I have never owned a Mac before so I am really new to them. I am considering going form the PC world to Mac and just wanted some suggestions. I will be editing photos, video on a personal basis. Nothing heavy duty just personal stuff for fun. I realize both machines may be over kill but I hate buying down and then need more speed in a year or so as I have experienced with PCs. Any other suggestions, and will the iMacs do everything I am looking for? They seem to be pretty fast and powerful.
Mac Pro or iMac 24....
- Thread starter doitdh
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2006
- Messages
- 284
- Reaction score
- 18
- Points
- 18
- Location
- new jersey
- Your Mac's Specs
- 20" iMac G5, 4G 40gb, G4 iBook
I would go with the iMac since you aren't doing anything TOO heavy duty. If you decide later on that you are going to do some more demanding work then just add some more RAM and you will be more then fine.
Best of luck
John
Best of luck
John
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2006
- Messages
- 4,576
- Reaction score
- 378
- Points
- 83
- Location
- St. Somewhere
- Your Mac's Specs
- Mac Studio, M1 Max, 32 GB RAM, 2 TB SSD
Tough, tough choice. I think it comes down to what you get for the money. If I were making the same choice today I would go for the 24" iMac. You get a 2.33 GHz processor, a 24" display and the usual dollops of RAM and disk. Fitted out with 2 GB of RAM and 500 MB of disk, it comes in at about $2500. If you go with the Mac Pro and try to achieve a similar result, you will spend closer to $4000. 23" and 24" monitors seems to be in the $1000 to $1200 region and the Mac Pro itself will run you $2500 or more. The difference in processor speed (2.33 GHz vs. 2.66 GHz) wouldn't seem to justify the cost differential. Now I know that some bright soul will pipe in that I can't just compare GHz - one machine is a Xeon and one is a Woodcrest, but my expectation is that you would not notice the difference.
So, I would recommend the iMac based on value for dollars alone.
So, I would recommend the iMac based on value for dollars alone.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2006
- Messages
- 192
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 18
- Location
- Southern Cali
- Your Mac's Specs
- White MacBook @ 2ghz, 1 gig of ram, 100GB HDD
mac57 said:
For basic stuff the Merom and Xeon will not differ.
However if one wishes to conduct a heavier dose of work, I am absolutely sure that 2 Dual Core processors will show their difference compared to one Dual Core Merom core.
Woodcrest (xeon architecture), as I have read, has been specifically designed with heavy useage in mind.
S
sursuciofla
Guest
From my experience folowing the sibling lines of G4(PB) and G5(iMac)...the MacBook Pro is less powerful than the iMac overall. For the MbP they are making a very powerful "portable" but nothing that rivals the power of a desktop just because it is not possible. The best machines are desktop and I don't know of a laptop that can rival the very best configured desktop. So I would get iMac based on the specs of both. Seems to me like you will be doing more home use than porting it around all the time.
sursuciofla said:
Thanks for the great feedback. At this point it seems the iMac 24" is the best value and makes the most sense. I tend to over buy and never use the capacity of the product. However, when I want the power and speed I need to know I have it. I will just be doing photos and home videos for fun (my son’s football and baseball games etc…), and nothing serious or professional. So it seems the iMac is a better choice.
The iMac will give you a more fun and integrated experience. A Mac Pro is such an overkill you won't know what to do with so much juice. The iMac Core 2 Duo will scream.
Keep in mind though that there are apps out there that still don't run natively on an Intel chip.
Keep in mind though that there are apps out there that still don't run natively on an Intel chip.
Shop Amazon
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.