Is buying a 2012 27" imac a good idea?

[MRrainer]

I do agree that staying with Mojave is a good idea for the time being.
I've also not upgraded my 2012 i7 Mini either - I can't think of anything I'd gain by that. But I know I'd lose the Dashboard and some 32bit apps.
[automerge]1573310381[/automerge]

The imac comes with a 6 month warranty from the seller. I know its not much but its better than nothing. The main thing i care about right now is whether or not the actual computer is good. If the specs are good. Ive had a lot of mixed opinions through this thread so im not really sure whether to buy it or not. Once i know if the actual computer is good then i will decide whether or not i want to take the risk buying an older computer. Would i be better buying this: https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B01IPH2700/ref=ask_ql_qh_dp_hza?tag=macr0e-21&th=1

IMO: don't buy Gaming PCs if you want to do actual work.

I don't do any video-editing with my 2012 Mini, so I can't say.
From Geekbench, that 2012 iMac seems to be about 25% faster than my 2.3 GHz 2012 i7 Mini.
Together with the SSD and the GPU, it should be noticeably faster.

Maybe post directly in the iMac sub-forum? There might be more people who use the same machine for that purpose.

Most of the audience in this forum is US. Taxes, F/X effects and differences in availability make it very hard to come up with an adequate price and thus a recommendation for such a rather old system.

I would watch auctions on eBay and compare the closing price of similar systems.

 

[Juicy Box]

The main thing i care about right now is whether or not the actual computer is good.

If the specs are good.

The problem with your question is that "good" is relative and very subjective.

What you might think as good could be very different that what I or other people think as good.

Ive had a lot of mixed opinions through this thread so im not really sure whether to buy it or not.

This isn't surprising for the reasons above. Different people have a wide-range of thoughts on matters like this.

There will be some people that will only say that only the newest iMacs are good.

Some that will look at the fact that it is a 7 year old iMac and just say it is too old to be worth it.

Some will think that if it can get the job done without any problems, and for the price they are looking for, then age isn't a factor.

Some people will be very price sensitive, and if it is the only iMac that they can get for the price they can spend, then that is what they will get.

The point is, you might have to look at everyone's posts and see which ones are most relevant to your situation.

Once i know if the actual computer is good then i will decide whether or not i want to take the risk buying an older computer.

Again, you probably will not get a post that gets you the exact answer you are looking for.

To look at this objectively, the maxed out Late 2012 iMac with the 2GB 680MX will exceed the minimum and recommended requirements of FCP.

Final Cut Pro for Mac - Technical Specifications

Final Cut Pro is Apple’s revolutionary video editing application. Review a comprehensive list of features and specifications.

www.apple.com

It will have:
8x the minimum RAM, and 4x the recommended
Double the recommended GPU VRAM for 4K editing, 3D titles, and 360° video editing
Way more storage than what is needed

Does this mean that the maxed out Late 2012 iMac will be a speed demon? Probably not. But it will probably fit your needs for the next few years.

If you do get the Late 2012 iMac, I would suggest not using macOS 10.15, and stick with 10.14 for now, or maybe forever.

 

[hollyb96]

shall i get the 32gb of ram or do you think that will slow it down and i should stick to like 16gb or 24gb? the main thing i care about is that its fast as the laptop i have to edit on right now takes about 30 seconds to load after clicking something. thats why i think this one could be good because of the 1tb of ssd instead of hdd. will it being an older model mean that it will be slower or will it not because it has fast components in it?

 

[MRrainer]

RAM will always be faster than SSD.

I just realized that the 1 TB SSD on said iMac is very likely not an original Apple SSD but most likely a SATA SSD.
Did the seller say, which make and model it is?
Ideally, you'd want something like a Samsung 860 Pro in this.

 

[hollyb96]

Is it good that it exceeds the minimum requirements? Will that slow it down or speed up the editing process? Its hard to tell which answer to go with because one person is saying 2012 is fine and another saying i shouldnt buy a 2012 imac and i dont know anything about computers so im not sure which person to listen to. If its only going to last like 2 years and also be really slow im thinking another option might be better but if it lasts like 4 years and it pretty fast then i would be fine with buying it.
The ssd brand the seller uses is "crucial" which has good reviews online. He didnt say a model though, although i could ask?

 

[MRrainer]

Minimum Requirements are just that: the absolute minimum.

Just ask him what it would cost to upgrade to a Samsung 960 Pro.

Though, to expand on that:
Personally, I'd feel better with a late 2015 model. I'd be more optimistic for it to be "good enough" for another four years of use.
If you need to save up a couple of months for that, you should seriously consider it.

