I'm about to buy new 27" iMac. I am undecided between the two quad core models. There are big differences in the daily use between the two? worth spending more for the Core i7.
View 13 Replies
whats the differ between the two?
View 8 Replies View RelatedJust wondering what everyone's thoughts are on moving from an iMac G5 (2GHz) to an Intel Mac Mini (a Duo or Core 2 Duo, not the Solo) for Final Cut Studio editing? I don't do a ton of editing (it's a hobby), but I wouldn't want too much less than what I'm getting from my G5 right now.
View 5 Replies View RelatedI do alot of photography with a canon dslr, I also plan to edit short HD videos as well as some photoshop and flash animation work.
Will I benefit greatly from the Quad Core Imac over the Dual Core Imac?
[URL]
What you say guys?
I know the same article is on main page
So the older Mac Pro's from 2008 have 2 2.8ghz Quad Core Intel Xeon processors, without hyperthreading, for a total of 8 cores, and the top of the line iMac has a Quar Core i7 2,8ghz with hyperthreading for a total of 8 (virtual) cores.
With the ghz being the same but less "real" cores, but probably newer CPU architecture, which CPU will actually be faster?
I know other threads exist, but they don't have responses specific to me so what's the harm in one more?
So, I am going to be selling my late 2008 15" MacBook Pro this week to get a new 27" iMac and I just need some legitimate advice from those "in the know" on processors.
I plan on having this iMac for about 3 years to do the following tasks:
1.) Record and edit HD cable (1080i) from an Elgato EyeTV HD - will include some encoding of 2+ hour sports game recordings
2.) Some light editing of 720p iPhone 4 clips in iMovie
3.) Surf the web, iTunes, iPhoto, Mail, and all the other standard stuff
Assuming budget is an issue, would you recommend me spending the extra money for a Quad Core i5 iMac or would I be ok based on the info above just going with the base Dual Core i3 model?
Like, will there be a considerable difference in the two machines (factoring in processor and graphics card) that will really be worth the extra $300 - $400 for 3 years of use?
The first Core i7 and Core i5 benchmarks are available. Quite amazing to see how much faster the Core i7 is even compared to the Core i5. (via digg) I'll definitely go for the Core i7 now that I've seen these results.
View 20 Replies View RelatedNew iMac at first of year has always locked up with green squares (1/4") randomly on the open window. I have to do a hard boot to unlock the screen. This may happen 5 or 6 times a day but I'm finding no pattern. It happens in any software, mail, internet browser, extra programs and only using what I need at the moment, including mail and internet, hasn't worked. I've run disk utility - repair disk and repair permissions multiple times to no avail. I've reinstalled the OS Mavericks and Adobe Creative Suite programs (Photoshop & Premiere Pro), no improvement.
I purchased a high-end iMac specifically to handle high-demand video editing needs. But this happens when checking email or browsing the internet too. Here's a listing of the system from a "Panic (system crashes) log" from the "Activity Report."
System Profile:
Model: iMac14,2, BootROM IM142.0118.B00, 4 processors, Intel Core i7, 3.5 GHz, 32 GB, SMC 2.15f2
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M, PCIe, 4096 MB
Memory Module: BANK 0/DIMM0, 8 GB, DDR3, 1600 MHz,
[Code] .....
im very interesting in buying a mac pro but as you know always money is the big problem , i decide to buy a quad mac pro but there is two option , is there to much diference in power processing between Quad-core 2010 "Nehalem" 2.8GHz and 3.2GHz? i check in geek bench mark and the 2.8 GHZ get a result of 8360 and the 3.2 GHZ get a result of 9968. is that to much diference ? please i need some help me in this dilema
View 8 Replies View RelatedI currently have a 24" iMac with a 2.8 Ghz Dual Core but I'm looking at buying a Mac Pro.I have been looking at the 2.26 Ghz Dual Quad, will this be faster than the iMac? I'm not really all that hot on clock speed vs cores, could someone with the relevant knowledge inform me which is better?
View 7 Replies View RelatedWhich one do you want to use for everyday surfing etc?
