21.5" Late 2009 iMac: 9400M or 4670

[neilw]

offering an integrated graphic chipset like the 9400M in the latest iMac is simply a joke

in the name of profitability, Apple is taking us for a bunch of idiots... cash cows but idiots anyway...

I'm rather more inclined to say that the 9400M base model isn't a joke, but charging $300 for a 500 GB -> 1 TB and ATI4670 upgrade is one. That's the only reason this is such a big discussion topic: the upgrade costs way more than it's worth. But for those who need a discrete CPU there's no other choice in the 21.5" model.

I think I'm finally leaning towards saving the money and going with the base. I'm probably more worried about overflowing the hard drive (solvable of course with an external) than the GPU at this point. But I might still change my mind...

 

[dagamer34]

I'm rather more inclined to say that the 9400M base model isn't a joke, but charging $300 for a 500 GB -> 1 TB and ATI4670 upgrade is one. That's the only reason this is such a big discussion topic: the upgrade costs way more than it's worth. But for those who need a discrete CPU there's no other choice in the 21.5" model.

I think I'm finally leaning towards saving the money and going with the base. I'm probably more worried about overflowing the hard drive (solvable of course with an external) than the GPU at this point. But I might still change my mind...

I just wish I could test both, like take home the base, install Windows 7 in Fusion and see if it runs well, and if it doesn't, return it and get the upgraded model without having to pay the restocking fee.

 

[neilw]

I just wish I could test both, like take home the base, install Windows 7 in Fusion and see if it runs well, and if it doesn't, return it and get the upgraded model without having to pay the restocking fee.

I personally wouldn't have any worries whether the base model would pass that test. The GPU upgrade will be more beneficial for games, certain specific apps, and future hypothetical apps that exploit OpenCL. That's the hard part of the decision for me: overpaying up front for hypothetical future benefit.

 

[sers]

I was actually surprised to see the results of the Macworld benchmark tests. I might have to take back what I said earlier, although it did seem to run slower. PErhaps there was some other crap running in the background, or something. I guess the base iMac isn't too bad of a machine afterall?

 

[CeeZee]

The GPU upgrade will be more beneficial for games, certain specific apps, and future hypothetical apps that exploit OpenCL. That's the hard part of the decision for me: overpaying up front for hypothetical future benefit.

That's really the crux of the problem for me, too. My heaviest app use is Photoshop, so at this point the base model is fine. But we keep our Macs forever, so that hypothetical future benefit becomes important. Okay, don't laugh, but right now we have two Macs - one is a 7 year old original 15" flat screen iMac, and the newest is a 5 year old 15" PowerBook G4. The iMac is only good for basic tasks such as TurboTax, Excel, Word, plain internet use. And my PB is now struggling to keep up with Photoshop and it has become a definite problem especially over the past year. To say nothing about the limits of a 15" screen. So it's clearly time to get an upgrade.

It is astounding to me how long these computers have stayed useable. That puts my hopes up pretty high for the longevity of my next one! By upgrading what I could - e.g. adding more memory and external hard drives, it really extended their lives.

To be even more sure, I know I should go for the Quad Core but it's only on the 27" iMacs and that is too large for the location where it has to go. If they made a 21.5" Quad Core I'd jump for it in a second.

 

[dagamer34]

I ended up getting the 21.5" with the ATI graphics card and MAN, the screen is to DIE for. What's even better is that running Windows 7 inside VMware Fusion 3 with Aero is stupidly easy on this machine. My late 2006 MacBook Pro is being run circles around with this machine.

I think I made the right choice. Now, I'm just waiting for Core i5 chips in MacBooks and I'll ditch my MacBook Pro! YAY!

 

[jzn21]

I ended up getting the 21.5" with the ATI graphics card and MAN, the screen is to DIE for. What's even better is that running Windows 7 inside VMware Fusion 3 with Aero is stupidly easy on this machine. My late 2006 MacBook Pro is being run circles around with this machine.

I think I made the right choice. Now, I'm just waiting for Core i5 chips in MacBooks and I'll ditch my MacBook Pro! YAY!

Congratulations!
I have the 9400M 21,5" and I am running Vista in VMware 3 with Aero smoothly too. The score is 2,9 for Aero and a 4,3 for Gaming Performance (see the attachment!).

 

[rypaca]

Perhaps a bit off topic, but I am curious if the 9400 can be upgraded after the fact? I purchased a 21.5" 3.06ghz 8gb RAM with the default 9400, and I'd like to know if it can be upgraded for the ATI 4670.

Thanks in advance,

Ryan

 

[liquidsuns]

Congratulations!
I have the 9400M 21,5" and I am running Vista in VMware 3 with Aero smoothly too. The score is 2,9 for Aero and a 4,3 for Gaming Performance (see the attachment!).

Weird. My 2006 Macbook with a GMA 950 scores a 3.4 for Aero.

 

[Mackilroy]

Perhaps a bit off topic, but I am curious if the 9400 can be upgraded after the fact? I purchased a 21.5" 3.06ghz 8gb RAM with the default 9400, and I'd like to know if it can be upgraded for the ATI 4670.

Thanks in advance,

Ryan

No sir. The GPU cannot be upgraded at all.

 

[panzer06]

Weird. My 2006 Macbook with a GMA 950 scores a 3.4 for Aero.

He's running under VMware using virtual hardware. I'll bet a game is rather slow using that method.

Cheers,

 

[eloh]

No sir. The GPU cannot be upgraded at all.

Seeking clarification...

Can the 9400M not be upgraded because it is shared (on board) memory?

Is it possible to upgrade the ATI 4670, in the $1499 iMac model, to a 512MB Card?

 

[mac2x]

Even if it was, it would void the warranty.