49 replies to this topic 2 votes

[Timan]

Alright a little back story first.

I used to be an iMac user (2005-2008), well in 2008 I bought the Mac Pro (8core 2.8ghz xeon), and I have not had to replace my computer since. Still feels pretty fast and snappy, gaming is average (I do use bootcamp a ton). So now the new iMacs are coming out and I'm wondering if its time to upgrade again, and if the new imacs are noticabily faster than what I currently have.

Here are my current specs:

Mac Pro 2008 (30" display near same res as the 27" iMac so no biggie there)

Processor 2 x 2.8 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon

Memory 10 GB 800 MHz DDR2 FB-DIMM

Graphics ATI Radeon HD 5770 1024 MB

Storage Crucial c300 SSD 128gb + 1TB Samsung 7200rpm

Heres what I'm looking to get:

iMac 27" LED Display 2560x1440 resolution

Processor 3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz

Memory 24GB (2x4GB Apple, 2x8GB Expercom) 1600MHz DDR3 RAM

Graphics NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5

Storage 1TB Fusion Drive

So if anyone has any ideas in terms of the new cpu's and their performance vs the xeon's, same with the memory and graphics.

Am kinda afraid of going to a fusion (Software solution eeeeek), where as now I just use my ssd for everything, then media on the regular drive.

Anyway, thanks for the help, hopefully

[+articuno1au]

Personally I think you should get off the iSheep trip and buy a real machine.

Right click. Macs stole it from PCs.

PCs 1, Macs 0.

EDIT::
Also, Dark Side Theme Forever.

[Timan]

Yea, NO WAY in hell, will I buy a pc. Will buy a Mac, and use Windows on bootcamp when needed.

You're gonna get banned for that darkside comment!!!!!!

[+articuno1au]

He only hits me because he loves me :'(

Honestly, if you have the money, it's clear you already want to do it.

This kind of thing isn't about need, it's a want. It's purely an economic decision

Also, Fusion is kinda I'd rather do what you're doing now and handle it all manually.

[hckngrtfakt]

CPU wise, you will not see much of a difference, as those dual Xeons are on par with the i7,
neither on the "fusion" drive specially when compared to a standalone SSD+hdd configuration
(assuming the SSD is dedicated to the OS, and program data is on the HDD)

Ram, not so much, as the one on the PRO i assume it should be ECC (ddr3) even if is just 10gb
should run "more stable" than the 24gb on the new iMac

Graphics wise is where you would notice most of the difference, as the 680MX is technically a downclocked version of the 680
(very good card specially when compared to the 5770, but it all depends on what "gaming" you'll be doing)

All in all, it all comes down to what you want and what you're willing to trade off in terms of performance (or bottlenecks, such as the Fusion drive)

[kevpan815]

I just boosted my RAM on my Mid Year 2010 Mac Mini from 2 GB's to 8 GB's and still don't notice any real faster speed difference just yet other than the fact that it is no longer creating so many so called Recovered (Temp) Files on Boot Up to ML and/or Boot Camp.

I am hoping to see a better Speed Difference after I order my SSD from either Godaddy.com or Crucial.com. Just FYI.

kevpan815, on 29 November 2012 - 18:34, said:

I just boosted my RAM on my Mid Year 2010 Mac Mini from 2 GB's to 8 GB's and still don't notice any real faster speed difference just yet other than the fact that it is no longer creating so many so called Recovered (Temp) Files on Boot Up to ML and/or Boot Camp.

I am hoping to see a better Speed Difference after I order my SSD from either Newegg.com or Crucial.com. Just FYI.

Correction: Newegg.com or Crucial.com. This is the second time in 24 hours that I had to make such a Correction. My Bad. :-)

[Timan]

Anyone know where I could get benchmarks to compare the two cpus? Not even sure what model i7 is in the new iMacs

[.Neo]

articuno1au, on 29 November 2012 - 15:06, said:

Also, Fusion is kinda I'd rather do what you're doing now and handle it all manually.

Handling everything manually won't make you look more interesting, nor will anyone question your masculinity for allowing the OS to do these things. But if you really really want to let your inner geek out you can always disable the software handling "Fusion Drive" and get two serperate drives: 128 GB SSD + 1TB HDD.

[PyX]

If I had the money and a non-27 inch iMac at the moment, I would jump on it. The Fusion drive looks so promising, it's almost unbelievable. I do trust Apple's solution when I look at the benchmarks it gives.

[.Neo]

I decided on the exact same machine as you and just wired the money. Another 3-4 weeks before it ships, dammit.

Attached Images

• 

[+Chicane-UK]

Back on topic - is there no official Apple sanctioned graphics card upgrades available? Sure those dual xeons are going to be still pretty decent even compared to the i7's... I'd guess only the graphics would really be holding you back unless you were a SERIOUS gamer.

I guess the RAM only being DDR2 would hold you back performance wise though... that said my Wintel PC only has a single Intel Core 2 Quad with DDR2 but a semi-reasonable graphics card and I'm able to play stuff like Battlefield 3 at 1080p and pretty high detail... so maybe it is just the graphics holding you back?

Edited by Charisma, 30 November 2012 - 15:15.
: Removed reference to a deleted/troll post

[neufuse]

well if there is no way in hell you will buy a PC then what are you going to buy? that iMac is a personal computer sorry I am just picking on you

[threetonesun]

Depends what you're doing with it. For safari, no, not faster. Outside of gaming I don't imagine you're maxing out that Pro very often.

[Timan]

.Neo, on 30 November 2012 - 13:57, said:

I decided on the exact same machine as you and just wired the money. Another 3-4 weeks before it ships, dammit.

Yep, went ahead and pulled the trigger, same specs. Now the fun part at selling my old machine!

[.Neo]

Chicane-UK, on 30 November 2012 - 14:31, said:

Sure those dual xeons are going to be still pretty decent even compared to the i7's... I'd guess only the graphics would really be holding you back unless you were a SERIOUS gamer.

People should keep in mind that the 2008 Mac Pro has Xeon processors based on the Core 2 Duo/Quad architecture. The 2009 Mac Pro introduced Nehalem (first generation Core i7). In that light it could very well be that the 3,4 GHz Core i7 iMac outperforms his 2008 Mac Pro.

From what I remember from back in the day my 2010 2,93 GHz Core i7 iMac already had higher benchmarks than a friend's 8-core 2008 Mac Pro, but don't quote me on it.