27-inch 3.60GHz i5 vs. quad-core 2.8GHz i5

[joshwithachance]

Is there much of a difference between these 2 iMacs? I'm leaning toward the 3.60GHz because it's $100 cheaper and it's clock speed is quite a bit higher and they're both i5 processors.

I currently have a 20" 2GHz Core 2 Duo iMac from 2007 aha, so both are huuuuuuge upgrades.

 

[Hellhammer]

3.6GHz is faster in single- and dual-threaded tasks but the 2.8GHz offers more raw processing speed due extra cores. If you really want some bang for your buck, get the 2.8GHz i7 refurb

 

[stridemat]

What are you going to be doing on your new machine?

 

[dexthageek]

The 2.8 i5 is a quad-core where as the 3.6 is only dual-core.

 

[toxic]

depends on what software you use. professional programs are more likely to take advantage of 4+ cores. games...depends. I'd say most don't.

 

[dexthageek]

depends on what software you use. professional programs are more likely to take advantage of 4+ cores. games...depends. I'd say most don't.

This is true for current applications. But if you want to future proof you machine the more cores the better. We should be seeing alot of applications that take advantage multi-core processors in the near future.

 

[joshwithachance]

well I'm going to be using it for iMovie/video editing, iTunes, web browsing, and school work so nothing TOO intense.

 

[fblack]

iMovie export is faster using Core i7.

http://barefeats.com/imac10v.html

Also the Core i5 comes with 4mb cache while the Core i7 doubles this to 8mb cache.

 

[stridemat]

well I'm going to be using it for iMovie/video editing, iTunes, web browsing, and school work so nothing TOO intense.

You also have to think about your future usage. A few years down the line a quad core processor could be a must.

 

[toxic]

This is true for current applications. But if you want to future proof you machine the more cores the better. We should be seeing alot of applications that take advantage multi-core processors in the near future.

and how long will it take for software to catch up? I doubt they will in the next year. so two years? three? at that point, would the OP be starting to look for a new computer anyway?

preparing for an uncertain future with depreciating assets is not exactly the best way to go. when software finally does catch up, there will be a better machine available for less money.

well I'm going to be using it for iMovie/video editing, iTunes, web browsing, and school work so nothing TOO intense.

if you don't use iMovie regularly, dual core is probably the way to go. if you do...you should look that up, but you'll probably want four cores. I don't think anything else you do will benefit much from more cores at a lower clock.

 

[aliensporebomb]

Well...

My axiom still holds true: if you buy more than you need then you will never be frustrated because you'll never hit the wall but if you buy less than you anticipate and hit the wall it will seem doubly frustrating.