27" inch iMac - i3 or i5 processor

I have narrowed my search down to a 27" iMac. I am also going to get the eSata drive add on from OWC to address the hard drive issues. It looks like they make a nice 4 drive case that you can equip with lots of space and connect to the iMac via eSata.

I was thinking about the i3 version of the 27" iMac but you can upgrade to an i5 core. Is there going to be a difference in performance or would it be a good idea for the longevity of the machine?

I can't afford the high end iMac, but with my educator discount, I can afford the i3 processor and upgrade the machine to the i5.

Thanks for all of your help,

J-

Get the best you can with the budget you have. If the i5 fits your budget then go for it...

There are noticeable performance differences between the i3, i5 and i7 processors so get the best you can afford

Thanks for the reply.

Basically, I record about 50 tracks of audio with plug-ins. I very rarely use VIs. I always would buy the biggest and the best, so downsizing to the iMacs is something new to me. I am currently using a PPC G5 and it is handling the work load with no hiccups. I need to upgrade because I can't update the software anymore. Before I take the plunge, I want to try and find out if these machines will handle my needs. All feedback is greatly appreciated.

Have a great day,

J-

I have a second drive installed in my G5. From what I have heard, the OWC eSata update, will give me more space, and more drive speed as well. The only thing that would be connected to my firewire port would be my Motu 828 mkii.

I hope I am not overlooking anything,

Thanks you for all of your help,

J-

I figured that might be the case. I am hitting the total state of confusion. After doing the math for the iMac, and the eSata update, and the extra casing, and drives, that comes just a little short dollar wise to the cheapest Mac Pro. Does anyone have thoughts on the medium to high range iMac, or the lowest version of the mac pro?

I know I just saw on OWC you can upgrade the mac pro models, so that is a plus down the road, and I know the mac pro has more room for growth. Performance wise???

Any and all thoughts are greatly appreciated,

Have a great day,

J-

The base mac pro smokes the iMac. Has 4 internal HD bays, lots of ram, faster architecture. Has PCI slots. Just get it.

I disagree.

The base mac pro is only a quad core.... such as the high end iMac. The iMac comes with 4GB RAM stock while the Mac Pro has 3GB RAM. So no, I don't think the "base" Mac Pro smokes the iMac out of the box.

Now, of course, the Mac Pro has much more expandability and more room for growth. But, if you buy the Mac Pro it will NOT outperform the quad iMac out of the box. You would need to spend quite a bit more to upgrade it. Yes, the Mac Pro has all these extra bays and slots - but unless you have the money to fill them with the hardware then it doesn't do much for you empty except for future expansion. Stock, however, the Mac Pro will not outperform the quad iMac stock.

Its pretty clear to me that the OP has a limited budget so I would say that the iMac would be a better choice than the Mac Pro if you only plan to buy the stock base Mac Pro without upgrading it in the near future.

Not to mention a monitor.... forget about comparing the two price wise.

I currently have (2) 22" monitors, and I have 2(2) 1TB drives, and a 500GB drive that I can stick in the Mac Pro, or if I go the iMac route, I would get a drive bay from OWC to put the drives in. It sounds like the final answer breaks down to being able to expand. The Mac Pro allows you to expand down the road, where the iMac is rather limited in that area.

Sopranos, I see you have an iMac? How many tracks do you typically have in a session? Vi's?, plugins? I usually have about 50 tracks with several plugs on each track. I don't use many VI's but I occasionally use a couple. I am trying to figure out if the iMac can handle that type of load.

Thanks for all of your help,

J-

If your even thinking of a Mac Pro you should go that route.

Just think, if you ever need to update it all you need is a pci-e card!

Could USB 3.0 or Light peak be coming out next year? You just missed out, No problem, just get a card.

If you had bought the iMac and you need light peak / USB3 then you need a new computer.

If your even thinking of a Mac Pro you should go that route.

I agree. I've had two iMacs so far since I started using Logic and my next purchase will definitely be a Mac Pro. The cost is not an issue when you compare expandability and user access. Also, what happens if your display goes out on an iMac. You're out of business until you can get that display repaired. On the other hand, with a Mac Pro, if the display goes down you can get another one for $200 or in the case of working with multiple displays (which I prefer) you just make do with less until you repair or replace the broken display. Also, replacing an ailing HD on an iMac is like major surgery (I've seen it done on my machine) whereas replacing an internal drive on the Mac Pro is an easy, very user friendly process.

