Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Anyone bought a new 21.5 recently?

D

daibachin

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jun 3, 2010
26
0
I have been reading on this forum for quite a while and like many others I am also waiting for the new imac to come.. but it seems it's not gonna happen any time soon... so all I see here is most ppls go with the high end 27.... I dun have space/money for the 27... I m thinking about the base line 21.5 with 9400m... I know it's old... that's y I m worried... I dun game much.. but I do sometimes... will this card be able to handle game like battle field, counter strike, WoW?

I will be installing window and use it w/ vm fusion... most ppls here suggest to go for the Win7, but it seems Win7 uses much more resource than xp... is there any reason to go for the 7 instead of xp? anything 7 can do, xp can't? more ram help?

This is my first post here. many thanks =)
 
daibachin said:
I have been reading on this forum for quite a while and like many others I am also waiting for the new imac to come.. but it seems it's not gonna happen any time soon... so all I see here is most ppls go with the high end 27.... I dun have space/money for the 27... I m thinking about the base line 21.5 with 9400m... I know it's old... that's y I m worried... I dun game much.. but I do sometimes... will this card be able to handle game like battle field, counter strike, WoW?

I will be installing window and use it w/ vm fusion... most ppls here suggest to go for the Win7, but it seems Win7 uses much more resource than xp... is there any reason to go for the 7 instead of xp? anything 7 can do, xp can't? more ram help?

This is my first post here. many thanks =)
Click to expand...

I gave and and bought at 21.5 just yesterday. Microcenter took off $50 so it was $1449.

I don't have the games your asking about, but in BootCamp I've already played Far Cry at full rez, full detail and it runs perfectly. Also Tiger Woods 08, full rez full detail.

On the Mac side, I ran Call of Duty 2 (again a slightly older game) and it runs smooth as silk, full rez, max detail.
 
I have the latest 21.5 inch iMac, but the upgraded model (ATI4670, 256MB). It runs TF2 in bootcamp at 60 fps (1920x1080, No MSAA, 2x Anisotropic Filtering, vsync on, everything else max).

Under OSX, it runs at 30-90 fps, at the same settings except vsync disabled.

In fact, the only game it struggles with is GTA4, and only because there is not enough VRAM. Runs very smoothly, but only at low settings.

If you want to do any gaming, then you should get the ATI at the very least. 512MB of VRAM would be better, but probably not available for the 21.5 inch model.
 
daibachin said:
Thanks!!
Any comment about running virtual window on this low end 21.5?
Click to expand...

Ahh, I missed that part. I specifically chose the higher end video card version of the iMac (Radeon 4670). I've got the the 9400 running a couple of machines and while it's a very nice integrated card, you're not going to max out settings on most games and avoid choppy frame rates.

That said, you go back to say, half life 2 (windows xp - bootcamp) and the 9400 works pretty well.

I chose the higher end iMac simply because I wanted to erase all doubt that the games I enjoy would run flawlessly at maxed settings.
 
both 4670 and 9400 are very bad graphics cards.

I would not get the 21.5 imac.

For 1000 bucks you can built a nice hackintosh. And if you want, I can give you advice on how. Or just visit tonymacosx86

Better get the refurb 27 inch or something. At least you have a nice display then.
 
hundert said:
both 4670 and 9400 are very bad graphics cards.

I would not get the 21.5 imac.

For 1000 bucks you can built a nice hackintosh. And if you want, I can give you advice on how. Or just visit tonymacosx86

Better get the refurb 27 inch or something. At least you have a nice display then.
Click to expand...

4670 is not "very bad". Plenty of people in these forums have reported being able to play recent games at medium settings and older games at max.

BTW, a hackintosh is more of a hassle to maintain. You need to wait for tweaked system updates, and it may be more crash prone because of non-standard hardware. Not everyone wants to deal with that.
 
Warbitrary said:
BTW, a hackintosh is more of a hassle to maintain. You need to wait for tweaked system updates, and it may be more crash prone because of non-standard hardware. Not everyone wants to deal with that.
Click to expand...

Precisely. Most people go Mac because they don't want to deal with this stuff.
 
Just finally caved in and bought a 21.5" iMac tonight. So far I'm very impressed with the machine. Downloaded Steam and installed a couple of games, installed CS4 and the setup iTunes, etc...

It's fast, the screen is beautiful, and so far I have no complaints. If a person has a sufficiently modern Mac and just wants a new computer, you might hold out for the next refresh. If you're working on older hardware and are leaning more towards needing a new Mac, I would easily recommend the 21.5".

Note - I did get the model with the ATI card, not the 9400m, so performance on it (games and graphics intense apps) I can't vouch for, but mine ran HL2 and Portal just fine (and 10.6.4 should make some great strides in this area too).
 
hackintosh - yea.. I read about it before and I think I m not gonna do it unless I have 2 HD.. I may use one for it just for fun..

Anyways.. so wut I see here is no one get the 9400M model... ppls at least go for the ATI 21.5... to me the price increase of $300 just not justified... for another $200.. u can get a basic 27.. same hardware inside, but the display I would say is the best in the market so far.. and plus u get video in, so u could still use it when the computer gets old... and wall mountable if needed.. it just seems better value to me..

