I've actually got a 2 TB Fusion, (128 GB SSD) and get the same. I'm ok with the speed difference on wake and boot — and in every other task the Fusion Drive has felt about as fast. I don't mind the trade-off rather than having a bunch of slower external disks, just surprised reviewers all described it as the same.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Late 2015 iMac 5K is a BEAST.
- Thread starter joshwithachance
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I made the MASSIVE mistake of buying the 5400 rpm 4K iMac last year, and this fusion drive is a GODSEND in comparison. I've had no issues in opening programs, having multiple programs open, or video editing in Final Cut which is awesome.
A 27" 5K display is a BEAST, an iMac 5K is a BEAST and not just for display.
Mobile components are a plus.
Everyone is entitled to their opinions but I do agree with you, I think the 5k machine is a beast. I don't care if its using mobile components or not. It holds it own on the Mac Pro and yet has a gorgeous 5k display on top of the processing power.
Explain further .... Just how are mobile comments a plus in this 'beast'.
[doublepost=1457618098][/doublepost]
the Mac Pro isn't a beast either - I have one. I used both Macs and PC's and PC wins every time in terms of performance and scalability.
Sorry to burst your bubble guys but Apple don't make beasts. Just look at the specs of the Z840 and the Dell 7910. they might be pig ugly, but they have specs that we could call a beast.
It's like getting yourself a BMW M3 and calling it a beast in a carpark full of nitro-fuelled monster trucks.
You're not bursting my bubble, because your comment about it not being a beast is your opinion. I'm happy with its performance and nothing you say will dissuade me so basically, to me, it is a beast.
You disagree, that's fine, you can buy something that fits your needs better and those of us who like the mac will be here enjoying our machines.
As you've already made it clear a multi-processor tower workstation is the only computer which fits your definition of "beast", all you're doing here is trolling. Yes, the iMac is an all-in-one computer and has limitations as such, and may not be a perfect fit for your usage, but for many of us here it's more than adequate for our usage, as well as being a fast computer with a stunning 5K display.
Everyone meet Shaunp the almighty savior that has the last judgement on anything being a beast or not. Please email him your resume and he will let you know if your a beast or not
The screen will kind of just make you fall in love.
I'm surprised your 1 tb fusion drive works. No I'm happy for you. I wasn't sure if the small SSD space would be a problem. Glad it isn't for you.
Well I don't game. lol. Actually if you want to know the truth I hate gaming.
I think gaming rigs are disgusting, and would never want one. Keep it. To the person who hates Apple, maybe one day you'll understand its appeal. Until then, why hate so much on a board?
Look, the point is an iMac will outperform a PC with better 'specs'. I've seen it.
I think you misunderstand me. I don't hate apple at all - I'm writing this on a nMP and my laptop is a rMBP. I just don't think the iMac can be labelled a beast. I don't think my nMP is a beast either. It's not trolling, it's just Apple don't make high-end kit. They make very nice consumer-level computers. There's not hate, more amusement at the iMac being labelled a beast.
As for the iMac outperforming a PC with better specs, please explain. That's quite a bold statement. If you are talking about all in one computers from Dell and HP then I'd agree with you, but PC's in general? No way. This isn't trolling, just fact. There's no 8-core option on the iMac, certainly no equivalent of say a GTX 980 Ti. I won't compare SLI or Cross Fire configs as that would be unfair. Both PC's and the iMac can have PCIe SSD. Where exactly is the performance of the iMac better?
This whole 'beast' statement was made in reference to the performance of the iMac, not to how it looks. So let's put looks to one side and look at pure performance, as yes the iMac is prettier than any PC, but that won't make it go faster.. The iMac in performance terms is just an average computer. Nothing more. It's very well packaged with an exceptional screen, but performance is average. It can't be any more than that given the components inside it.
Anyway I'm bored of this thread now. Have fun with your beasts boys. I'm sure they are lovely.
[doublepost=1457648302][/doublepost]
You don't need to bother, I already know that you aren't a beast.
[doublepost=1457648367][/doublepost]
Not trolling. Just amused at the reactions. Anyway, enjoy your beast.
You don't need to bother, I already know that you aren't a beast.
[doublepost=1457648367][/doublepost]
Gutted
Why are expensive, slow, mobile components a plus in a desktop that's
improperly ventilated and throttles down it's performance under moderate use?