View 12 Replies View RelatedI know this has probably been answered a billion times, but I need the answer for my specific needs. My daily use will be: Web browsing iTunes Watching HD Movies Bit Torrent HandBrake Dvd Burning Windows Parallels Social Networking iPhotoCan someone tell me if I really need the Core i5 2.8ghz, or should choose the Core i3 3.2ghz. Mind you, I dont wanna max out the machine with daily use...but dont want to overkill it.
View 24 Replies View RelatedI am doing a presentation for a class thingy in technology about new media and i'm trying to express how when macintosh youtubers started uploading video blogs when they switched to intel/intel made iMacs and about this media blah blah blah. In the pic attached is that a iMac G5 or intel. I see spot light on the top right so it's either running tiger or leopard. I thought I saw a apple remote magnetic thingy on the side. Did the iMac g5 have one?
View 21 Replies View Relatedfirst, I didn�t know if this thread should be here or in Buying Tips, but anyway. My doubt is about the brand new 27� iMac�s processor, If I should buy a more GHz one, but with only two cores, or should I buy little bit less GHz one, but with four cores.
It really worth pay $200 more? It really worth the four cores? My main needs are run CS4, some Final Cut, maybe Logic Studio, and switch between different OS's (OS X, Windows, and Linux). I think even a 21.5� model would be more than enough, but I just wonder If Quad Core gonna give me more power (I hope so).
currently i have a blackbook and imac core duo, 17 ". My macbook beats the imac in everything except graphics. Before i got my imac i seriously considered a g5 dual 2.0, but the money wasnt there. I see an apple refurb dual 2.0 for 1599, and im sure i cud get one a lot cheaper used here or on another board. How much of a performance increase will i see IN APERTURE going to the PM, if any? i would need a good increase to justify it, and eve then im not sure my parents would be ok with me spending a few hundred bucks to upgrade
View 5 Replies View Relatedplease post your first hand experience/comments and post a photo as well ...
View 20 Replies View RelatedI'm in desperate need for a new computer, for Gaming/school work.
I Am very interested in the New 27" Imac quad core-i7...but I'm scared.
I have read threads upon threads about the screen flickering/yellow glow and such and my question to you all is, when to buy my new imac?
I want to buy it without these problems of course.
Does anyone know when Apple will be fixing all these problems? (If they havint already)
Back in August, I did an OS update on my iMac, and the machine wouldn't reboot. I was able to reinstall Leopard by booting from a disk, and all was well for a few more weeks. The machine seemed to run normal, with the exception of 5-minute-plus boot up times. But within a few weeks it stopped booting. I installed Leopard on an external HDD and figured I'd leave the internal alone until Snow Leopard came out.
A few weeks later when SL was released, I booted from the install disk, found the internal HDD, and went through the installation process. Everything went fine but the machine would not boot. I installed SL on my external HDD running Leopard, and everything was fine. I've since been running my computer off the external.
The internal HDD no longer shows up on the desktop, in Disk Utility, etc. I'm fearing it may have died. More worrisome, though, is my machine doesn't always boot up, whether from my external HDD (set as the startup disk) or from CD. By "doesn't always boot up," I mean most of the time when I restart, it just sits on a gray screen, nothing happens (even when holding "Option" or C.) Sometimes it will boot, but takes 20 or 30 minutes to do so.
I'm considering replacing the internal HDD, but am curious, does that seem like the issue, or might the failure to boot from externals and CDs indicate a more serious problem?
I have one of the original intel imacs, core duo 1.83.I see it supports 2GB of ram, does anyone know if I can use a single 2GB chip to get there?
View 9 Replies View Relatedi am looking at ram upgrade options as i am about to dive in and purchase the 27" quad core imac.i know we need to install in pairs but do the 'pairs' need to match. can i leave the 2mb pair that comes with the computer AND add a pair of 4mb giving a total of 12mb?
View 3 Replies View RelatedI see the numbers of everything from Core 2 Duo, to the slightly faster and cooler Core i3, to the supposedly faster core i5s and i7s. The benchmarks go up accordingly, but I found this does not always equate in a faster experience on most tasks.
