Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

allozebad · Oct 7, 2007, 05:17 PM

Hello all experts,

This is my first post so please forgive the ignorance that may arise from my questions.
I am about to order my very first Mac. My main uses will be Office stuff, Photoshop (which I use quite in depth), and I also want to learn video editing. I just bought a Canon HV20 so my videos would be in HD. I would like to use this opportunity to learn some professional tools, so I am interested in more than just iMove. I'll probably play with Final Cut PRo and Motion at the least. So here are my questions:

- Do you guys feel it's worth spending the extra $250 to go with the 2.8ghz?

- I was told by a guy at the Apple store that I can't buy the iMac with 1Gb RAM and add 2Gb (I intent to buy them from a third party given the outrageous prices Apple has for RAM). He told me I cannot do that and the memory MUST be paired (so I can have 2x1 Gb or 2x2Gb, but not a 1Gb stick and a 2Gb stick at the same time). Is this correct?

- Is it worth going all out and getting 4Gigs of RAM? or should I start with 2Gbs and see how it performs?

- Should I spend the extra $100 for the 500Gb hard drive instead of the 320? I already have a 500Gig 7200 rpm external hard drive with 300 gigs available on it, so I do have quite a bit of space right now, but I'm just wondering if the performance is really better with an internal HDD.

Thank you so much in advance!

Veltliner · Oct 7, 2007, 05:35 PM

I'd rather spend money on more RAM than on a slightly faster processor.

A larger main hard drive is a good idea.

As a Photoshop user, check for the glossy display/color accuracy issue. Due to reflections it'll will be harder for your to do accurate work, and the calibration is impossible if the room isn't completely darkened. Google "iMac glossy display" and "color calibration".

No matter what other answers you will get here, the display issue is a serious issue, and you should research it for yourself. I'd recommend either a MacPro plus cinema display or a matte display white iMac.

mduell · Oct 7, 2007, 05:45 PM

- No.

- No.

- Yes.

- No.

selowitch · Oct 7, 2007, 06:02 PM

Actually, I'm pretty sure that while the iMac will physically accept up to 2 1GB SO-DIMMs, it can only actually address (i.e., use) 3GB of that RAM, and from your thread title, I assume you are talking about an iMac....

-Sam

adamfishercox · Oct 7, 2007, 06:11 PM

the new iMacs can address 4 GBs of RAM.

selowitch · Oct 7, 2007, 06:15 PM

Originally Posted by adamfishercox

the new iMacs can address 4 GBs of RAM.

Ooooh. Well, okay, I stand corrected. But it was true of my October 2006 iMac C2D 20" anyway.... ;-)

adamfishercox · Oct 7, 2007, 06:17 PM

Yes it is. And my Core Duo can only address 2

allozebad · Oct 7, 2007, 07:27 PM

Originally Posted by Veltliner

No matter what other answers you will get here, the display issue is a serious issue, and you should research it for yourself. I'd recommend either a MacPro plus cinema display or a matte display white iMac.

Thanks Veltliner. I actually do like the matte screens a lot more. But wouldn't I give up quite a bit of performance by choosing the older iMacs? I realize my first post wasn't clear, I am indeed looking at the iMacs (not any mac, I can't afford the mac pro as my budget is about $2200).

adamfishercox · Oct 7, 2007, 07:47 PM

You will give up hardly any noticeable performance by going with an old iMac. Just put in some more RAM and you'll be fine.

Chongo · Oct 7, 2007, 09:31 PM

I have 4 Gbs of RAM (2x2) I purchased from Other World Computing. It cost me a little over $250

Gankdawg · Oct 8, 2007, 09:17 AM

Originally Posted by mduell

- No.

- No.

- Yes.

- No.

Hi mduell, curious as to why you don't feel the 2.8 is worth it. Too much money? Or not a big enough jump from 2.4? I'm kinda in the same boat as the OP, but I am going to get the 750GB HDD, and I plan on using Bootcamp in Leopard to play some PC games. Thank you.

P · Oct 8, 2007, 11:28 AM

Hey mods, can we please have a sticky on the various Intel iMacs and their RAM usage, dualchannel etc? It must be the number one most asked question in this forum.

Going from 2.4 to 2.8 GHZ means a 17% boost in one system component - the CPU - at a 27% increase in cost if you use the pre-built options. The other boosts - more RAM and bigger HD - can be had cheaper elsewhere. If you just boost the CPU, it's a 14% increase in cost. I still don't think it's worth it, as the speed increase is just in one component. You will pair a very expensive CPU with a middling GPU and limited RAM ceiling - not a good idea.

Gankdawg · Oct 8, 2007, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by P

Hey mods, can we please have a sticky on the various Intel iMacs and their RAM usage, dualchannel etc? It must be the number one most asked question in this forum.

Going from 2.4 to 2.8 GHZ means a 17% boost in one system component - the CPU - at a 27% increase in cost if you use the pre-built options. The other boosts - more RAM and bigger HD - can be had cheaper elsewhere. If you just boost the CPU, it's a 14% increase in cost. I still don't think it's worth it, as the speed increase is just in one component. You will pair a very expensive CPU with a middling GPU and limited RAM ceiling - not a good idea.