I'm not bored any more, so I'll start posting again. Still confused?
Right so let's have this out. I say the iMac is not a beast, many of you say it is. Tell me why you think it is, but let's analyse the components...
Screen, very nice, but Dell make one too.
CPU - Apparently an i7 6700k a good CPU, but in general terms not that fast. Try finding it on here https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html Its' 59th on the list.
GPU M395X. A laptop GPU As the iMac is a desktop I'll compare it agains other desktop GPU's, but I'll go easy on you. Compare it to the GTX 780, a 3 year old GPU http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html The GTX 780 is significantly faster. And it's 3 years old.
SSD - nothing special, most new PC's have PCIe SSD, some have 2 slots.
RAM - DDR3, PC's have DDR4 now.
Just so there's not further confusion, I like the iMac, it's a really nice package, but when you look at the components it is average. Nothing more. The screen is amazing and people think that's equates to the rest of the machine being amazing, which is isn't. It's very nice, but nothing spectacular compared to other desktops, and we do have to compare it to other desktops if you are calling it a beast.
Now a few of you have said everyone has a different concept of what is a beast, but wouldn't this mean the best performing if we are talking about computers? So given the facts, the components that are in there, tell me why it is a beast. Very interested to know what makes you think this.
Or to put it another way if these were cats what some of you think is a beast would be a little kitten chasing around a ball of wool, mine would be a Bengal Tiger that would rip your head off and then eat you.
I'll take an M3 over a monster truck any day of the week.
shaunp, People have different needs mmmmmk...? Hardware designers have different goals mmmmmk....? Beastness should only be evaluated against those criteria mmmmmk....?
For sillyness sake, you think your PC is a beast? My SUPERCOMPUTER that is the size of OF YOUR HOUSE and consumes the ELECTRICITY EQUIVALENT OF YOUR TOWN rips your PCs balls of and feeds them to its iPad.
For sillyness sake, you think your PC is a beast? My SUPERCOMPUTER that is the size of OF YOUR HOUSE and consumes the ELECTRICITY EQUIVALENT OF YOUR TOWN rips your PCs balls of and feeds them to its iPad.
I have a nMP, not a PC. And yes I know people have different needs. I never disputed that.
None of this however answers why you think the iMac is a beast... I've said why it isn't, please tell me why it is.... I'm listening.
[doublepost=1457705358][/doublepost]
I would too.
Hey shaun, maybe one day you'll understand that what you call 'beast' is a relative term. ok.
Depending on who you talk to the 27 iMac can either be a beast or not, depending on a variety of factors. But to say it's NEVER a beast is simply incorrect.
What about someone like me who has never opened Aperture, Final Cut, etc in their life. Because they don't do any of the things that the apps do. This computer is frankly beast enough because I don't do anything intensive on it.
And even for the people that do do high performance stuff on it. Like Final Cut. It's still a beast. Because it can beat the hell out of Final Cut.
Look your idea of 'only a $5k Dell is a beast LOL hehehe' is just frankly childish. No, that's one of the higher spec'd computers available on the market. It's a beast, sure. Doesn't mean others can't be as well.
Frankly for many users on this forum this computer can, in fact, be categorized as a 'beast'. And I'm even talking about the professional users.
Maybe I'm responding to a troll but I'll set the record straight.
Are there better spec'd All-in-Ones out there? I really have never looked at a Windows AIO before so I'm curious.
I really wanted to want to buy the retina iMac last year and the year before. I think almost everything about the machine is awesome: the design, the display, CPU, SSD, you name it. And of course all those little things that one takes for granted in Macs, like integrated BT and Wifi. These are not always included your average tower. And of course OS X.
The only reason why I didn't buy was the GPU. If it would have had the 980M I would've went for it. But it had the AMD GPU that was a bit slower than I wanted and also seemed to have at least the possibility of some heat issues and throttling.
It is truly a beast of an all-in-one for non-gamers and a solid choice for casual gamers who want/need to buy a Mac.
I too almost purchased the 5k iMac last year. I'm glad I did, because I think the Skylake processors give me more bang for my buck. They seem to run a lot cooler then last year's model.
I've said this in other threads, this iMac is the very best computer I've purchased. I'm really happy with it and I have no regrets