I would go with the Mac Pro.

Keep your eyes on the prize:

Light Peak coming to intel soon

" We expect that the components will be ready to ship in 2010. Over time, the optical components, designed to be small, easy to manufacture and affordable, are expected to enjoy the economies of scale that other components have in the computing and consumer electronics industries. "

Scott and onewave you are totally correct. I am using two monitors already with my g5 and I can just pull my sata drives and put them in the new machine. I really like the option to expand.

Thank you so much for all of your help and feedback,

J-

I currently have (2) 22" monitors, and I have 2(2) 1TB drives, and a 500GB drive that I can stick in the Mac Pro, or if I go the iMac route, I would get a drive bay from OWC to put the drives in. It sounds like the final answer breaks down to being able to expand. The Mac Pro allows you to expand down the road, where the iMac is rather limited in that area.

 

Sopranos, I see you have an iMac? How many tracks do you typically have in a session? Vi's?, plugins? I usually have about 50 tracks with several plugs on each track. I don't use many VI's but I occasionally use a couple. I am trying to figure out if the iMac can handle that type of load.

 

Thanks for all of your help,

 

J-

First, I agree with everyone here that the Mac Pro is a better choice if you have the hardware and/or coin to expand it out. My point was simply that the Mac Pro does not "smoke" the iMac stock out of the box.

I rarely use audio tracks (other than drums... I am a drummer by trade).... I pretty much only use VI's (Omnisphere, EWQL SO, Kontakt, Komplete, East West products, Evolve, etc.). Furthermore, I typically have 10-25 tracks of East West SO and/or Omnisphere and Kontakt.... mind you, these are pretty powerful instruments and taxing on the computer and I have yet to see an error or max out the CPU. Therefore, I'm not sure exactly what the limitations are yet - I can only say that its handled everything nicely so far.

Good luck!

Scott and onewave you are totally correct. I am using two monitors already with my g5 and I can just pull my sata drives and put them in the new machine. I really like the option to expand.

 

Thank you so much for all of your help and feedback,

 

J-

Is that true? Would you be able to boot from a Drive with PPC Apps on an Intel Mac Pro? If so that would be handy.

My point was simply that the Mac Pro does not "smoke" the iMac stock out of the box.

Sopranos, if you read triplets reply carefully you will see that he was referring to more than processor stats and price comparisons. I think he's just saying that the Mac Pro offers more potential for long term use before it inevitably becomes obsolete.

And I agree.

The base mac pro smokes the iMac. Has 4 internal HD bays, lots of ram, faster architecture. Has PCI slots.

My point was simply that the Mac Pro does not "smoke" the iMac stock out of the box.

 

I think he's just saying that the Mac Pro offers more potential for long term use before it inevitably becomes obsolete.

 

And I agree.

 

The base mac pro smokes the iMac. Has 4 internal HD bays, lots of ram, faster architecture. Has PCI slots.

I thought that part was obvious. Meaning, I didn't know that someone would have to point out that the Mac Pro can POTENTIALLY offer much more than the iMac. And I was simply pointing out that the iMac is every bit as good as the Mac Pro stock out of the box if one were not to upgrade it or have the means to take advantage of all the "potential" upgrades. After all, does the BASE Mac Pro have "lots of RAM"? No.

And I agree. I thought I made it clear in my above post that I agree it was a better choice based on his case and circumstances.

But thanks for chiming in with semantics. It helps that you "think" what he might be saying. Any idea what you "think" I might be saying?

Any idea what you "think" I might be saying?

Any idea what you "think" I might be saying?

Your pictures are so cute... thanks again for taking the time out. I do understand where you are from now.

I do understand where you are from now.

Excellent ! ! ! ! ! !

I want to thank everyone for all of the help and advice. Today, I got the new machine. I ended up getting a 2.8 ghz quad core mac pro. I did upgrade to 6gb of ram. I already have three sata drives collecting dust, so they will fit in the bays nicely. I also have two monitors that I am using. It made the most sense.

Thanks again for all the help getting me back int the 21st century. Now to do what the machine is intended for writing and recording

J-