Aperture 3 which iMac

[Canticleer]

Hi,

I'm sure it has been discussed before but I have read so many posts and reviews that I don't see clear anymore. So I finally decided to ask you guys directly.

I'm a photographer in the market for a new Mac. Now I'm working on a PowerMac G5 2.7 GHz Dual processor and a MacBook Pro 2.33 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo. On the MacBook I'm running Aperture 3, on the PowerMac Aperture 2, since that one doesn't run A3.

The new machine will have to replace the PowerMac but I'm afraid I'm on tight budget, so a Mac Pro isn't an option.

Now I'm wondering what's the best buy. A 21,5 inch iMac with 3,6GHz intel core i5 and 8GB ram or a 27 inch iMac with 2.8GHz Quad-Core i5 and 8GB ram.

I'm not that much interested in screen real estate but far more in speed and performance.

Thank you very much for your advice.

Canticleer

 

[Hellhammer]

27". It offers more raw power and thus is more "future-proof". The extra screen estate really helps with photos too

 

[John T]

Until my faithful old iMac G5 died, I was in the same position as you, running Aperture 2.1.4.

I went for the 21.5" 3.06 Ghz i3. I do pretty intensive work on Aperture (I haven't upgraded to Aperture 3.0 because, at the moment, I see no real advantage) and, even with the standard supplied 4 Gb of RAM, compared with the G5 the new machine simply flies! I keep an eye on the Activity Monitor and, so far, the existing amount of RAM is more than adequate. However, should the need arise, there's provision for a further 12 Gb!

The size of screen is surely a personal thing - the 21.5" in far from "small" and in my opinion, more than adequate for still photographic work. I have a feeling that some people go for the larger screen more to satisfy their personal egos than their actual requirements!

 

[Canticleer]

Thanks for your replies.

I somewhere read that Aperture generally benefits more from higher clock speed then from extra cores, except for tasks like building previews and exporting photo's. On the other hand I can follow Hellraisers 'future proof' argument too.

Does the difference in video memory, 512MB in the 21,5 inch and 1GB in the 27 inch, speed things up, or is this equalized by the difference in screen size?

Tough choice.

Cheers,
Canticleer.

 

[Hellhammer]

Thanks for your replies.

I somewhere read that Aperture generally benefits more from higher clock speed then from extra cores, except for tasks like building previews and exporting photo's. On the other hand I can follow Hellraisers 'future proof' argument too.

Does the difference in video memory, 512MB in the 21,5 inch and 1GB in the 27 inch, speed things up, or is this equalized by the difference in screen size?

Tough choice.

Cheers,
Canticleer.

Aperture doesn't really use VRAM for anything so not really. Remember that the i5 in 27" goes 3.33GHz with Turbo so the difference in tasks that are single or dual threaded is also smaller

 

[Canticleer]

Thanks Hellhammer, do you know how fast the i5 in 21,5" goes with Turbo?

Canticleer

 

[Canticleer]

Thanks Hellhammer, do you know how fast the i5 in 21,5" goes with Turbo?

Cheers,
Canticleer

 

[Hellhammer]

Thanks Hellraiser, do you know how fast the i5 in 21,5" goes with Turbo?

Canticleer

3.86GHz so it's theoretically ~16% faster than the quad core i5. Not that noticeable and the tasks that are CPU intensive are more or less multithreaded and thus the quad is faster

 

[Canticleer]

So if I got it right, in the end there isn't that much of a speed difference. But the 27" wins in respect to possible upgrading in the future and to screen size of course. At least as far as Aperture is concerned.