iMac anyone????

[kdog4130]

Well, I am two weeks away from making the transition from PC to Mac, and have two models in mind.

1. iMac w/24" display, 2.8ghz Intel Core 2 Duo

2. iMac w/24" display, 3.06ghz Intel Core 2 Dou


#2 has a slightly faster video card, and more memory out of the box, however is another $500.00


So, my question is.......who has one of these, and is it really worth the extra money, considering I do not game on it. Thanks!

[Jordansrealm]

I do not game but being a photographer I want the best graphics I can get and also the most memory for processing very large images and also a decent amount of storage space. I have the 24-inch iMac with 2.8, the 2.0 was not available when I bought this one or I would have got it. I dont know if you do anything that requires the "extra" like I do but I felt it was worth the cost. Either way you are getting one of the best computers money can buy.

[kdog4130]

Originally Posted by Jordansrealm

I do not game but being a photographer I want the best graphics I can get and also the most memory for processing very large images and also a decent amount of storage space. I have the 24-inch iMac with 2.8, the 2.0 was not available when I bought this one or I would have got it. I dont know if you do anything that requires the "extra" like I do but I felt it was worth the cost. Either way you are getting one of the best computers money can buy.

I do actually process very large Raw format image files. So, is the 2.8 enough, or is the 3.0 a better way to go, from a photographers standpoint??

[Tedroy]

The mac is just a joy to use. Whatever config you end up with, you won't be sorry.

[KeepsWhatHappens]

How much more memory does #2 come with?

[mottmcfly]

Originally Posted by kdog4130

I do actually process very large Raw format image files. So, is the 2.8 enough, or is the 3.0 a better way to go, from a photographers standpoint??

If you are going to process a lot of raw data the processor speed is important but the amount of memory is just as important. Going to 3.0 might be more of an issue when working with video rendering. I would go big on everything.

[Jordansrealm]

Originally Posted by kdog4130

I do actually process very large Raw format image files. So, is the 2.8 enough, or is the 3.0 a better way to go, from a photographers standpoint??

As a photog I would say more is better. If you can buy more memory as well and load it up. You can buy aftermarket memory that is MUCH cheaper than buying it from Apple though. Still not sure for you if the $500 is worth it. If you process the occasional RAW file you wont need it but if you are like me and deal with 100s a week then you need anything you can get.

I am looking at a 30-inch monitor and a Mac Pro next. Just dont have a spare $10k laying around for the setup I want haha

[HBeric]

You'll be fine with the 2.8 ghz, but if you have that extra $500, and it is burning a hole in your pocket, you'll be extra fine with the 3.06 ghz. For the most part though, the difference between the 2.8 ghz and the 3.06 ghz is barely noticeable.

As you don't game, I wouldn't be all that concerned by their difference in video cards. The 256 MB card in the 2.8 ghz iMac will be plenty (I get very solid frame rates while playing WOW with the same card). Crunching the data of your raw images will have a lot more to do with processor speed and ram than anything else.

I have a 24" iMac with the 2.4 ghz Intel processor and I have been extremely satisfied with its performance in every way. I bought the computer with HD video editing in mind, and it performs flawlessly (and speedy) in this regard.

I do recommend maxing out the ram on whatever system you decide to buy (especially if you plan to run XP or Vista using Parallels or VMware Fustion).

I DO NOT recommend buying ram from Apple. Buy the iMac with the minimum amount of ram (you're likely going to toss out the single or dual 1 gig sticks of ram and replace them with two 2 gig sticks anyway), then buy 4 gigs from a supplier of quality ram online. Crucial is a great place to shop for Apple compatible ram. I paid about $80 for 4 gigs of ram from Crucial. If I remember correctly, Apple was charging at least 4 times that amount for 4 gigs.

Good luck and keep us posted on what you decide.

Eric

[mcinvale]

HBeric sounds like he knows what he's talking about.... well, with everything except that WOW comment.

[RustyIron]

My wife has the 2.8 GHz, 24". It rocks.

I used to think that my 30" Cinema Display was the ultimate, and it still is in regards to size, but the color displayed by the new iMacs blows my Cinema Display out of the water.

You WILL be happy.