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

opencube

macrumors member
Original poster
Jan 31, 2009
42
0
Been looking for an all in one desktop system for my brother in law for a while now and the imac seems to offer better quality and as good spec as similar Windows based systems.

We have narrowed down the options to (all 27 inch):

* 3.6GHz Intel Core i5 processor with 4MB level 3 cache; supports
Hyper-Threading and Turbo Boost = £1593

* 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5 processor with 8MB level 3 cache; supports
Turbo Boost = £1684

* 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 processor with 8MB level 3 cache; supports
Hyper-Threading and Turbo Boost = £1848

Main purpose of the machine is for email, surfing, kids homework, photo/video editing, management of ipods/iphones in the house.

But my bro in law would rather get something thats going to last for a few years.

Is there much of a difference in the above?

Cheers
 
unless the video editing you are doing is really significant, and you doing it often. you will be fine with the cheapest.
 
I'd also say take note of the graphics card that's fitted.

In the past I've seen people lose interest in some 2nd hand model sales if they come with the most rotten graphics card in the range fitted.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.