10-20-2011, 06:43 PM

Hey,
Windows user looking to switch over to mac, its taken me this long because I can't afford Apple products there so expensive, but I need to get an iMac I'm in love with them and now with iCloud I want to fully convert to mac.

My main uses are: music production (ableton live), itunes, internet and ms office.

Okay I LOVE the 27" imacs, now I just cannot afford the 2011 model, it's just not in my budget, but I really love the 27" screen. I could probably afford a used 21.5" 2011 iMac, OR a 2009/2010 27" iMac.
Whats the main differences between the 2? is it really worth the extra spec to get or should I go with the bigger screen lower spec?
I need 1TB hard drive and 4gb ram and I'm confident that will do, I know the 2009/10 imacs dont have Facetime which is a shame but then I don't expect I'd ever use it, with that in mind what are the main differences I should be concerned about?

Really appreciate any advice, if its just the processor difference really and the thunderbolt port on the back then I'd probably be okay, but if ths graphics are a LOT better on the 2011 model and its a LOT quicker, then i'll probably get the 2011 smaller screen, just really need help on this decision.

What would you do?

10-20-2011, 06:54 PM

Faster than ever: Macworld Lab speed tests the mid-2011 iMacs Review | Macworld

'mid 2011' iMac - First Benchmarks

iMac 2011 Benchmarks Cause Speed Envy

How does your Mac stack up - Geekbench thread.

10-20-2011, 06:57 PM

Thanks for your reply, thing is I don't just care about speed, I don't really know if I need that extra speed? what do you think?

Originally Posted by BrianLachoreVPI

Faster than ever: Macworld Lab speed tests the mid-2011 iMacs Review | Macworld

'mid 2011' iMac - First Benchmarks

iMac 2011 Benchmarks Cause Speed Envy

How does your Mac stack up - Geekbench thread.

10-20-2011, 07:44 PM

Then what do you care about? There are graphics benchmarks in there as well. If you don't care about speed - then I guess it really doesn't matter what you get.

10-20-2011, 07:53 PM

I care about what all those things relate to what I need to do with it, in regard to music production for example is there really much difference with what I'll be able to do with a 2009 or 2010 model in comparison to a 2011 model? is it just marginal difference that would be hard to notice or serious stuff worth paying more for?

Originally Posted by BrianLachoreVPI

Faster than ever: Macworld Lab speed tests the mid-2011 iMacs Review | Macworld

'mid 2011' iMac - First Benchmarks

iMac 2011 Benchmarks Cause Speed Envy

How does your Mac stack up - Geekbench thread.

Originally Posted by BrianLachoreVPI

Then what do you care about? There are graphics benchmarks in there as well. If you don't care about speed - then I guess it really doesn't matter what you get.

10-20-2011, 08:43 PM

I care about what matters in relation to my needs (music production using ableton), with this in mind how much will it really matter in terms of what I can and cant do or how fast/slow it really is between the 2010 and 2011 models?

Also do the machines look exactly the same or is the 2011 model biult to a higher quality? I wish I could go to a mac store and compare them but you cant

Originally Posted by BrianLachoreVPI

Then what do you care about? There are graphics benchmarks in there as well. If you don't care about speed - then I guess it really doesn't matter what you get.

10-20-2011, 09:17 PM

I am half way there myself I just got an Ipad and debated about which models to get. After lots of reading and viewing Youtube reviews I am going with a 21.5 2011 model. Imacs hold there value and I would only be saving a few hundred by getting a 2009 model so I am going for the gusto. I was thinking of the 27 inch but that will be too much for me right now. Maybe in the future

10-21-2011, 07:07 AM

From everything I've read, the newer Intel i3/i5/i7 processors, the Sandy Bridge ones, are head and shoulders faster than the older ones, even the older ones with the same name. All of the latest iMacs use them. Hence, I would say to get the latest iMacs. All the benchmarks show this to be true. I don't understand why Intel didn't re-brand them as the SandyBridge processors are so different from their predecessors.

I've been using two laptops at work, one a Lenovo W510, the other a W520. The 510 has the previous version of the i7 processor, the 520 the SandyBridge version. This is about equivalent to the 2010 vs. 2011 iMacs. Once I started using the 520, the 510 seemed really slow by comparison. And you can just forget about my Centrino powered T61 that I use on an everyday basis.

The faster processor will mean faster graphics, although the video card has more to do with that. The newer ones are also faster.

To me the bottom line is to get the fastest machine you can, especially if you don't plan on replacing it for a few years. (This advice comes from someone typing on a 2006 Intel 1st gen iMac, but I don't do much of anything but surf on this. My knowledge on the whole Sandy Bridge topic comes from researching building a game machine so my son can run Flight Simulator or X-Plane. His MBP can't keep up.)