First time iMac buyer needs advice

I use my computer for mostly photo editing in lightroom. Sometimes I use photoshop and do the odd video edit 4k as well. Looking at one of the new iMacs announced today and needing some advice.

At this stage I am looking at the 21.5 inch iMac. Has a cash saving over the 27 inch and still has some good specs. Some questions I have:
- Pay extra for i7 at 3.6hz. Seems only a little improvement over the i5 3.4ghz. Worth it?
- 16GB ram seems like a good amount. To go up to 32GB is quite a big step up price wise.
- Fusion drives. Can you still edit 4k footage fine with one or should I move up to 512gb ssd? I am currently running a ssd (with no GPU), so would I notice a difference with a fusion with GPU?

I guess the main question is with this machine and my usage what should I prioritise to upgrade? i7, ram or ssd? I may be able to afford 2 upgrades here.

In answer to your questions:

- i7 has a geekbench score of 14572 versus i5 with a score of 12148. The only advantage to be gained from the faster i7 would be noticed when editing video and especially 4k.
- For my money 32Gb is nice but I love lots and lots of memory. 16Gb would be plenty for what you plan to to.
- You will find most on this for do not like fusion drives. There have been issues. The SSD will be faster and I would add an external drive for storage.
I am not sure what you mean by running an SSD with no GPU???? You have to have a GPU - that is the name for the processor of your graphic card.
As for speed - SSD beats Fusion every time. Fusion was just a cheap way to give people lots of storage with some of the speed from the small SSD. I just have not heard a lot of good reports on them.

IMO - Priority of upgrades - SSD, CPU, Memory.

Lisa

Thanks for the questions and answers.

shpitot said:

At this stage I am looking at the 21.5 inch iMac. Has a cash saving over the 27 inch and still has some good specs. Some questions I have:
- Pay extra for i7 at 3.6hz. Seems only a little improvement over the i5 3.4ghz. Worth it?
- 16GB ram seems like a good amount. To go up to 32GB is quite a big step up price wise.
- Fusion drives. Can you still edit 4k footage fine with one or should I move up to 512gb ssd? I am currently running a ssd (with no GPU), so would I notice a difference with a fusion with GPU?

I guess the main question is with this machine and my usage what should I prioritise to upgrade? i7, ram or ssd? I may be able to afford 2 upgrades here.

Click to expand...

I'll give you a quick opinion based on the bullet points above.

- If this 21.5" iMac was upgraded as described above (32gig RAM, 3.6ghz i7 CPU, 512gig flash storage)...it would cost $2599.
- If went with 16gig RAM, 3.6ghz i7 CPU, 512gig flash storage...it would cost $2199.

If you're going to spend this kind of money...get a 27" iMac!

- Nick

If you're going to spend this kind of money...get a 27" iMac!

Click to expand...

Yes. And - Forget Fusion - go Flash. It's the future.

Ian

Thanks. Sounds like the 27" with a 512gb ssd is the way to go. Thanks

Wise choice! Believe me. That 27" display is a huge specification not be overlooked when considering RAM, storage, and CPU speed!

- Nick

pigoo3 said:

I'll give you a quick opinion based on the bullet points above.

- If this 21.5" iMac was upgraded as described above (32gig RAM, 3.6ghz i7 CPU, 512gig flash storage)...it would cost $2599.
- If went with 16gig RAM, 3.6ghz i7 CPU, 512gig flash storage...it would cost $2199.

If you're going to spend this kind of money...get a 27" iMac!

- Nick

Click to expand...

Got to agree with Nick. 27' is definitely the way to go.
The larger screen makes such a difference, especially with photo and video editing.

I have a similar question. I tend to keep my computer for a while - currently typing on a 2006 iMac that is ready to be put to sleep. I also am mostly interested in using it for photography, but I don't really want to deal with external storage. I use a 21mb DLSR, which maxed out my current 256GB drive quickly, so I lean toward a fusion drive. Knowing all of this, would I be better off with choice A or B, both 27"?

A.
4.2GHz i7
32GB RAM
3TB Fusion

B.
3.8GHz i5
32GB RAM
1TB SSD

A is less expensive, and if I add a 2TB SSD to B along with the faster processor, I am in iMac Pro territory - $$$

Hello Rob. Sounds to me that storage amount is more important than speed. Thus "Choice A" (more storage) would be to be the "wiser" choice.

Technology has improved a lot since 2006. Thus either choice you make will be a BIG BIG upgrade!

- Nick

p.s. I might also mention that you would be better off purchasing your new iMac with less RAM. The RAM on 27" iMac's is user upgradeable (VERY EASY...only takes 5-10 minutes at most)...and Apple charges more for RAM than you can purchase for. I would say get the minimum amount of RAM...then upgrade the RAM at your leisure later.

p.p.s. I was curious & looked up the price to upgrade the RAM to 32gig. Apple is charging $600...you can do it for $280. Nice savings right!!! You could actually upgrade it to 64gig of RAM for $580...which is still less than the $600 Apple is charging for 32gig of RAM.

pigoo3 - thanks for the advice. The memory comment changed my mindset a bit around those things that can be easily upgraded later on. I've decided to go with the following:

3.8GHz i5
8GB RAM
2 TB SSD

I would prefer the faster processor, but Apple says that is more for video editing and rendering and heavy multitasking, so it might be overkill for photo editing.

RobW said:

pigoo3 - thanks for the advice. The memory comment changed my mindset a bit around those things that can be easily upgraded later on. I've decided to go with the following:

3.8GHz i5
8GB RAM
2 TB SSD

Click to expand...

Good deal on the RAM decision.

