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

i5? i7?

Y

ycwee37

macrumors member
Original poster
Oct 4, 2010
58
0
i know it's a very common question...and sorry for that


i am an architecture student.

but so far i'm just using photoshop cs ..

and i don't know whoch iMac should get..i want a 27''.

the graphic card too..is 512Mb enough for my need ?
should i get the high end BTO i7 ??

thanks in advance
 
Last edited:
In the early stages of this release I am stating the base model is the best bang for your buck.

Most programs don't take advantage of 4 cores let alone 8 cores when hyper threading so I say go with the base. Not to mention, the base model turbo boosts higher than the 3.1.
 
I want to see some benchmarks, especially video encoding (which I think can translate relatively well to sophisticated photo editing). I don't make any money from my activities but I am fairly impatient. I'm creating a media library and I'd like to not have handbrake encodes take nearly real time (like they do on my Mac Mini). Plus I'm new to OSx and bought the mini to dip my toe in the water and its actually quite a bit slower than the Windows machine it replaced (Q8200), so that makes my performance itch even a bit worse. I don't know if I'm willing to spend $1000 between the base and highest high end though... that's a lot of dough (a whole 'nother computer ;))
 
i5-2500 vs i7-2600

i5-2400 is 6% slower than i5-2500. If you just use Photoshop, then the i5 should be adequate. Same applies to the ATI 6770M GPU. Save the money towards RAM upgrade unless you use it for something else too
 
mackage said:
Those aren't the exact same processors Hellhammer.
Click to expand...

Ignore the K because it is completely irrelevant. The i7 is exactly the same and the i5 is just a higher clocked version. The i5 in high-end iMac should be around 6% slower. i5-2500S (i.e. the 2.7GHz quad) is around 18% slower when excluding Turbo.
 
Hellhammer said:
i5-2500 vs i7-2600

i5-2400 is 6% slower than i5-2500. If you just use Photoshop, then the i5 should be adequate. Same applies to the ATI 6770M GPU. Save the money towards RAM upgrade unless you use it for something else too
Click to expand...

If that was directed at me, my other main cpu intensive usage is encoding videos. I'm converting most of my DVD collection of 400+ titles (at least, anything I think I might watch more than once again) with Handbrake...
 
imahawki said:
If that was directed at me, my other main cpu intensive usage is encoding videos. I'm converting most of my DVD collection of 400+ titles (at least, anything I think I might watch more than once again) with Handbrake...
Click to expand...

Well, sure the i7 will be faster at those tasks as you can see in the link I posted but the i5 will be more than sufficient. It's up to you. If you are thinking between low-end and high-end iMacs, then I would just go with the low-end because the price difference is 1000$ like you said.
 
Hellhammer said:
Well, sure the i7 will be faster at those tasks as you can see in the link I posted but the i5 will be more than sufficient. It's up to you. If you are thinking between low-end and high-end iMacs, then I would just go with the low-end because the price difference is 1000$ like you said.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback, I truly appreciate it. I probably shouldn't be as concerned about non-real-time tasks, I'm just anal :D
 
wacomme said:
When would the i7 be advantageous over the i5 - real world?
Click to expand...

I assume CPU intensive tasks that are more real time i.e. you can't move on to step B until step A is complete and it is a time sensitive thing, e.g. you're a pro photographer or videographer or 3D modeler, etc. Anything else, as Hellhammer suggests, is just how much do you want to spend on your computer?
 
I too am looking to upgrade and wondering which machine. I am coming from a 24" iMac - 2.8 Ghz Extreme (Rev. A Aluminum model Aug 2007). As an almost 4 year old machine I was looking forward to this update to upgrade and have a buyer for my machine.

I picked the highest end model at the time in 2007 and typically do that for performance and longevity as well as resale. However, I usually only use it for Safari, iTunes, Quicken, Mail, etc. Typical consumer stuff. I've been dabbling with Aperture and Final Cut Express HD but really don't use it for graphics or anything real work heavy etc.

