Is ANYBODY planning to buy a base 21.5 iMac ???

[Shanpdx]

yeah I still can't make up my mind.

I could get the upgraded Mac mini,
# 2.53GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
# 4GB memory
# 320GB hard drive1
# 8x double-layer SuperDrive
# NVIDIA GeForce 9400M graphics

but after I buy a cheap lcd, keyboard, mouse, web cam, etc...
I'm up there within $150 to upgrade to the basic 21.5" Imac.

The basic Mini is probably good enough for my needs but don't want to regret not going a step or two up later on.

with Desktop Class CPU (E7600 3.06Ghz) inside the iMac and 7200 RPM 3.5" HDD iMac wins against MacMini with LCD OR MacBook with LCD.

i guess iMac will take some of the sales of low end MacBook and MacMini.

$1199 is really a good value machine, and if you can get some form discount it is even better. I got the second model $1300 and i am pretty happy with that.

 

[Shanpdx]

and

21.5" LED Backlit Display darn good. I like it, it took a while to read the small text (compared to my 22" LCD 1680x1050) after few days i am doing fine.

 

[solchitlins]

yeah I almost pulled the trigger this morning on a refurbished 20.5" base model from the apple store "$1000" but I'm not really in a hurry. Figured I'd think about it a little longer.

 

[solchitlins]

and

21.5" LED Backlit Display darn good. I like it, it took a while to read the small text (compared to my 22" LCD 1680x1050) after few days i am doing fine.

so the text is smaller?
I have bad eyes, maybe I should get a refurbished 24" instead.

You think the 24" would be better for me or isn't it that big of a difference?

 

[Shanpdx]

so the text is smaller?
I have bad eyes, maybe I should get a refurbished 24" instead.

You think the 24" would be better for me or isn't it that big of a difference?

if you can find the 24" model at the store then take a look at the website you visit regularly. i doubt you can see 24" model at the store now.

but the 21.5" display is better than 24" - i believe

 

[Shanpdx]

yeah I almost pulled the trigger this morning on a refurbished 20.5" base model from the apple store "$1000" but I'm not really in a hurry. Figured I'd think about it a little longer.

did you miss the $101 off black friday apple sales?

 

[solchitlins]

yeah on black friday I was set to find a mac mini.

now I'm leaning towards a refurbished base model 21.5" instead.

 

[Shanpdx]

good luck with that...

you might want to check this out also

http://www.appleinsider.com/mac_price_guide/

 

[solchitlins]

bah

I'm a goof.
I ended up canceling my order after going over some upcoming bills.
I just can't justify spending so much all at once.

I'm going to end up buying a refurbished Mini and then slowly upgrade as bills loosen up.

 

[Shanpdx]

congrats! Keep us posted how you like the new iMac once you received

 

[powerbook911]

Well, I just ordered my first Mac.

I chose the base 21.5" refurbished Imac.
With tax the total was $1058.

More then I wanted to spend. But I hoping that the $150 dollars over the Mini price "upgraded ram, hd, mouse, keyboard, web cam and cheap display etc." will pay off for me in the long run.


And by buying the refurbished unit I hope that any problems it might have had are fixed now.

Knock on wood.

Seems like a solid choice, please let us know how you like it. I'm interested in knowing the packaging they are sending the refurbished units in too.

I think the best reason for your selection is you're going to have a really really nice display. You can't argue with the value in that.

 

[applelicious]

Well, I just ordered my first Mac.

I chose the base 21.5" refurbished Imac.
With tax the total was $1058.

More then I wanted to spend. But I hoping that the $150 dollars over the Mini price "upgraded ram, hd, mouse, keyboard, web cam and cheap display etc." will pay off for me in the long run.


And by buying the refurbished unit I hope that any problems it might have had are fixed now.

Knock on wood.

Congrats on your mac. Its a great computer! Enjoy!

 

[iamthedudeman]

This CPU upgrade is nearly completely worthless, virtually imperceptible. It will just add more heat to the box.

