, at the end of this year. at the same clock speed, with the same number of cores, Nehalem has been shown to be more than 120% faster than a Quad Core Penryn. Nehalem will boast 8 cores and 16 threads, possibly making it anything up to 200% faster, clock for clock.

Nehalem could be one of the biggest jumps in CPU performance from one generation to the next, ever.

So... rather than eeking out 3% now, for an extra $300 or whatever, I'd either stick with what you have and get one of these bad boys, or get the one with more memory.

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is stoned to death.
- Joan D. Vinge

QUOTE Thanks
blankenship

 
Member Since: Sep 06, 2007
Posts: 19
blankenship is on a distinguished road

blankenship is offline
well, i can't stick with what i have now. it's a freakin' dual-500Mhz G4, and i do lots of intensive photoshop work, usually on 150-200MB files. i'm in the stone-age, and spend a LOT of time twiddling my thumbs.

having said that, which do you think i should buy?
(or, the 3rd interesting $2200 option: 2.16Ghz used MacBook Pro with additional 23" display).

realistically, how long do you think it would be before this "Nehalem" makes it into the iMacs?
QUOTE Thanks
Kash

 
Kash's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 03, 2006
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 9,385
Kash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant future
Mac Specs: Black Macbook C2D 2GHz 3GB RAM 250GB HD iPhone 4 iPad 3G

Kash is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by blankenship View Post
looks like it costs $200 to upgrade the 3.06Mhz to 4GB RAM, and another $100 to get up to the 750MB drive.

so, one way to look at is is:
if you had these same options on the 2.8Ghz, you'd be paying $300 to upgrade to the faster 3.06 processor. think it's worth it?
And you'd be a fool to pay Apple to upgrade those parts for you. You can get a third party 2x2GB set for a fraction of the price Apple charges, and hard drives are dirt cheap nowadays. You can get a terabyte drive for around $150.


June 2007
July 2009
QUOTE Thanks
Zoolook

 
Zoolook's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 24, 2006
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 2,751
Zoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud of
Mac Specs: 15" MacBook Pro, i7 2.66Ghz, 8GB RAM, 512GB SSD; iPad 3, iPhone 5

Zoolook is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by blankenship View Post
well, i can't stick with what i have now. it's a freakin' dual-500Mhz G4, and i do lots of intensive photoshop work, usually on 150-200MB files. i'm in the stone-age, and spend a LOT of time twiddling my thumbs.

having said that, which do you think i should buy?
(or, the 3rd interesting $2200 option: 2.16Ghz used MacBook Pro with additional 23" display).
OK, ok - well the difference between your G4 and the C2D is so huge, really you'd never see the difference between 2.8ghz and 3.06ghz. I'd get the former, and the additional RAM - but upgrade the RAM afterwards, via 3rd party. Spend the spare cash on CS3 or something.

Quote:
realistically, how long do you think it would be before this "Nehalem" makes it into the iMacs?
January '09 for Mac Pros and MBP, March '09 for iMac and MacBook. Don't wait that long. I thought maybe you have a G5 or a Core Duo.

I have a CD MacBook '06, and my next machine will likely me a MBP with this chipset and the new nVidia chipsets.

The iMac you're looking at will be a fine machine, you'll be blown away by the speed difference.

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is stoned to death.
- Joan D. Vinge

QUOTE Thanks
blankenship

 
Member Since: Sep 06, 2007
Posts: 19
blankenship is on a distinguished road

blankenship is offline
okay, but the problem is, if i get the lesser 2GB RAM option from Apple, then i have to literally throw the included RAM away if i want to upgrade to 4GB, because it comes as (2) 1GB sticks which will use up both my slots (not (1) 2GB stick that I can just add to). wouldn't it be better to just get the 4GB from Apple at the outset?

would you advise getting the 2.8Ghz iMac instead of a 2.16Ghz used MacBook Pro with external 23" display? i'd like the flexibility of the MacBook, but i'd guess it's significantly slower than the iMac (bus, RAM capacity, and whatnot).
QUOTE Thanks
Zoolook

 
Zoolook's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 24, 2006
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 2,751
Zoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud of
Mac Specs: 15" MacBook Pro, i7 2.66Ghz, 8GB RAM, 512GB SSD; iPad 3, iPhone 5

Zoolook is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by blankenship View Post
okay, but the problem is, if i get the lesser 2GB RAM option from Apple, then i have to literally throw the included RAM away if i want to upgrade to 4GB, because it comes as (2) 1GB sticks which will use up both my slots (not (1) 2GB stick that I can just add to). wouldn't it be better to just get the 4GB from Apple at the outset?
Either order it with 2GB of RAM, replace them with 4GBs of Crucial (for $109) and saving yourself $90 from the Apple price, and then sell what you removed for $50. Meaning you got 4gb's of RAM effectively for $40.

or

Buy the 2GBs version and just keep it as it is. It'll be plenty fast enough for you by the sounds of it.

Or if you're lazy, just suck it up, and get the 4gbs version, afterall I am an Apple Shareholder and this is how they make so much money...

Quote:
would you advise getting the 2.8Ghz iMac instead of a 2.16Ghz used MacBook Pro with external 23" display? i'd like the flexibility of the MacBook, but i'd guess it's significantly slower than the iMac (bus, RAM capacity, and whatnot).
Now there's an option... but how much memory will it have and should you get a 7200rpm drive to replace the existing one? Decisions decisions. The MBP is a great machine and will still blow your G4 away, but it's quite a bit slower than either iMac.

Did you buy your G4 new? Sounds like you only do this occassionally, so get the best machine you can afford. For me, this is the iMac 2.8ghz with 2GBs of RAM with the option to upgrade the memory if needed.

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is stoned to death.
- Joan D. Vinge

QUOTE Thanks
blankenship

 
Member Since: Sep 06, 2007
Posts: 19
blankenship is on a distinguished road

blankenship is offline
yep, i bought the G4 new...with a couple Lacie electronblue 19" monitors. and a couple months later, a new PowerBook G4 15" 550Mhz. ah, 2001 was a great year.

i should probably get the iMac and keep my old PowerBook (adding a new battery or two) just to use for traveling/email/web. then add a storage/photo viewer device to take on photoshoots, and just tell my clients 'you didn't really wanna see these on a laptop, did you?"

i could get a used 17" macbook...2.4Ghz w/ 2GB RAM and a 320GB drive, i'm guessing, for around $2000, but it wouldn't do me any good without a 23" display, and a new mouse, keyboard, additional external drive...so, i'd be in for significantly more dinero than the imace (probably $8-1200 more, depending on if i could find good, used stuff) and, ultimately, have a slower machine....
QUOTE Thanks

Post Reply New Thread Subscribe


« APG G4 Questions | USB question »
Thread Tools

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Transfer from old imac OS 9 to new Imac OS X el_lasso Running Windows (or anything else) on your Mac 0 02-26-2008 06:03 PM
iMac G5! Apathy Apple Desktops 12 02-12-2008 07:19 PM
The New iMac (merged) EDIT-XTREEM Apple Desktops 7 07-21-2006 04:29 PM
Swap a PowerMac for an iMac? Smileyguy Apple Desktops 4 12-27-2005 11:17 AM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
X

Welcome to Mac-Forums.com

Create your username to jump into the discussion!

New members like you have made this community the ultimate source for your Mac since 2003!


(4 digit year)

Already a member?