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

Would i see a difference from 17"imac to a mini??

O

oldnslow

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Mar 15, 2007
26
0
I have a 17" imac (early 2006) 1.83ghz with 2gb ram. If i wanted to get away from an imac what mac mini with options do you suggest and would i see any performance increase from what i have now. Mostly what i do is edit lots of photos with iphoto and aperture, also if going with a mini, what monitor would you suggest in the 20-24 inch size and in the 350.00 to 400.00 range.

David
 
You will definitely notice a speed boost. The Mac mini's processor is better, but not all that much. The new Mac mini also has DDR3 ram. It also have an NVIDIA 9400M, which is a lot better than your current graphics.

Does your iMac have the Intel Core Duo or intel Core 2 Duo?
 
dukebound85 said:
you wont see that huge of a jump cpu wise tbh
Click to expand...

i disagree, because you cant just tell the difference like that. its the whole overall system. the experience will be a LOT better because the RAM is faster, CPU is faster/newer technology/GPU is way better/HD is better etcetc...

i think you will notice a very nice speed bump :)
 
I have the exact same iMac. It's the Core Duo. My machine is getting old but still is my main hub for all things media related for my house. I think you should just look into a new iMac because the ram is upgradeable and the you won't have to spend extra on a monitor.
 
DoFoT9 said:
i disagree, because you cant just tell the difference like that. its the whole overall system. the experience will be a LOT better because the RAM is faster, CPU is faster/newer technology/GPU is way better/HD is better etcetc...

i think you will notice a very nice speed bump :)
Click to expand...

and here i am with a cd blackbook which aside from ripping movies, doesnt perform noticeable slower for the majority of tasks than my quad core beast i built within the year.

just my thoughts of course
 
Eidorian said:
Believe it. I'm serious. My old iMac Core Duo is lightning compared to my Macbook when it comes to disk access.
Click to expand...

looks like ill have to believe you haha, because i dont have a CD desktop machine...

dukebound85 said:
and here i am with a cd blackbook which aside from ripping movies, doesnt perform noticeable slower for the majority of tasks than my quad core beast i built within the year.

just my thoughts of course
Click to expand...

nah ok, the average user wouldnt notice it. i notice it with things such as opening Dashboard, opening files, waiting for the disks to spin up, as well as a bunch of other things.
 
So are guys saying that if i optioned either a 2.0 or 2.26 mini with 4gb ram and a 7200 rpm hdd i would not see much difference in what i have!!!

David
 
oldnslow said:
So are guys saying that if i optioned either a 2.0 or 2.26 mini with 4gb ram and a 7200 rpm hdd i would not see much difference in what i have!!!

David
Click to expand...

Nor was I.
You will definitely notice a difference if it has a 2.26GHz C2D and 4GB ram.
 
The difference will definitely be noticeable, even with the base model of just 2.0ghz.
 
My personal opinion. If you're looking at a mini for the form factor- ie. size etc. Then it's a good option. But seeing that you already have an iMac. Upgrade to the new iMac. You'll be spending 600+ on a mini, then another few hundred to get a decent sized monitor. Say, a 24" will run you 250. You're already up to 850 before ram and hard drive upgrades. If you purchase a new iMac, it'll only be a little more, and you'll have a really nice screen built right in. Not to mention the iMac standard comes with more hard drive space and more ram. Just my 2 pesos-for what my opinions worth.

edit- The big difference you're going to be seeing is once snow leopard comes out. It will take advantage of these CPU upgrades.
 
While its true that 3.5" hard drives are faster than 2.5" hard drives, there's also a factor of data density to be considered. I.e. a 1.5TB desktop drive is faster than a 500GB desktop drive. Honestly, if you get a 320GB or 500GB 7200rpm drive for the mini, it'll probably have performance approximately on a par with the hard drive in the iMac. The data density of a 320GB or 500GB drive is considerably higher than the data density on an equivalent sized 3.5GB drive.

Your best bet, in my opinion, is to get a stock mac Mini and throw in a large, fast hard drive and 4GB of RAM.

You can pick up a Dell 24" monitor for $349. You might want to consider getting a 24" iMac like people have mentioned though.
 
I'd stick with the iMac until it either broke down or no longer served my needs. I'd also look into lengthening its shelf life with either a ram or hd upgrade (which looks to be a b$#(h from the guides I've seen online) before I got a new system.

I'm chugging along with a white c2d 20" imac for my office, hooked up to a second monitor, and I honestly have no desire to shell out the money for a new system.

I wouldn't consider myself a mac oldtimer by any means, but I did come on board during the last few years of the PPC era. Besides the security and stability of the OS, what attracted me to the platform was the number of guys I knew using macs to make a (non graphic or video arts) living who were contentedly working away on two or three year old machines. This was due partially to the ppc upgrade cycle (why spend thousands on a new machine with 500 extra mhz) which contrasted nicely to the newer, better, faster upgrade every 6-18 months pc mentality, complete with windows revisions that forced you into a new machine.

Unless you have scads of disposable income that you want to throw into a new machine (and God bless you on behalf of the economy) or have a job where you're losing potential income with every processor cycle, why switch?
 
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