Actually thats not even close to being true.

The CPU upgrade is way more use full than the graphics card in everyday computing.

Here is the differences between the imacs with the same processor and different video cards. The only major difference worth noting is in games. Thats the only major difference.

http://www.macworld.com/article/143636/2009/11/imacs_late2009_benchmarks.html

Now let's take a look at the different processors.

http://www.winandmac.com/news/best-benchmark-imac-core-i7/

The difference between the 3.06 and the 3.33 is about 9% percent in performance.

That may not seem like a lot, but it makes a difference when you are running intensive applications. Makes a big difference. Lets look at the numbers shall we? This is just a few between the base imac and the ATI imac both with the 3.06 processor.

Adobe
Photoshop---Cinebench-------Parallels------Compressor

0:44----------2:16------------5:26-----------8:09
0:41----------2:15------------5:20-----------8:06

You see the above tests don't have much difference between them, so other than gaming the better graphics card doesn't really do much for every day computing.

Now lets see the numbers with a 9% performance increase, this is a rough estimate but you get the point.

Adobe
Photoshop--Cinebench--------Parallels-------Compressor

0:41----------2.03------------4.97----------7:41
0:41----------2:15------------5:20----------8:06

Not much difference in shorter less intensive applications. But there is a nice increase in the more demanding ones. These are not exact numbers, but that is roughly 9% as the above geekbench scores indicate.

I have owned the base imac 21.5, upgraded to the 21.5 with the ATI card, had issues and handed that in on a 21.5 base with the 3.33 processor. Of the three, I can tell a difference in speed with the upgraded processor, but not with the ATI imac. I have witnessed this first hand. No more heat from the 3.33, but there was more heat from the ATI card and HD.

 

[iamthedudeman]

Well, I just ordered my first Mac.

I chose the base 21.5" refurbished Imac.
With tax the total was $1058.

More then I wanted to spend. But I hoping that the $150 dollars over the Mini price "upgraded ram, hd, mouse, keyboard, web cam and cheap display etc." will pay off for me in the long run.


And by buying the refurbished unit I hope that any problems it might have had are fixed now.

Knock on wood.

Smart choice. Not much performance difference between the imacs with the 3.06 C2D. The quad cores not withstanding. The refurbs having the problems worked out to boot.


Welcome aboard, you're going to like it here.

 

[929406]

Actually thats not even close to being true.

The CPU upgrade is way more use full than the graphics card in everyday computing.

Here is the differences between the imacs with the same processor and different video cards. The only major difference worth noting is in games. Thats the only major difference.

http://www.macworld.com/article/143636/2009/11/imacs_late2009_benchmarks.html

Now let's take a look at the different processors.

http://www.winandmac.com/news/best-benchmark-imac-core-i7/

The difference between the 3.06 and the 3.33 is about 9% percent in performance.

That may not seem like a lot, but it makes a difference when you are running intensive applications. Makes a big difference. Lets look at the numbers shall we? This is just a few between the base imac and the ATI imac both with the 3.06 processor.

Adobe
Photoshop---Cinebench-------Parallels------Compressor

0:44----------2:16------------5:26-----------8:09
0:41----------2:15------------5:20-----------8:06

You see the above tests don't have much difference between them, so other than gaming the better graphics card doesn't really do much for every day computing.

Now lets see the numbers with a 9% performance increase, this is a rough estimate but you get the point.

Adobe
Photoshop--Cinebench--------Parallels-------Compressor

0:41----------2.03------------4.97----------7:41
0:41----------2:15------------5:20----------8:06

Not much difference in shorter less intensive applications. But there is a nice increase in the more demanding ones. These are not exact numbers, but that is roughly 9% as the above geekbench scores indicate.

I have owned the base imac 21.5, upgraded to the 21.5 with the ATI card, had issues and handed that in on a 21.5 base with the 3.33 processor. Of the three, I can tell a difference in speed with the upgraded processor, but not with the ATI imac. I have witnessed this first hand. No more heat from the 3.33, but there was more heat from the ATI card and HD.