I get what you are saying. A very expensive CPU will hopefully give me the longest life out of the machine. I do plan on buying a 2GB chip (not from Apple of course). That's also why I'm going with 750 GB of hard drive space, to give the machine as long as a useful life as possible. When I bought my dual 1.8 G5 with 250 GB, I thought it would take forever to fill. I was wrong. As far as the middling GPU, it's enough for me and my gaming needs. If I ever want more, I will either buy an Xbox/PS3/Wii/;whatever or build a gaming PC. Thank you for your input and the calculations.

mduell · Oct 8, 2007, 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by Gankdawg

Hi mduell, curious as to why you don't feel the 2.8 is worth it. Too much money? Or not a big enough jump from 2.4? I'm kinda in the same boat as the OP, but I am going to get the 750GB HDD, and I plan on using Bootcamp in Leopard to play some PC games. Thank you.

With a budget limited to the iMac range (otherwise you'd be buying a Mac Pro), I think you're better off maxing out the RAM. The CPU is socketed so you can always upgrade it after your warranty is up.

Gankdawg · Oct 8, 2007, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by mduell

The CPU is socketed so you can always upgrade it after your warranty is up.

I didn't know that, thank you.

bearcatrp · Oct 8, 2007, 07:28 PM

If your budget is the iMac range, then max out the ram and get a fast scratch disk (external drive). I own both, iMac (24 inch, 2.16ghz) and a mac pro and can tell you IF you could afford the mac pro, get one. The iMac is do able. I used iMovie on the iMac with 2gb ram. For short editing, the page outs were not to bad, but long editing and it began to climb. That when I snatched a refurb 2ghz mac pro. Cut the time almost in half. I would suggest you check out Camcorders - Independent Camcorder Reviews, Ratings & Comparisons for some good information with editing and platforms used. I haven't edited HD yet but from what I here, you will want a real strong computer to handle it. Good luck on editing. I enjoyed it so much with iMovie that I stepped up to Final Cut Express.
Randy

Mojo · 01:26 PM

3D Gaming -- 3 Aluminum iMacs versus Other Macs Excellent review of current and past iMac video card speeds. BareFeats may also have CPU tests... MacWorld online reviews have good speed comparison charts too.

Other World Computing offers a 3GB RAM "kit" for the white 24" for around $130. You can pay more and less at other vendors (and for different RAM brands at OWC) but OWC's stock RAM is excellent as is OWC's reputation for customer service.

I agree with Veltliner: the glossy screen is unacceptable for image editing purposes. Some people report being unable to properly calibrate the glossy screens using third-party calibration hardware/software. I think that the potential for eyestrain is very real when using a glossy screen for extended periods of time. I checked out glossy and matte-screen iMacs and I dismissed the glossy screens immediately. FWIW, BareFeats LOVES the glossy screens and hope that the new Cinema displays are glossy. I think that they are out of their minds...

I will be surprised if Apple does not offer a matte option sometime in the future, but I could be wrong... Apple has ignored choruses of complaints in the past regarding other product changes.

Veltliner · Oct 10, 2007, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by allozebad

Thanks Veltliner. I actually do like the matte screens a lot more. But wouldn't I give up quite a bit of performance by choosing the older iMacs? I realize my first post wasn't clear, I am indeed looking at the iMacs (not any mac, I can't afford the mac pro as my budget is about $2200).

I just bought a white 24" iMac. The display is fantastic - no comparison with the 20" iMac I had before (and that was pretty good, too).

You will be on good grounds to do video editing. An exception might be AVCHD, but that's a bummer even for MacPros, I'd say. That code is so sophisticated, it is ultra demanding for processors. We are in a phase of computer development,where hardware is ahead of the software by a year and a half to two years.

Video: AVCHD camcorders came out a year before there was even software to edit them, and it took even longer to get good software to edit them - and still it is tough to edit.

8-core Macs came out, before the software can even access those resources with ONE app (if you run several, its' fine).

But that's not truly a problem. The AVCHD format and its cameras are not really well developed (the new, tiny Panasonic HSC1U (can't they come up with decent model names?) is pretty good, but still does not come close to the maximum data rate AVCHD is capable of, also its manual focus is fiddly), so regular HDV or DVCPRO HD is alright as this time. DVCPRO HD has four times the data rate of SD, but it is intraframe compression only, which isn't that tough on the processor.

So, long story cut short, with your budget and intentions, the white 24" iMac will be fine. Just be sure to max out the RAM to 3 Gb. Don't buy cheap rubbish Ram (you would be sorry for the 50$ you could save here), go to Crucial.com, which offers quality RAM still at a fantastic price. Bought twice there, every time it worked out well.

Veltliner · Oct 10, 2007, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by Mojo

I agree with Veltliner: the glossy screen is unacceptable for image editing purposes. Some people report being unable to properly calibrate the glossy screens using third-party calibration hardware/software. I think that the potential for eyestrain is very real when using a glossy screen for extended periods of time. I checked out glossy and matte-screen iMacs and I dismissed the glossy screens immediately. FWIW, BareFeats LOVES the glossy screens and hope that the new Cinema displays are glossy. I think that they are out of their minds...

I will be surprised if Apple does not offer a matte option sometime in the future, but I could be wrong... Apple has ignored choruses of complaints in the past regarding other product changes.

I have the impression, that Apple separates their product line into a. entertainment and gaming iMac and b. MacPro for professional applications. This way the iMac doesn't eat into the MacPro market share, while Gamers and entertainment users are mostly happy with the glossy screen. So I would doubt a matte iMac.

But I won't believe the new cinema display to be glossy. (Or they HAVE TO give the matte option at least - because what good is all the advanced color grading option in Final Cut Studio 2, when you get blinded by the reflections in the glass). It could be that the surface is slightly different from the matte displays we have now, but it defenitely has to be non-reflecting.