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.
2.4ghz vs 2.8ghz...Help!
- Thread starter msb212
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Get the 2.4GHz, you won't notice a difference and it'll be a waste of money to get the higher end CPU.
The low end model is the best value for money. And, based on what you say you use a computer for, you wont notice a difference between the 2.4 and the 2.8 so save your pennies.
For what type of work would the 2.8 really benefit the user? (I went for the 2.4 version with 2 GB upgrade. Great value!).
I will go for the 2.8GHz. It is a 16% performance increase over the 2.4GHz, something that I believe you will notice.
The processor is not something you are likely to upgrade in an iMac, and OSX is a hungry servant... I think the $250 are well spend. I don't want to spend the next two years thinking what might have been for $250 more.
If you want to minimize cost, you can chose the 2.8GHz BTO upgrade on the 2.4GHz version, and then buy the last GB of RAM from a third-party vendor. It is the same RAM-spec as the old iMac. That is doable for the $150 price-cut, with money left to spend.
I think of it this way: I was ready to spend a lot more on the old 2.4GHz, and get much less. In that light the 2.8 looks pretty-darn-cheap.
That is my take on the story...
The processor is not something you are likely to upgrade in an iMac, and OSX is a hungry servant... I think the $250 are well spend. I don't want to spend the next two years thinking what might have been for $250 more.
If you want to minimize cost, you can chose the 2.8GHz BTO upgrade on the 2.4GHz version, and then buy the last GB of RAM from a third-party vendor. It is the same RAM-spec as the old iMac. That is doable for the $150 price-cut, with money left to spend.
I think of it this way: I was ready to spend a lot more on the old 2.4GHz, and get much less. In that light the 2.8 looks pretty-darn-cheap.
That is my take on the story...
If any of them it is the X7800. The iMac uses the intel mobile technology normally designated the product code T7XXX. The X in X7800 signifies that this is an extreme version...
Update: The X7800 is listed as a 2.6GHz. I believe the one in the iMac is the 2.8GHz X7900. I do not think that it is on the general marked yet.
The QX6800 is a quad-core and dare I say MUCH faster processor, only to be found in the pc-guy's room. It is however running way too hot for iMac application, at least with a reasonable noise level. Think of it as a 2.66 GHz Xeon Quad core, made for single processor configuration only. This processor range is normally designated the product code Q6XXX - a 4 core derivative from the 2 core family E6XXX. A processor family sadly neglected by Apple.
Not a quad core ????
Please put this in English for us mo-rons....The new Imac 2.8 Extreme is NOT a quad core??? I did a google search and came up w/ intel quad core info....bummer if it's dual core, I will get the 2.4 or search for a used Power Mac
Please put this in English for us mo-rons....The new Imac 2.8 Extreme is NOT a quad core??? I did a google search and came up w/ intel quad core info....bummer if it's dual core, I will get the 2.4 or search for a used Power Mac
I was thinking about getting the 2.8GHz, but I opted for 4GB of ram instead (bought elsewhere). I couldn't afford both.
I do have some regrets about not getting the 2.8 since the CPU isn't upgradable. But I think I'll be fine.
In music production I max out the CPU all the time. And the 0.4 would certainly result in being able to have a few more tracks running.
However, since I also work with large images, the 4GB of RAM will make a difference.
I guess I should have gone with the 2.8GHz and buy the RAM later on. But I've already ordered it now.
Oh well. It will be faster than my MacBook anyhow.
I do have some regrets about not getting the 2.8 since the CPU isn't upgradable. But I think I'll be fine.
In music production I max out the CPU all the time. And the 0.4 would certainly result in being able to have a few more tracks running.
However, since I also work with large images, the 4GB of RAM will make a difference.
I guess I should have gone with the 2.8GHz and buy the RAM later on. But I've already ordered it now.
Oh well. It will be faster than my MacBook anyhow.
the second option:
Intel® Core2 Extreme mobile processor
Experience the world's highest performing mobile processor¹. Bar none. Now you have the performance to play the latest multi-threaded games anywhere, with the Intel® Core2 Extreme dual-core mobile processor X7800.
* 4 MB of shared L2 cache
* 800 MHz front-side bus
I get a new Mac every 4 or 5 years. So I buy the fastest machine possible with the money I have. It so happens I had enough for the 2.8, so I ordered it. If you plan on keeping it until it's no longer usable, I'd go with the 2.8. If you have the money for it.
Otherwise, the 2.4 would probably be fine.
Otherwise, the 2.4 would probably be fine.
2.4 gig imac vs 2.8gig
I noticed that the general recommendation by most was 2.4 gig. In my situation I was planning on purchasing a canon hv20 hd camcorder to make videos of my grand children. My current machine is a 1.6 gig G5 and it is not powerful enough to run the new iphoto 8. I'm not sure whether it has enough power to edit hd video using iphoto hd 5. Most of my videos are 3 to 5 minutes in length. Grandchildren and their parents have short attention spans. Do I need to upgrade?
I noticed that the general recommendation by most was 2.4 gig. In my situation I was planning on purchasing a canon hv20 hd camcorder to make videos of my grand children. My current machine is a 1.6 gig G5 and it is not powerful enough to run the new iphoto 8. I'm not sure whether it has enough power to edit hd video using iphoto hd 5. Most of my videos are 3 to 5 minutes in length. Grandchildren and their parents have short attention spans. Do I need to upgrade?