Here's my experience so far on processor upgrade:
In one computer trade school re-certification class I am in, we are working with Windows Server 2003 on a Quad Xeon platform and it's incredibly slow.
But in a previous class we had the previous generation server edition on older Xeons, and while not fast, it was much better. On paper the newer multi-core Xeons should have made a difference, but could 2003 server software be that much more bloated than the previous Windows server edition that it would stall like that and make us wish we had the older setup?
I am going to try out the Adobe CS lab and put the new high end Dells to the test there and see if they work better than when we had an older CS version on older Xeon equipped Dells.
I don't know if this is something to do with Dell, or if Apple's increasing processor bumps/generations are going to similarly not make a difference in the speed things appear to go at, whether it's Adobe stuff, server stuff, or anything else that needs power.
I know somebody who plans on a Core 2 Duo, i5 or i7 MBP and I was wondering if the higher end processor is worth it in that case (iMovie being the main program of use).
I currently have a early macbook 2008, 2.1GHz, 1GB ram. and im wondering if the base imac is A LOT quicker?
View 5 Replies View RelatedA while ago we got more ram, and I was looking at it in about this mac and I noticed a difference to the ram that came with the Mac. Is there anything wrong with that?
View 2 Replies View RelatedI just upgraded my iMac i7 to 8GB Ram and ran geekbench again but there was no difference to the prior 4GB setup.. even in 64bit it doesn't make a difference.
View 1 Replies View RelatedIn the UK and looking to buy a refurb 09 27" iMac. Pondering 2 models at the moment, the 2.66 i5 @ 1259 and the 2.8 i7 @ 1399. One thing I'm wondering is if the 140 price bump to the i7 is worth it? What are the diffferences between the 2 processors speed wise? I'm mail going to be using this for streaming HD video and similar multimedia tasks.
View 3 Replies View RelatedWill I really notice a difference between these 2 graphic cards if I'm just doing basic gaming, internet browsing, music, and occasional photoshop?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have G5 which takes 15 hours to write a DVD home movie.
I am planning to buy a new imac.
My choice is 27" 2.93 i7 8 ram or 21" 3.60 i5 8 ram Does anyone know if there would be a SIGNIFICANT difference in processing a DVD between these two. It has been suggested i7 could do it in 3 hours.
I recently had the 2.8Ghz 24inch imac with 2Gb memore and 320Gb hard drive with the ati graphics but had a display problem so returned it but my current pc is so slow i need a new computer now so i'm looking at the 24inch 2.66Ghz model but what sped difference will i see in sped from 2.8-2.66 and will the nvidia graphics be better, worse or the same as the recent ATI graphics and is the memore a bigger improvement with now 4Gb ddr3
View 2 Replies View RelatedI ask this question as a new Apple user with a pretty rocky start. I'm on my second defective iMac (yellow tint, stuck pixel, smell, etc). Because of 2 defective iMacs in a row and another replacement in the near future, I now need to learn about how to transfer settings/data from one Apple to another most efficiently--if at all. I previously understood it would be best to simply not use Migration Assistant on a new iMac, even though as a new Apple user I really have little data history to transfer over. So with my next replacement, and hopefully the last, I would start from scratch with new application installs, OS settings, documents, etc. The logic as explained to me is that migrating would transfer over files I would not want on the new iMac. However, when I spoke to Applecare over the phone tonight, I was told that while I could Migrate, I should instead Restore all my settings/data from a Time Machine backup from this defective iMac to the new one. As I understand it from how he explained it: with Migration you will simply transfer your old data/settings on top of what exists on the new iMac, but with a Restore the new iMac will wipe out whatever is on it (is there anything to wipe out on a new iMac?) and then transfer your old data/settings. Is my understanding of those 2 terms, Migration and Restore, correct? And is Restoring the preferable thing to do in that it doesn't (or shouldn't?) bring over any unnecessary files into the new iMac and saves a great deal of time or should I still start completely from scratch?
View 9 Replies View Related