As your fellow countryman John Ruskin famously put it:

"It's unwise to pay too much, but it's worse to pay too little. "

A quote by John Ruskin

It's unwise to pay too much, but it's worse to pay too little. Whenyou pay too much, you lose a little money - that's all. When you paytoo little, you ...

www.goodreads.com

 

[hollyb96]

would it be better to buy an imac mini rather than an imac? i can get a newer imac mini for cheaper i think?
[automerge]1573345735[/automerge]
just looked at the sellers other items and he is selling a 2015 imac with these specs:

• 27-inch "5K Retina" LED-backlit display with IPS technology (5120 by 2880 resolution) • Intel Core i5 3.2GHz quad-core (6500) "Sky Lake" processor (with Turbo Boost 2.0 to 3.6GHz) • AMD Radeon R9 M380 Graphics with 2GB GDDR5 memory • 32GB DDR3 RAM • 1TB (SSD) • 720p FaceTime HD Camera • Four USB 3.0, two Thunderbolt 2, Gigabit Ethernet and SDXC card slot • Wi-Fi 802.11ac and Bluetooth 4.0 • macOS 10.13 High Sierra (Free upgrade to macOS 10.14 Mojave) • Apple wired Keyboard and mighty Mouse

is this a lot better than the 2012 one?

 

[MRrainer]

Mac Mini - you'd need a 2018. And those ain't cheap either. And then it would be lacking in the GPU department. You could buy an eGPU - but that would bring us right back to square one and Mr Ruskin...

As for that 2015 model - somebody else will have to comment on the GPU. Geekbench says it's technically slower than the 2012 i7 (because it only has the entry level CPU, I presume).
But it will be supported longer by Apple with later macOS releases. That's almost 100% sure.
But those won't make the system faster...

From this, you can see just how slow Intel has been progressing over the last decade.
It's even worse if you look at the difference between the top 2015 iMac and the top 2017 iMac.

2019 is the first year where there have been substantial year-over-year performance improvements.

 

[hollyb96]

Aw man, now i dont know what to do. Would everyone suggest i just dont get an imac then? Maybe i would be best just getting a windows computer?
[automerge]1573493707[/automerge]
Would i be best buying this 2019 imac?

2019 iMac 21.5 inch 4k, i3 3.6GHZ, 8GB DDR4, 1TB HDD - Very good condition | in London | Gumtree

2019 iMac 21.5 inch 4K Retina, i3 3.6ghz, 8gb DDR4 RAM, purchased brand new in August 2019 directly from Apple UK, still has 9 months warranty left on it. Included is wireless keyboard (without numeric keypad) and apple magic mouse 2. Original box is also included and

www.gumtree.com

 

[MRrainer]

21.5 inch models don't have user-upgradable RAM.

The truth is, depending on your work-load, there is a certain price-threshold in Apple-land below which it does not make sense buying.
That threshold is obviously lower for stuff like browsing, office etc.pp. that doesn't require a lot of RAM and IO.

This is akin to living in a big, expensive city. As long as you earn a certain amount of money, it's a nice life.
But ask the people who are below that threshold. They live in hell.

Are you going to earn money with that computer?
I don't think so, given everything we know.
As such, over-stretching yourself because of what amounts to a consumer item is not the best idea.

If you have a computer now, I would continue to use that and save up on either a new system or a used system that isn't that old. We should see a lot more 27" 2017 models hit the market next year, when Apple Care runs out for the first batch.

 

[hollyb96]

The seller is now offering a 2013 imac with GX780 4GB card. Is that good?

 

[iluvmacs99]

I have the opportunity to buy a 2012 27" imac with 32gb ram, 1tb sdd memory, 3.4ghz, intel core i7. I know the the specs are good but im worried about buying an older computer. is buying a 2012 imac a good idea or shall i try and buy a newer one with worse specs?

First of all, you need to tell us what kind of video format and footage will you be editing on and what final format will you be outputting with.

If you are dealing mainly with 4K video, then forget the 2012 to 2014 Macs of all varieties. The Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge processors have Quicksync that are several generations behind. These processors be it i5 and i7 are only good up to 1080p video. Also, the quality output of Quicksync is slightly less good under Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge, but still good for general viewing. Only from the Haswell chip (2014 Mac onwards) where you get speed and quality maintained. But with 4K video, especially if you are shooting high bitrate and high frame rates (60fps and up), you need something like an 8th generation Intel chip and up plus a capable graphics card with 8Gb of video ram to be comfortable editing 4K. 4K editing is extremely demanding as it has 4x more data than 1080p; and much more if it's higher bit rate/fps which most cameras these days like Sony mirrorless and Go Pros can output. And that's the reason why you see a lot of used iMacs from 2012 to 2013 are up for sale, because the original owners had to trade in for the current iMacs with better graphics, faster internal SSD (blade speed) and more VRAM.

