Buying advice for storage options and gpu model

[AlexGraphicD]

That's a fair comment, but equally applies to all modern technology. There's always going to be something better just around the corner, so you could chuck money away by always upgrading as soon as something new comes out or wait forever for the next best thing.

Well in IMac's case I'm afraid this doesn't apply as it does in general in ot. It is true that technology is always upgrading but I've read many concerning things about this current line of GPU mainly it being just a rebrand of a 2014 line with no major differences and that the 2016/2017 upgrade will have significant differences in power consumption and performance.
Not to mention the possibility of TB 3 ports and USB C.

Also because I can somewhat wait until October before I buy a new one, (and I don't really have the necessary budget right now) I think it would be worth waiting and see if the upgrade is truly worth compared to the old line.

Although I really envy those who have already a 5k Mac on their desks and wish I had one when it came out. But until now I didn't really need it as I had a couple of old macs to do the work and reading about all this concerning things about the underwhelming gpu made me hesitant to just go and buy a computer just because it looks pretty in my eyes.
[doublepost=1468760071][/doublepost]

This topic comes up often enough we should REALLY have an FAQ thread on it. The answer is actually surprisingly simple and hinges on two essential questions.

1. How fast does your storage need to be? / How much of an impact will a PCIE based SSD have on the speed of your work vs a SATA SSD/Fusion Drive?

2. To what degree do the applications you use/plan to use take advantage of a faster GPU?

If you can get away with SATA SSD speeds (and lets be honest here, unless your working with extremely high end raw video footage, you most likely can), and can afford the extra desk space, then buy the absolute minimum that Apple sells for SSD storage (256GB, don't bother with the fusion drive) and then just add storage externally as necessary via USB 3.0 or Thunderbolt (if you need PCIE speed but still don't want to pay the "Apple tax").

If you do this, you can then spend money where it belongs, on parts of the computer that can't be updated (at least not without voiding the warranty), namely the CPU and GPU. For those, buy as much as you can afford and then some if possible if you plan to keep the machine for a long time. IMO, aside from a bit more desk clutter (which isn't even really that bad if you get nice looking externals), this option is far superior to paying an insane amount of money for a 512GB or 1TB Apple SSD (UNLESS of course you actually NEED 1500+ Mbps). Buying a refurb is smart though as the difference between the 2014 and 2015 models really isn't that large.

That said, as you yourself seem to be aware, the truly smart choice is to just wait for the 2016 models if you can. I know it's hard, but if it's a long term investment, you'll most likely be getting a good deal more bang for your buck, especially in the GPU department where these computers need it the most.

1. Not lightning fast but I'd like it to be faster than the 5200 rpm HDD drive I have on my old 2010 iMac. Yeah, I don't really think I'll notice the PCI/SATA speed difference all that much but I'd prefer my applications and OS to be on a PCI ssd and the media files on a SATA.

2. Don't really know that for sure. My main applications that I use are photoshop, illustrator, indesign, iMovie and occasionally FCP for casual video editing (ex. for YouTube uploads).
Oh and handbrake in rare occasions and of course mail and multiple tab Internet browsing on a daily basis.

 

[MacGizmo]

With the 27" iMac, I would upgrade the video card to the 4GB version and the i7 processor. You can upgrade the RAM yourself later, and I would get the full 32GB. The storage drive is easy... don't ever buy a spinning hard drive again. The difference in speed is amazing. The absolute slowest SSD is still shockingly faster than the fastest hard drive.

That being said, that speed will only be noticed for the OS and i/o tasks. In other words, Photoshop will not run faster because it's on an SSD. But it will run disk-intensive filters and save/open files significantly faster. The upgraded video card will greatly speed up the screen redraw as well.

Judging by the apps you're using, it sounds as if you do the same thing I do: you're a graphic designer? There are certain truths for other people that don't apply to us.

• More RAM won't help most people, it will absolutely help us—particularly with large Photoshop and Illustrator files.
• Raw GPU performance can help gamers, but it's of little value in comparison for us. More video RAM is enough to improve life for us.
• Faster processor (the Core i7) won't do much of anything for most people, it will absolutely help us with apps like Photoshop, FinalCut, etc.

I wouldn't spend the money for more than the 256GB SSD though. I would also prefer more storage to be internal, but the reality is that we often think we need more than we do. External SSD storage drive with Thunderbolt connections are out there, and they're only getting cheaper.

