I'm getting an iMac for my dad, and am debating on whether to get 2.0 GHz or 2.4 GHz. Would the 2.4 GHz be a very noticeable upgrade over the 2.0 GHz? Is 2.0 GHz still a sufficient amount? He's mainly going to use it for typing, emailing, and web surfing
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
2.0 GHz vs. 2.4 GHz
- Thread starter Mets1989
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The 20" iMac ...
When upgrading from 2.0 to 2.4GHz, you get a faster CPU, faster GPU, more VRAM, and a larger HD.
Which makes the 20" iMac 2.4 a decent deal, for a base machine.
It upgrade two things you would want to update, the GPU and the HD.
---
However, for just normal stuff the entry machine isn't bad -- though a Apple HD update to something bigger would be called for.
RAM can be updated for $30-100 from a 3rd party depending on whether you want 2GB or 4GB -- and 2GB is generally enough unless you run Pro apps.
When upgrading from 2.0 to 2.4GHz, you get a faster CPU, faster GPU, more VRAM, and a larger HD.
Which makes the 20" iMac 2.4 a decent deal, for a base machine.
It upgrade two things you would want to update, the GPU and the HD.
---
However, for just normal stuff the entry machine isn't bad -- though a Apple HD update to something bigger would be called for.
RAM can be updated for $30-100 from a 3rd party depending on whether you want 2GB or 4GB -- and 2GB is generally enough unless you run Pro apps.
Since iMacs are not upgradable, I maxed mine out as much as possible to enjoy its 3-year anticipated life time. However, I opted for a 2.4GHz instead of the 2.8GHz because of the extra heating, power, and 4GB RAM limitation.
I did, however, choose a BTW 750GB HD and 4GB aftermarket RAM. It runs great so far.
I did, however, choose a BTW 750GB HD and 4GB aftermarket RAM. It runs great so far.
2.0
if he's using it for just such basic tasks, you'll be fine with the 2.0. however, if you think he'll ever start using it for even digital photos, i'd take into consideration the longevity you are hoping out of it. that .4 speed bump will give you a bit of a longer life time and in three years with the way the megapixels are shooting up in cameras, the better GPU and bigger HD will make it worth it.
if he's using it for just such basic tasks, you'll be fine with the 2.0. however, if you think he'll ever start using it for even digital photos, i'd take into consideration the longevity you are hoping out of it. that .4 speed bump will give you a bit of a longer life time and in three years with the way the megapixels are shooting up in cameras, the better GPU and bigger HD will make it worth it.