In my case, I bought a Mac Pro with a Radeon RX580 which allows me to edit 4K comfortably but barely (had to use RAID 0 for SSD and HD just so the 4K won't be choppy) and then I output the files to my Macbook Air which can then use Quicksync to render the final movie quickly with great quality. With my fast Mac Pro and a fast Radeon RX580, rendering a 30min 4K video will take 2 hours. Under Quicksync, it will take less than 10 minutes. The iMacs you mentioned will take an eternity due to the aging processors. If you are mainly editing and producing 1080p content, then the iMacs are ok, though not great. Rendering times is time dependent on how current and fast the processor in your iMac can handle.

 

[bigfatipod]

You're asking a lot of basics questions (which is absolutely fine). But it leads me to think that you may want a full/normal warranty coverage plan with your new/used computer, in case you have ANY questions or problems.

 

[hollyb96]

i will only be editing 1080p videos and i cant see myself buying a 4k camera anytime soon the that wont be an issue. is this 2013 imac with with gforce GX780 4GB card better than the 2012 imac with geforce GTX 680MX Graphics with 2GB GDDR5 memory? Or is a 2015 imac with AMD Radeon R9 M380 Graphics with 2GB GDDR5 memory better than both of them? Thanks

 

[iluvmacs99]

i will only be editing 1080p videos and i cant see myself buying a 4k camera anytime soon the that wont be an issue. is this 2013 imac with with gforce GX780 4GB card better than the 2012 imac with geforce GTX 680MX Graphics with 2GB GDDR5 memory? Or is a 2015 imac with AMD Radeon R9 M380 Graphics with 2GB GDDR5 memory better than both of them? Thanks

The more video RAM you have, the more fluid when you edit the time line of your 1080p video becomes. The processor of the computer is what determines how fast you can render your finished movie to h.264 file format.

 

[hollyb96]

so 32gb RAM will mean editing will be really fast? what graphics card is best out of the list and i will ask for that (and that will be what makes rendering fast?)?

 

[iluvmacs99]

No. Computer memory only helps if you have many complex footage combined together in multiple time lines whereby your computer will run all these footages in memory and swapping them between video RAM and computer RAM without paging in and out of the hard drive or SSD. More ram doesn't make your computer faster; it just keeps your computer performing at its maximum performance. 16Gb is good enough for 1080p, so if you could get 32Gb of RAM for a small extra cost then that's always helpful. But if your budget is limited, focus on more video RAM and be content with just only 16Gb of ram.

2012 to 2013 iMacs still use the Ivy bridge processors, so they were considered fast in rendering in the 2012 to 2013 era, but is not as fast as the modern iMacs of today with the Coffee Lake and up processors. You can definitely pump out useful 1080p Youtube videos with those older Macs.

 

[hollyb96]

i didnt realise there were 2 different types of RAM. Will this imac be better than the older 2012/2013 versions?

Apple iMac 27 inch 2017 - i5 3.4GHz + 2TB SSD + 16GB RAM + RADEON 570 4GB | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Apple iMac 27 inch 2017 - i5 3.4GHz + 2TB SSD + 16GB RAM + RADEON 570 4GB at the best online prices at eBay! Free delivery for many products!

www.ebay.co.uk

Will this have more up to date features? I would've like to keep the price lower but if i can manage to get the seller to lower the price a bit would this be best? I truly know nothing about computers so sorry for all the dumb questions. I just want something that will work for video editing because the laptop i used for video editing previously couldnt handle the editor and it was impossible to edit on. Would a 2015 imac have up to date features? Thanks

 

[iluvmacs99]

i didnt realise there were 2 different types of RAM. Will this imac be better than the older 2012/2013 versions?

