iMac 27in Retina with 4GB graphics

[james_de_h]

<p>I am using and still relying upon my 2009 27in 2.66GHz i5 iMac with my own home brew fusion drive that mates a Samsung 830 EVO 500GB SSD with the OEM 1TB spinner. It has 16GB of RAM and ATI Radeon HD 4850 512 MB graphics. I use both PS and LR alongside the latest MS Office. This spec and iMac are just fine for me but I am in the position where my business model allows for its replacement. The simplest solution is to go for another iMac, all of which now have Retina displays. Simple question. Should I go for the top 4GB graphics card for one simple reason. If it is the most 'powerful' option it will not have to work as hard so possibly it may run cooler? I am looking for the new mac to last as long as this one. This is about longevity and not out and out performance.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>I'm no Mac specialist, but in general: what is high performance today spells longevity. What is especially worth considering is that graphics cards are being used more and more often to speed up specific tasks - something Adobe started using in PS CS6 and extended in PS CC, and LR6 also now sports GPU acceleration. This trend will only grow "worse", sot the importance of the graphics card will certainly not decrease over time. For these operations, more graphics memory is certainly an advantage. So getting the higher end graphics is indeed more future-proof (within reason of budget obviously).</p>

[james_de_h]

<p>Thanks - the extra for the 4GB card, spread over 5 years, is actually not that great. Seems like it is the way to go.</p>

[Dave410]

<blockquote>

<p>the importance of the graphics card will certainly not decrease over time</p>

</blockquote>

<p>One pundit suggested that Apple might remove the discreet graphics card from the MacBook Pro when Skylake arrives. I sure hope that doesn't happen.</p>

[jim_a]

<p>I agree with Wouter. Finally upgrading from my 2009 Mac Pro to the Late 2015 27" iMac. I opted for the 4GB card as I tend to keep my Macs for a long time and hope the benefits of the top-end card are realized in LR and PS.</p>

<p>The <a href="http://atp.fm/episodes/141">Accidental Tech Podcast</a> guys linked to an interesting video showing the heat build up of the new iMac compared to the last iMac 27" Retina version. Apple has made improvements: <a href="

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Dave, not sure whether it is true for the MacBook Pro or not, but it is worth noting that the integrated Intel graphics have improved quite a bit, and especially the Intel Iris solutions (which I believe Apple uses) are actually as fast or faster than most low-er end mobile GPUs from AMD and Nvidia (stuff like the Geforce 740M, 930M or Radeon R3/R5 level chips). So, for most notebooks, the intel option is more energy efficient and as fast; Skylake is another step forward there. So, dropping the dedicated GPU could be a smart decision, in fact.<br>

Since the iMac uses higher-end GPU, it's worth the extra spending on a GPU, so it's a different story than the notebooks.</p>

[steven_clark]

GPU development has been stalled at 28nm for years at this point. It is very likely that a year or two

after the companies escape that node to greener pastures a high end card from now will be

outperformed by a midrange card from then. Also investing in a high end card usually does not prevent is obsolescence. Should you need features that are developed later, only new cards will have them anyway. I would not consider unused capacity an investment

in this case I think it's just insurance that their money in the Mac Pro itself stays useful for longer. On an actual desktop(which Apple no longer makes) you would just update the card.

[james_de_h]

<p>Since I started this I decided to go along and see one of these macs for myself. To be honest, the screen did not really seem much different to mine image wise but fewer reflections which is a plus. The'Genius' I had talk me through the various specs was actually not quite as clued up as I expected initially but he was really helpful and went off to talk to a supervisor to see if what I was using the mac for would call for the higher spec CPU and GPU. He came back and said 'Not necessary. Core i5 is plenty fast enough and a 2GB GPU is fine but we do not know what will be on offer software wise in 5 years. So your call.' I decided to go with 4GB and the i7 processor and 512GB SSD. The genius told me to add my own RAM to save some cash. 'It is the only bit you can swap yourself anyway.' Helpful advice. He said add two 8GB sticks and not to go the full 32GB as I will not hit the RAM ceiling. If I do, then swap out the 2x4GB Apple ram later. Still cheaper than going for 16GB. So there you go. I now have to wait for it to be delivered. I think the buy to order models are assembled locally and not in China as it takes a boat a lot longer to float over than the 10 day wait! Thanks for your help here. With any luck this machine will see me into retirement....</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Enjoy it ;-)</p>

[james_de_h]

<p>Thanks Wouter</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>Adobe has taken great strides in the utilization of GPU memory, graphic co-processing and multi-core CPUs. They can't hurt image processing, but are vital to video processing. When I upgraded from a 2G GPU to 4G, my video processing time was reduced about 30%, and I can handle 4 4,2,2 HD streams without jitter. RAM memory is probably more important to Photoshop efficiency, although I see benefits of multi processing for HDR and panorama processing.</p>