[Biallystock]

imwesley said:

I'm buying an iMac but I can't decide which way to go. The previous model is a good deal at $1399 and the performance isn't much worse than the new model. So the question is: is it worth $400 to get twice the RAM and storage? I think I'll go for the new model for those reasons and also because it has the capability to accept more RAM, an extra USB, and Firewire 800.

The only good thing about the new iMac would be the maximum RAM. In practice though because Apple always fills up the available RAM slots, upgrading never pays because you have to throw out one or both existing RAM.

Firewire 800 is not new, it was in the previous model. What is new is they have removed the FW400 port and replaced it with 2 USB2 ports.

$400 is a ridiculous price to pay for the extra RAM and Hard Drive space. Install your own and save. The era of waste and fiscal laziness is dead and gone.

[wolfjo]

Take a look at the HD upgrade procedure - it is not fun. Better to go with an external HD.

The RAM is easy, and costs $50 for 4 gigs.

Personally, I would pay for the upgraded HD and having the OPTION of putting more RAM in later - 4Gb was getting tight for me...

[Biallystock]

I agree about the external HD. Get a good quality mirrored 2Gb external FW800 drive for the money. The only drawback is Spotlight seems to be fairly incompetent finding things on external disks. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't

Someone said the aluminium iMacs were easier to service. Easier if you have the suction cup to remove the glass and don't mind going through the screen and everything under it to get at anything. Given that, a trained technician does it in about 10 mins.

In Australia going new or refurbished is a no brainer. The new models went up in price and there is over $1000 difference between similar models. Which explains why the Apple Store appears to have run out of the previous refurbished iMacs.

I have a feeling things are going to be a lot quieter here for Apple.

[Jarmo]

theguyfromtatooine said:

Would you consider testing the iMac with an ATI Radeon 4850 card? I would like to see the result very much.

Me too. I'd expect a significantly improved games performance. Far above the other contestants.

[bernardp]

In retrospect I am more than happy I bought the previous BTO 24inch iMac rather than waiting months for this modest upgrade. I am currently making good use of firewire 400 with my video-camera as well as firewire 800 for an external hard drive. The previous Nvidia 8800 video is very capable with every PC game I have thown at it on the Vista partition.
Although the iMac's design doesn't get an update, it's about time we had a mouse that matches the concept rather than the legacy white mighty mouse.... how about an aluminium solid state integrated mouse/trackpad?

[imwesley]

My thoughts exactly. Upgrading the HD is not pleasant. But I have no problem using externals either.
I do wish there were more graphics tests to compare. It looks like the new models are slightly better except in the Call of Duty test. That is a bit concerning but could possibly be improved with a driver update. I would say the biggest pull toward the new model is the ability to add 8GB RAM. I probably don't need it now but someday I might. If it means spending a bit more now to extend the life I think it might be worth it.

Having said that...how sure are we that the previous model only accepts 4GB? Apple has listed limitations before that turned out to be not quite true. Has anyone tried adding 8GB to the 2008 models?

I

[Macalways]

imwesley said:

Having said that...how sure are we that the previous model only accepts 4GB? Apple has listed limitations before that turned out to be not quite true.

Could you supply a reference on that statement.?

[samhuff]

Re: Benchmarks: New iMacs
hillstones wrote:
The previous model 2.8 GHz 24" iMac is a steal at $1,399 in the clearance section, or $1,299 using the education discount, if still available at Apple. If not, Amazon still has them at $1,394.

well maybe. I was thinking I wanted the new one for double the storage and memory and the extra USB port instead of the better gpu.
UNQUOTE

Snow Leopard is a coming, the GPU will be major too. Plus the ability to go to 8 gigs when the memory prices fall enough, should be a good midlife kicker.

[tufuno2000]

Comparing the IMac and the Mini is a good, and a bad idea. Good, because there is no other affordable desktop mac to compare it to. And people like me, who would like to change for something faster have no choice other than that. Bad, because indeed, an all in one computer isn't a desktop, and it is true that you would not might to want the so often mentioned glossy screen. So let the Mini be the Mini, too expensive or not, but it remains a kind of laptop without a screen. And those who want a thing in the middle, who do not need four hard drives and the latest CPU, remain outside. Nice to be somebody apart working on apple, but the middle class aren't served. Be different !

[trip1ex]

[quote name='hillstones']
> [quote name='trip1ex']
> >

hillstones said:

> > The previous model 2.8 GHz 24" iMac is a steal at $1,399 in the clearance section, or $1,299 using the education discount, if still available at Apple. If not, Amazon still has them at $1,394.
>
> well maybe. I was thinking I wanted the new one for double the storage and memory and the extra USB port instead of the better gpu.

Adding memory and additional storage is not that difficult, nor is it expensive. The aluminum iMacs are easier to open than the prior white iSight model. A hub solves the one extra USB port. With a $400-$500 savings on the prior model, the new one isn't worth it.

Well I don't see a $400-$500 savings. I see a $100 difference.

[davebarnes]

Take a look at refurbished models in the Apple Store.
You can save as much as $550.

[sirmarcos]

I concur with the those wanting to see the ATI Radeon HD 4850 tested - it's available BTO at the midrange model (well, the 2.96GHz model), and should be better than the top-end's standard GT 130.