Apple iMac 27 inch 2017 - i5 3.4GHz + 2TB SSD + 16GB RAM + RADEON 570 4GB | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Apple iMac 27 inch 2017 - i5 3.4GHz + 2TB SSD + 16GB RAM + RADEON 570 4GB at the best online prices at eBay! Free delivery for many products!

www.ebay.co.uk

Will this have more up to date features? I would've like to keep the price lower but if i can manage to get the seller to lower the price a bit would this be best? I truly know nothing about computers so sorry for all the dumb questions. I just want something that will work for video editing because the laptop i used for video editing previously couldnt handle the editor and it was impossible to edit on. Would a 2015 imac have up to date features? Thanks

Depending on the generation of the iMacs, the newer the iMacs the newer and faster RAM they use. As I said before; past Ivy and Sandybridge processors, the Haswell, Broadwell to Coffee Lake chips (2015 and up Macs), you will get the same h.264 rendered video quality with 1080p. Which means, all you are going to get is a machine that is capable of handling 1080p editing, but the more powerful the iMacs, the faster it renders time wise. With iMovie and my old Mac Mini 2011 with only a measly 512Mb shared ram (1Gb with a hacked patch), I could easily edit 1080p videos for 8 years. Only recently I bought the Mac Pro to edit 4K videos. Most of the laptop PCs you buy today under $500 aren't really meant for serious video editing and if you are having trouble editing videos, it's probably more so due to the slow hard drive that's on the laptop rather than the processor of the laptop or the RAM (most budget PCs come with 8Gb of ram). So basically, you need a really FAST media drive (SSD or Firewire/USB3 RAID HD) to keep up with the megabytes of footage data, lots of VRAM (4Gb and above) so you have footage in your graphics card and working computer memory for 1080p which 8Gb or 16Gb of RAM is good. If you have those requirements fulfilled, then you should be fine. The only thing is how long are you willing to spend on rendering those videos as a final product, because the more powerful machine you buy would only net you maybe a few minutes faster render and a more responsive machine. A few minutes render might be good for a person running a video editing business, but probably less so for someone whose primary use for video editing is a personal hobby.

To summarize; with iMovie and those iMacs you just mentioned, you are fine with 1080p. If you are working with FCPX, then go with something like a 2015 iMac with a somewhat current chipset. If you are working with Davinci Resolve, then you would have to invest in a more current and modern iMac since this program requires a lot from the Graphics Processing Unit.

Video editing has always been a difficult subject to recommend Mac wise, because it is something that requires a huge amount of data handling, and yet is subject to the creator's needs. Basic home movie or Hollywood style movies? That's why it is so difficult for us to recommend a specific machine, because it's you who would only know. Don't focus on buying the last iMac you'll ever need, because there is no such thing as the final computer, because your video needs may change. Your hobby and direction may change and then may require a different machine just like myself. I never thought I would need 4K, then one day I played with it and edit it and that made me upgrade to a more powerful Mac platform.

 

[hollyb96]

Hi, ok its been a while and i want to thank everyone for their help. I have decided just to spend a bit more money so that they last longer. Here are my current 2 options and im not sure which to go with:
-2017 imac bought in september 2019 £1200
1tb fusion
8gb ram
radeon 575x 4gb

or

-2019 (transparently brand new) imac- asking price £1390, hoping to get it a bit cheaper
1b fusion
8gb ram
radeon 570 4gb

I will be using it for video editing. Im not sure if its worth spending a bit more to get the newer model. Im using it for video editing so im not sure if getting the 2019 model with radeon 570 will be good if if i should radeon 575 on the 2017 model. Any thoughts?

 

[honestone33]

My uses of myMacs are not very intensive, but I suspect video editing is quite involved. You might want to go with a "pure SSD" instead of a Fusion Drive. I know for my less intensive tasks, when I had the slow 1 TB, 5400 rpm drive in my late 2012 Mac Mini, it was definitely slow. Once I swapped that drive out for a 256 gig Samsung SSD (within 3 months after I purchased the machine; eventually sold the 1 TB drive), the machine flew (and still flies)!

 

[Zanc]

That spec iMac is the same that I am using, except I am using a 1TB Fusion Drive instead of just a SSD, although, there are inconsistencies in what you are posting:


Which one is it?

My iMac has the 680MX with the 2GB VRAM, and it is the best GPU that you can get for the iMac for that year, but if the one you are getting has the 675MX, then that could change things.

My iMac is a beast. I thought that I would have replaced it by now, but there is no need at this point. I don't play WoW anymore, but when I did, I was able to play it with most of the graphic settings on max. I do play WoW classic, and I play that with all the graphic settings to the max.

While I do not do too much video editing anymore, when I did it seem to perform well. It encodes video pretty quickly too.

A side note, I am still on macOS 10.13 and probably will be parked here for a while, although it is capable of having the lasted OS, at least for now.

Another good thing about this model is that it is able to do Target Display Mode, which turns your iMac into an external display for other Macs. This is something that newer iMac cannot do.