I bought my iMac 27" in 2013 with the i7 processor, 256 GB SSD storage, 32GB RAM, and 4GB Video Card upgrade. I work on enormous PSD files, long InDesign documents, and some light-duty video work. It's a fantastic machine, runs all the latest software, and speeds along quite nicely today. My only wish is that it was a Retina 5k display.

 

[AlexGraphicD]

Yes I'm a graphic designer. Sad to hear that I have to go with the i7 as it is such an expensive option and I have a somewhat limited budget...

 

[Goody13]

More confusion. On http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-R9-M390-Benchmarks.153797.0.html this states "The performance of the Radeon R9 M390 slightly above a Nvidia GeForce GTX 960M or870M" and the website for the Asus AIO website https://www.asus.com/uk/AllinOne-PCs/Zen-AiO-Pro-Z240IC/ states "NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX™ 960M gaming-grade graphics".

The general consensus is that none of the iMac GPUs are good enough for gaming. This is what makes things difficult to decide.

 

[iMcLovin]

I would say get the best BTO options for the iMac. Its expensive but its the only option to get the machine nearly on par with todays technology and speed. If you are a graphic designer, either you can afford the Mac BTO maxed out or I would personally recommend a PC. If Adobe is the tool you are working in it doesnt matter for the work itself - and then you can play games as well if you like that sort of stuff. You will loose a bit of the sexyness the Mac delivers, but you can still do your work and you get a lot more power for the money. Dont sacrifice speed and power for the sleek design, then its not worth it staying with Mac IMO.

 

[Malus120]

More confusion. On http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-R9-M390-Benchmarks.153797.0.html this states "The performance of the Radeon R9 M390 slightly above a Nvidia GeForce GTX 960M or870M" and the website for the Asus AIO website https://www.asus.com/uk/AllinOne-PCs/Zen-AiO-Pro-Z240IC/ states "NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX™ 960M gaming-grade graphics".

The general consensus is that none of the iMac GPUs are good enough for gaming. This is what makes things difficult to decide.

No. The general consensus is not that "none of the iMac" GPU's are good enough for gaming." The general consensus is that the iMac is an all in one and you should set your expectations accordingly. The top end 295mx/395mx are similar in performance to a desktop 285 or 380X, AKA fine for gaming at high settings at 1080p or even 1440p for even the newest games in windows although you won't be pulling 60fps on the absolute bleeding edge titles without a good deal of settings tweaking. Now if you want to game at 4K with modern titles, or need a rock solid 60fps all the time for every game (particularly at 1440P) then yes, you probably want to look elsewhere.

Well in IMac's case I'm afraid this doesn't apply as it does in general in ot. It is true that technology is always upgrading but I've read many concerning things about this current line of GPU mainly it being just a rebrand of a 2014 line with no major differences and that the 2016/2017 upgrade will have significant differences in power consumption and performance.
Not to mention the possibility of TB 3 ports and USB C.

Also because I can somewhat wait until October before I buy a new one, (and I don't really have the necessary budget right now) I think it would be worth waiting and see if the upgrade is truly worth compared to the old line.

Although I really envy those who have already a 5k Mac on their desks and wish I had one when it came out. But until now I didn't really need it as I had a couple of old macs to do the work and reading about all this concerning things about the underwhelming gpu made me hesitant to just go and buy a computer just because it looks pretty in my eyes.
[doublepost=1468760071][/doublepost]

1. Not lightning fast but I'd like it to be faster than the 5200 rpm HDD drive I have on my old 2010 iMac. Yeah, I don't really think I'll notice the PCI/SATA speed difference all that much but I'd prefer my applications and OS to be on a PCI ssd and the media files on a SATA.

2. Don't really know that for sure. My main applications that I use are photoshop, illustrator, indesign, iMovie and occasionally FCP for casual video editing (ex. for YouTube uploads).
Oh and handbrake in rare occasions and of course mail and multiple tab Internet browsing on a daily basis.

It really sounds like you can wait and if you have the patience I highly recomend you do. I love my 2014 5K iMac but I wouldn't generally advise someone to buy now. That said, I want to clarify that when i was talking about "how much storage speed you need" and PCIE vs SATA before I was talking about SSDs. Spinning disk is only really relevant for static, read only media storage at this point.