Thanks for the info, useful to know. Not sure whether I need the better performance but good to know $180 buys around 9% quicker processing

 

[stonemann]

I have owned the base imac 21.5, upgraded to the 21.5 with the ATI card, had issues and handed that in on a 21.5 base with the 3.33 processor. Of the three, I can tell a difference in speed with the upgraded processor, but not with the ATI imac. I have witnessed this first hand. No more heat from the 3.33, but there was more heat from the ATI card and HD.

That's good to know. I checked out the 21.5" 3.06 iMac with ATI card at an Apple Store. I didn't notice any excessive heat. Mind you, as a store machine, it wasn't being tasked beyond people testing video and web-surfing. A very impressive machine. From your experience the 3.33 Ghz upgrade is worth the additional investment? I figured I can always add RAM later, but your stuck with the processor, right? And no problems with the bigger (Seagate?) drive either?

 

[orangerock]

My wife surprised me with a new 21.5" Friday for my birthday/Christmas, I had strongly hinted to her that I would love to have one. I am a PC convert and could not be happier with the new iMac. For those of you out there on the fence, do it, you will not regret it. Mine runs so quick, quiet, and efficiently I have caught myself smiling at times. I have the base model and use it for photos, video, web, etc. and it is more than enough machine to do what I need. After tons of research and going to the Apple Store to test drive the Macs I knew I would like one...turns out I like it better than I imagined.

 

[powerbook911]

My wife surprised me with a new 21.5" Friday for my birthday/Christmas, I had strongly hinted to her that I would love to have one. I am a PC convert and could not be happier with the new iMac. For those of you out there on the fence, do it, you will not regret it. Mine runs so quick, quiet, and efficiently I have caught myself smiling at times. I have the base model and use it for photos, video, web, etc. and it is more than enough machine to do what I need. After tons of research and going to the Apple Store to test drive the Macs I knew I would like one...turns out I like it better than I imagined.

That is honestly the best value machine. It also gives you more performance than almost every Mac notebook, so again, the value is fantastic. Enjoy it. It will keep you smiling for a long while yet.

 

[phoobo]

Not exactly

The difference between the 3.06 and the 3.33 is about 9% percent in performance.

That's a 9% difference in processor speed all right, but processor speed is only one component of performance. Also involved are HD read-write speeds, RAM speed, bus speed, etc.... you get the idea.

It's likely much less than a 9% difference in actual computing performance.

 

[iMatthew]

My wife surprised me with a new 21.5" Friday for my birthday/Christmas, I had strongly hinted to her that I would love to have one. I am a PC convert and could not be happier with the new iMac. For those of you out there on the fence, do it, you will not regret it. Mine runs so quick, quiet, and efficiently I have caught myself smiling at times. I have the base model and use it for photos, video, web, etc. and it is more than enough machine to do what I need. After tons of research and going to the Apple Store to test drive the Macs I knew I would like one...turns out I like it better than I imagined.

Congrats! I was in the same boat as you and got an early Birthday/Christmas present as well trying to get by on my little G4 Mac Mini which to this day still runs like a tank. I ended up getting the 27" base model and its simply amazing! Welcome to the wonderful world of Mac - you will never go back!

 

[AppleFan360]

I have caught myself smiling at times.

It's been 2 years since my switch from Windows to Mac and I'm still smiling.

 

[Shanpdx]

it will be even more awesome once Dual Core i3 3.06Ghz or Dual Core i5 3.2Ghz goes into the iMac 21.5" in the next revision .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_future_Intel_microprocessors#Core_i3

quiter, cooler and faster

hope GPU manufacturer make the card more cooler and consume less wattage (TDP and over all watts consumed)

 

[iamthedudeman]

That's a 9% difference in processor speed all right, but processor speed is only one component of performance. Also involved are HD read-write speeds, RAM speed, bus speed, etc.... you get the idea.

It's likely much less than a 9% difference in actual computing performance.

No it's not much less than 9%. It is roughly 9%.