Overall, I would highly recommend someone getting a high-end Late 2012 iMac if they are trying to save some money, but still want a decent Mac.


But.........



This seems a little high for it. I understand that people might look at that price and then say try to get something newer, but I don't know what the Mac market is like where you live, so maybe that price is decent.

Maybe look around before jumping on the deal you found, because it is a 7 year old Mac.

But, then again, I wouldn't sell mine for less than $1,000 based off of what it can still do for me. I doubt I would be able to find a buyer quickly, but I wouldn't let it go for any less.

A bit late in responding, but I wouldn't spend much on such an old Mac. I have a late 2012 i7 iMac and the graphics chip has just died. The cost of replacing the motherboard is just not worth it. I would not take the risk of buying a used iMac of that vintage to find it dies in few days/weeks/months.

 

[Juicy Box]

This thread is old and there has been a lot of recent changes that would change a lot of people's opinions that they have made previously, but given the right price, a Late 2012 iMac with the i7 might still be a good deal for many.

A bit late in responding

Yeah, I doubt we will hear from the OP and find out what she ended up doing, I think she created an account just for this thread, and hasn't been active in a while.

I have a late 2012 i7 iMac and the graphics chip has just died. The cost of replacing the motherboard is just not worth it. I would not take the risk of buying a used iMac of that vintage to find it dies in few days/weeks/months.

There is definitely risk involved when buying used, but the price is good, it should reflect the risk.

My base model Mid-2007 iMac's GPU just recently failed a few weeks ago. I bought it used for my parents back in 2011 for $250 (I think).

It lasted for almost ten years, so I think it was worth it.

I have had failures on Macs I have purchased new, and have purchased used Macs that have lasted 20+ years without any issues. (look at my sig, I still have almost all of those Macs, and almost all of them still work)

I have a late 2012 i7 iMac and the graphics chip has just died.

When it comes to the Late 2012, they are not known to have widespread GPU issues, so that would be a lower risk if anyone wanted to buy one. There were high HDD failure rates and delimitation issues with the Late 2012 iMacs, but luckily, GPUs were not really an issue.

The Late 2012 iMac that the OP was interested in had a SSD, so this might reduce the chances of any potential heat related failures of a GPU.

I would not take the risk of buying a used iMac of that vintage to find it dies in few days/weeks/months.

For me, it might be worth the risk. Depending on what the user is looking to do, a used Mac might perform more than adequate for their needs, while not having to spend $$$$ for a new Mac.

I recently purchase an M1 Mac Mini to replace my Late 2011 17" MBP, and I have been testing the performance of it compared to some of my older Macs.

The Late 2012 with the 3rd gen i7 still performs really, really well, depending on what you want to do with it.

For Handbrake, I encoded a ripped DVD of the movie Clueless (1995), and compared the times and average FPS of the encode using my Late 2011 17" MBP with the 2nd gen i7, Late 2012 iMac with the 3rd gen i7, and the M1.

Using the Apple 720p30 preset, this is the results:
Late 2011 17" MBP - 87 FPS
Late 2012 27" iMac - 133 FPS
M1 Mac Mini - 267 FPS

Clearly the M1 is faster than the iMac, but when considering that the iMac is 9 years old, the difference isn't as much as I thought it would be. The iMac performed about 50% of the speed of the M1.

When I changed the settings of the encoder from Medium to Placebo, the gap started to closed between the iMac and the M1:
Late 2011 17" MBP - 7 FPS
Late 2012 27" iMac - 10 FPS
M1 Mac Mini - 15 FPS

For tougher encodes, the old 3rd gen i7 was 66% the speed of the brand new Mac Mini.

Clearly the M1 Mac Mini is faster, but not a huge, dramatic difference considering the age of the iMac, at least when it comes to encoding.

For GPU performance, using WoW, with setting set on the highest settings, the 2GB 680MX in my iMac had about half the average FPS to the M1 with the same settings. I didn't compare the MBP because I cannot run WoW in MacOS on it anymore, and in Windows, I cannot get a playable frame rate even close to the highest settings.

The point of all this is that the performance that the Late 2012 iMac still provides (with the BTO specs), and the gorgeous display that is comes with could be worth the risk of a potential failure if the price is right, imo.

 

[KennyJr]

I have 2 iMacs. The newer one has Retina display (first used on the 2014 27" iMac) - My older iMac is non-retina.

I recently bought a Mac Mini M1. Using the older iMac as a Mac Mini M1 display, what I see is disappointing. Using the newer iMac with Retina display it's a different story, It looks really good.

This may be a something worthy of consideration.