What Apple attracts me the most is their display and design including the mouse and keyboard.. I actually dun like those logitech keyboard with big wrist rest and "bumper" around it.. I dun really need it and it takes up too much of my desk space.. simple is good.. I like apple's design =)
 
Apple prices their computers like movie theater concessions, what can be said.
 
daibachin said:
.. so wut I see here is no one get the 9400M model... ppls at least go for the ATI 21.5... to me the price increase of $300 just not justified... for another $200.. u can get a basic 27.. same hardware inside, but the display I would say is the best in the market so far..
Click to expand...

I feel it's justified - you get a lot better graphics card with dedicated memory and a 1TB drive (remember iMac HDDs aren't user-upgradeable). What you've described though is the essence of up-selling - for only this much more I can get this... then for only this much more than that... etc... it never ends until you get to the top. I personally think the 27" screen would be too big... even with my 21.5" I feel like it's huge - I can't imagine a 27" screen.

But in the end go for the one that suits your needs the best... remember the system is designed to make you think "it's only this much more!"
 
iMac hard drives are definitely upgradable, in fact people even replace their hdds with ssds.
 
TMRaven said:
iMac hard drives are definitely upgradable, in fact people even replace their hdds with ssds.
Click to expand...

They're upgradeable all right... but it's not exactly something Apple makes easy. I should have written they not meant to be upgraded by users.

Most people are alot better off getting what they want out of the box than risk tearing apart a brand new, highly compact, $1,500 machine and throwing away their warranty. There are definitely some tech savvy folks who can do this no-problem, but they're the minority.
 
mox358 said:
They're upgradeable all right... but it's not exactly something Apple makes easy. I should have written they not meant to be upgraded by users.

Most people are alot better off getting what they want out of the box than risk tearing apart a brand new, highly compact, $1,500 machine and throwing away their warranty. There are definitely some tech savvy folks who can do this no-problem, but they're the minority.
Click to expand...

Replacing your HDD does NOT void warranty... unless you screw something up in the process...
 
Sun Baked said:
Refurbish iMac 27 i5 for 1699, so you can afford that extra $300 for the next machine, because that is the discount. ;)

http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac
Click to expand...

I've personally found this deal very tempting, however the LCD thread always makes me hesitate. The fact that the ATI GPU is still underclocked and isn't 100% OpenCL compatible doesn't help matters either. So I continue to wait it out with my early 2006 iMac, hoping Apple makes decently-made-and-priced Macs again.
 
eXan said:
Replacing your HDD does NOT void warranty... unless you screw something up in the process...
Click to expand...

Thanks. I also thought that it would void the warranty... haha.. anyways, I will do it after warranty expired.. 500G should be sufficient at the moment... I also have a WD 2.5" 500G.. so I guess that's good enough..
 
TMRaven said:
where did you hear that bull?
Click to expand...

Perhaps I should have been clearer. Apple advertises an ATI Radeon 4850, but as per this thread, it's actually a Mobility Radeon 4850, which according to the people in that thread, is essentially an underclocked desktop 4850. So it's not actually underclocked by Apple, but if you're not in the loop and buy a $2k iMac expecting an "ATI Radeon 4850," then yes, the GPU is indeed underclocked from what is advertised.

For heat reasons, this is probably a good move by Apple, but I wish they'd be a bit more upfront (they've been doing this since the original Intel iMac I have, which actually has a Mobility Radeon X1600 under the hood).
 
dolphin842 said:
Perhaps I should have been clearer. Apple advertises an ATI Radeon 4850, but as per this thread, it's actually a Mobility Radeon 4850, which according to the people in that thread, is essentially an underclocked desktop 4850. So it's not actually underclocked by Apple, but if you're not in the loop and buy a $2k iMac expecting an "ATI Radeon 4850," then yes, the GPU is indeed underclocked from what is advertised.

For heat reasons, this is probably a good move by Apple, but I wish they'd be a bit more upfront (they've been doing this since the original Intel iMac I have, which actually has a Mobility Radeon X1600 under the hood).
Click to expand...

Apple advertise it as an HD 4850, not an 4850.

Just like they used to advertise the 2600HD, whereas it was an underclocked XT.

So they do the opposite of what you're saying, precisely because they are not allowed to advertise that you are buying something better than what you actually receive.
 
daibachin said:
I have been reading on this forum for quite a while and like many others I am also waiting for the new imac to come.. but it seems it's not gonna happen any time soon... so all I see here is most ppls go with the high end 27.... I dun have space/money for the 27... I m thinking about the base line 21.5 with 9400m... I know it's old... that's y I m worried... I dun game much.. but I do sometimes... will this card be able to handle game like battle field, counter strike, WoW?

I will be installing window and use it w/ vm fusion... most ppls here suggest to go for the Win7, but it seems Win7 uses much more resource than xp... is there any reason to go for the 7 instead of xp? anything 7 can do, xp can't? more ram help?

This is my first post here. many thanks =)
Click to expand...



the 9400murder sucks. http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-9400M-G.11949.0.html it cant play games. after a year, youll regret it :) get rhe 4670
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back