And no where in my post did I say that processor speeds or HD's etc don't play a role. But I fail to see your point at all when nothing was based on the processor speeds, but performance numbers. Especially since I am comparing two imacs with pre-configured specs other than the Processor. Exactly why I posting these two web sites. We are discussing imacs, are we not? And the 21.5's specifically.

Notice that the performance from the 3.06 to the 3.33 is roughly 9%. All using imacs.

http://www.winandmac.com/news/best-benchmark-imac-core-i7/

The difference of the geekbench numbers for raw processor power of 5131 and 4708 is roughly 9%.

Now notice how much a bigger HD, Graphics card, etc make a difference.

http://www.macworld.com/article/143636/2009/11/imacs_late2009_benchmarks.html

And thanks but I know that HD read-write speeds, RAM speed, and bus speed plays a factor......you get the idea.


More importantly, I am not talking about processor speeds. I was talking about performance. Not processor speed. But since you mention it, the difference in speed is actually around 11%. Not 9%.

 

[Madlem]

This is my first post here and I just got my first mac ever iMac 21.5
and I'm in love everything is working great

 

[iamthedudeman]

That's good to know. I checked out the 21.5" 3.06 iMac with ATI card at an Apple Store. I didn't notice any excessive heat. Mind you, as a store machine, it wasn't being tasked beyond people testing video and web-surfing. A very impressive machine. From your experience the 3.33 Ghz upgrade is worth the additional investment? I figured I can always add RAM later, but your stuck with the processor, right? And no problems with the bigger (Seagate?) drive either?

Well I had problems with the bigger HD which is WD. That was on my 21.5 1TB imac with the ATI card.

The HD made a low pitched sound. Annoying to say the least.

I gave my first 21.5 base to my father. He saw mine and wanted one, bad. I said I like my mac, he said he did too. I said I will give him one that is for the office since I have 12 of them there, 7 of those of the same model that I had at my house. He said if your going to do that just to give him the one at my house. I said again I like my mac, he again said he did too.

So I bought the upgraded model the 21.5 with the ATI card and 1TB HD. Handed that one back to apple for a base model with the upgraded 3.33 C2D processor. Bought a Hitachi 500GB external HD for 89.99.

The base 21.5 cost 1200, with the 3.33 C2D it cost 1400. Now for 1500 you get a 21.5 with the ATI card and a 1TB drive but the 3.06 C2D. I used the 100 i saved and bought 4GB memory for a total of 8GB.

Now for 1500 my mac has

3.33 C2D
8GB memory
500GB Hitachi HD that is silent.
9400M G

I don't play hardcore games, so for video the 9400M G matches the ATI 4670 for video playback.

http://www.macworld.com/article/143636/2009/11/imacs_late2009_benchmarks.html

as opposed to the 1500 ATI mac that has.

3.06 C2D
4GB memroy
1TB HD
ATI graphics card

For 1500 you can either have a machine with a faster processor and more RAM or a machine with a better graphics card and a bigger HD.

Now for every day computing the faster processor does make a difference and more RAM makes a difference. The 1TB drive and the better graphics card do not. Based on the numbers.

http://www.macworld.com/article/143636/2009/11/imacs_late2009_benchmarks.html
http://www.winandmac.com/news/best-benchmark-imac-core-i7/

Now if everyday computing is more important to you, you might want to go with the faster processor. If gaming is the ATI would probably be the better choice for you.

Now for a extra 100( I paid 89.99) I can add a good 500GB external drive for a total of 1TB.

Now for 1600 my setup would look like this.
3.33C2D
1TB total HD space
8GB Ram
9400M

For around 100 you can add 4GB memory to the 1500 21.5 imac with the ATI card.

Your set up would look like this.

3.06C2D
1TB total HD space
8GB Ram
ATI 4670

For 1600 the difference between the two is essentially between the faster processor and the better graphics card. Since I don't do gaming that much and use video allot more for every day tasks are more important to me. So the faster processor would be more beneficial in that task.