Which iMac Should I get?

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>Aside from what I pointed out above, Andy, I believe you about the iMac performance differences you stated. Not too many folks have the opportunity to have access to those systems to compare, so it's much appreciated that you divulged what you found in your review.</p>

<p>It's just you started piling on other non-important facts about your background as if we all doubted your expertise which pointed to a sign on your part of defensiveness.</p>

<p>Debating isn't a sign of doubting someone's knowledge on a subject no matter how often it's misinterpreted that way. But that 's the internet for ya'.</p>

[simon_crofts]

<p>Does the larger screen slow down the processing speed to some extent? System resources spent on redrawing the screen etc.</p>

<p>Also, anyone know whether any form of wireless screen is possible nowadays? I was thinking of something like an iPad only a bit bigger and without the delay in redrawing. I'm guessing wireless bandwidth makes that impossible, but it would be great if it were possible.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>Tim, you're right, that was overplayed. What I was trying to convey was that I was writing from the perspective of having data to back up my advice.</p>

<p>Simon, good question. The stress on the system from maintaining a larger frame buffer is shifted to the video card and all of the ones available in the current iMacs are more than enough to handle these screen resolutions. OSX actually offloads many of the interface drawing functions to the video card too by making extensive use of OpenGL. If you do plan on using video card intensive features (3D apps and games for example) or OpenCL (if you want to run Aperture for example) and have the budget for it, the higher model with the higher end video card with more memory might be a good choice, but most of the time it's not necessary. I have a PC at home that can easily handle a 1600x1200 screen, a 1920x1200 screen and a 1366x768 screen <em>at the same time</em> while Photoshopping and playing video despite having a video card and CPU that are both weaker than the ATI 6770 in the entry level 27" iMac.</p>

<p>Wireless monitors - I've seen a couple of computer specific solutions that do not give high resolution. More recently some companies have wireless HDMI bridges (Amazon search for wireless hdmi or wireless display) but AFAIK nobody's got anything for DisplayPort. There are some ways starting to show up to use an iPad with a Mac or PC, like the iPad Photoshop control apps. Then there's AirPlay - Apple's video-over-wireless tech, the usefulness of which they seem to be increasing. Right now it streams video from an Apple device or Mac with iTunes to an AppleTV or compatible AV device, but it appears as though the next version of iOS gives it more functionality. The people who have a copy are under NDA but they've been able to say so far that they've been able to do things like send a mirror of an iPad's video over wireless to an AppleTV, so I wouldn't put it past them to have an iPad acting as a display for a Mac soon.</p>

[walkertexasranger]

<p>Ok guys I have come down to 3 decisions; all of them are a model of the 27in iMac and whichever one I choose I am going to buy 16Gb of aftermarket memory. Which one would you buy?<br>

1. The standard 27-inch:</p>

<ul >

<li >2.7GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5 </li>

<li >2560 x 1440 resolution </li>

<li >1TB hard drive¹ </li>

<li >AMD Radeon HD 6770M with 512MB </li>

</ul>

<p >$1,699.00<br>

2. The middle of the road 27-inch:</p>

<ul >

<li >3.1GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5 </li>

<li >2560 x 1440 resolution </li>

<li >1TB hard drive¹ </li>

<li >AMD Radeon HD 6970M with 1GB </li>

</ul>

<p >$1,999.00</p>

<p >3. The top of the line 27-inch:</p>

 

<li id="coherent_id_147" >3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7</li>

 

<li >2560 x 1440 resolution </li>

<li id="coherent_id_149">1TB Serial ATA Drive</li>

<li id="coherent_id_150" >AMD Radeon HD 6970M with 2GB </li>

<p id="coherent_id_25" >$2,299.00</p>

<p >On all models you would have to add $200.00 for the 16Gb of memory.</p>

<p >Well what is yall's opinion? Should I save some cash and go with the standard model and buy photo software? Or should I spend the extra and get the best one? I am in need of guidance.</p>

<p >Thanks!</p>

<p id="coherent_id_26" > </p>

<p > </p>

[mdma]

<blockquote>

<p>Well what is yall's opinion? Should I save some cash and go with the standard model and buy photo software?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Without software, hardware is just abstract statistics and fancy engineering. Option 1. </p>

[andylynn]

I agree - unless you'll need the video card upgrade. The more powerful video card will be useful if you want to run 3D

games or 3D modeling, of anything that makes heavy use of OpenCL (if you plan to spend a lot of time using Aperture,

or get the new version of Final Cut Studio). Btw I'd recommend Aperture to anybody running a Mac and doing a lot of

shooting, who doesn't already have a strong preference for some other primary app like Lightroom, and it's a great

deal at $80 from the App Store.

[walkertexasranger]

<p>So you seem to understand computers pretty well Andy, which iMac do you think I should get?</p>

[photo5]

<p>get the $2299 one. you won't miss the money and you will love the power.</p>