I do use it for MTR and Handbrake, but as most of my collection is done, I only use it for new titles and nowadays I buy more from iTS for convenience anyway. It does act as my Home Sharing server for an iPad 2 and Apple TVs (new and original).

It will be my machine for at least 3-4, maybe 5 years. But I am thinking even without the BTO options, the extra $300 for 3.1 vs. 2.7 isn't worth it just for the upgraded card? Nor is the i7 necessary for my needs.?..?

I don't do any gaming on it.

Thanks.
 
MowingDevil said:
What about w/ audio applications like Logic, would it make a difference to go to the i7? Wondering what the best iMac would be for that.

Are the i7 BTO options also quad core?
Click to expand...

Yes, the i7 is quad core too.

I also have the same question about Logic.
 
roland.g said:
But I am thinking even without the BTO options, the extra $300 for 3.1 vs. 2.7 isn't worth it just for the upgraded card? Nor is the i7 necessary for my needs.?..?
Click to expand...

Sounds like the base 27" is good for your needs. Consider adding an SSD later on if you're interested. Thunderbolt enclosures should arrive soon so no more surgery required.

Icaras said:
also have the same question about Logic.
Click to expand...

LogicBenchmarkChart.jpg


Looks like HT can help quite a bit so i7 should be worth it.
 
Hellhammer said:
Sounds like the base 27" is good for your needs. Consider adding an SSD later on if you're interested. Thunderbolt enclosures should arrive soon so no more surgery required.



LogicBenchmarkChart.jpg


Looks like HT can help quite a bit so i7 should be worth it.
Click to expand...

Many thanks for that! I've seen this graph before actually. But I see and realize now that the difference between the i5 and i7 is quite substantial indeed.

Looks like this is what I'll be aiming for. I'm very pleased quad i5s and i7s are available on the 21.5"s now too :D
 
thank you guys for your opinions !

i finally went with the base 27''

2.7Ghz, 512mb graphic card~

can't wait for it to reach!!!:)
 
Instead of posting a new thread (like all the new members) I thought I may as well post in this thread to avoid thread congestion, plus Hellhammer is posting here and I value his knowledge.

Ok so I'm looking at getting the BTO 3.4GHz i7 with the 6970M 1GB GPU. I'm going to start getting into 'PC' games, including new titles, so would this be the best option? Should I get the 6970M 2GB instead? What are the benefits of this?

I'm not sure if anyone has heard of/used the Dolphin emulator (GC/Wii emulator), would these specs run most games comfortably?

btw this isn't the only reason I'm getting the iMac, I'm just thinking if I should spend more and get the added benefit of some PC gaming...

Cheers
 
Sutton Dagger said:
Instead of posting a new thread (like all the new members) I thought I may as well post in this thread to avoid thread congestion, plus Hellhammer is posting here and I value his knowledge.

Ok so I'm looking at getting the BTO 3.4GHz i7 with the 6970M 1GB GPU. I'm going to start getting into 'PC' games, including new titles, so would this be the best option? Should I get the 6970M 2GB instead? What are the benefits of this?

I'm not sure if anyone has heard of/used the Dolphin emulator (GC/Wii emulator), would these specs run most games comfortably?

btw this isn't the only reason I'm getting the iMac, I'm just thinking if I should spend more and get the added benefit of some PC gaming...

Cheers
Click to expand...

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/02/24/amd_radeon_hd_6950_1gb_performance_review/3

That compares 1GB and 2GB AMD 6950. As it is more powerful card than the 6970M, it can take advantage of more memory (160Gb/s vs 115.2Gb/s). That means the difference should be even smaller in the iMac. Based on that, I would save the 100$ and go with 1GB version. If you want to be sure, wait for the first benchmarks to show up.

I haven't heard about GC and Wii emulation but since even the MBA can emulate PS2, I think that iMac would be more than fine for Wii.
 
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