Just to clarify something regarding the storage. Are you getting the 2TB Fusion drive or 2TB SSD?

- Nick

pigoo3 said:

Just to clarify something regarding the storage. Are you getting the 2TB Fusion drive or 2TB SSD?

- Nick

Click to expand...

2TB SSD - with the money I saving on RAM and the i5 processor, the 2TB SSD is now in my budget and fills the need to have all my data on the same drive.

Thanks again!

RobW said:

2TB SSD - with the money I saving on RAM and the i5 processor, the 2TB SSD is now in my budget and fills the need to have all my data on the same drive.

Thanks again!

Click to expand...

Ok...as long as you're happy & within budget! A $1400 upcharge for a 2TB SSD is pretty steep!

- Nick

So, I keep reading that SSD is the way to go. If I opt for a 1TB drive, I'll definitely need external space at some point. If I use an external drive for photos aren't I defeating the purpose of SSD in the first place by storing my photos on a platter? I guess I could offload only the ones I am done with, but I like to come back to them sometimes too. I'd probably be more apt to revisit them if they were local.

RobW

Delighted for you.

You will, of course need at least one 3TB External Hard Drive (EHD) for your Time Machine backup and we strongly advise a cloning BU as well - Carbon Copy Cloner or SuperDuper! on another EHD. These two EHDs have to be larger than your Internal 2TB SSD - hence 3TB.

Nowadays, these are very inexpensive, and absolutely essential to have.

Don't know if you've read up on SSDs, but when they fail, they often do so with little or no warning; and it is almost impossible to recover data from them - even with the cleverest Data Recovery apps.

Ian

RobW said:

So, I keep reading that SSD is the way to go. If I opt for a 1TB drive, I'll definitely need external space at some point. If I use an external drive for photos aren't I defeating the purpose of SSD in the first place by storing my photos on a platter? I guess I could offload only the ones I am done with, but I like to come back to them sometimes too. I'd probably be more apt to revisit them if they were local.

Click to expand...

Rob. The conflict is SSD storage is very fast...but expensive ($$$/gig)...compared to traditional spinning HD's (which are relatively MUCH cheaper/gig). When choosing between these two options...most users choose between "FAST" (SSD) or "LARGE" (spinner HD). If someone wants "FAST & LARGE"...then that = BIG BUCKS.

As a digital photographer...if you generate lots of large files with your DSLR...then almost no internal storage device will be large enough. Eventually you will almost always need some sort of external storage device...and most definitely will need something external for backup's.

Also...you're upgrading from a 2006 iMac. ANY new Mac is going to be way better & way faster than your old 2006 iMac...and I'm assuming way more internal storage.

All I'm saying is...the iMac you mentioned (before the storage upgrade = $2299). And if you go with the 2TB SSD...that's $1400 more for a total of $3699. Normal people with normal budgets....just don't spend this sort of money on a storage upgrade.

I'm sure you know that computers can depreciate quickly. SSD storage is getting cheaper all the time as well. Next year a 2TB SSD storage upgrade could cost significantly less than it does today. The $1400 that the 2TB SSD upgrade costs today...could be 25%-50% less 12 months from now. If that's the case...the value of this $3699 computer could drop by $700 in 12 months just due to cheaper SSD prices...then you also add the "normal" depreciation a 12 month old computer has.

The "sweet-spot" right now for SSD's is in the 256gig to 512gig area.

But. If you have the budget...and don't mind spending $3699 for this iMac...then go for it. I'm just trying to point out the downsides to "over-configuring" an iMac in this way.

- Nick

p.s. One question. What size internal hard drive does your current 2006 iMac have?

What you are saying makes sense. Are there any wireless external drive options? One of the reasons I like the iMac is that it has very clean footprint on my desk. I don't want an external drive tethered and sitting out all the time. I know the time capsule is wireless, but that's mainly for backups, right?

My current iMac has a 256gb drive.

RobW said:

Are there any wireless external drive options?

Click to expand...

Yes. Here's a bunch from Newegg:

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...ireless+hard+drive&ignorear=0&N=-1&isNodeId=1

And here's an article on the Best Wireless HD's for 2017:

http://www.computershopper.com/feature/2017-guide-the-best-wireless-hard-drives-tested

RobW said:

I know the time capsule is wireless, but that's mainly for backups, right?

Click to expand...

The "spirit" of the Apple Time Capsule is to use it for backups. But it can be used as a wireless external HD. Here's an old Apple support article that says this:

"Time Machine works best if you use your backup disk only for Time Machine backups. If you keep files on your backup disk, Time Machine won’t back up those files, and the space available for Time Machine backups is reduced."

https://support.apple.com/kb/PH11102?locale=en_US

RobW said:

My current iMac has a 256gb drive.

Click to expand...

Thanks Rob. My main point of asking was to see how much storage you've been using for a lonnng time (since 2006 on your iMac). I would imagine you've been surviving ok with this.

Even if you got your new iMac with a 512gig SSD...you would be doubling the amount of storage your old iMac had...and...have the speed benefits of the much faster SSD. Heck...we could compromise on things...and get you're new iMac with a 1TB SSD for +$600...and that would be quadruple the storage of what you currently have.

I'm mostly thinking that going with the 2TB SSD for +$1400 just a bit over the top compared to what the iMac itself costs...and what the norms are of most new computer buyers.

HTH,

- Nick

p.s. Just wanted to mention some additional info regarding some teminology:

- Apple Time Machine (mentioned in the article above)...was an older Apple wireless external HD only (mostly used for backups).
- Apple Time Capsule is a wireless external HD AND a wireless router.