imac or macpro

[bazookaman]

I was just reading an article in the latest macworld that got me thinking whether or not I need a macpro or would an imac do me just fine. I do design (web and print) so i had planned on a macpro. but the article made me wonder if maybe the top end imac would work as well. Although i'd have to go with some type of external storage for all my movies. just wondering about people's opinions.

[jdc]

iMac... (i have both a 20" 2.4 - pictured - and a 24" 2.4)

http://forums.macresource.com/read/1/484...msg-484945

right now i have open: Quark 7, PS, ID, AI, Acrobat, word, mail, text edit, fetch, safari, FF, imovie, iphoto, itunes, ical, aol radio, preview, boscos screen share, efax, preview, suitcase and dragthing

never a hiccup, ever

tons of files, windows, folders, safari tabs all open at the same time

external FW 800 drives, some 500, some 400 gigs

[Ted King]

There's a lot to be said for getting an iMac - it can do what you need (probably - based on your brief description). But if you have a nice monitor and don't particularly see how having two monitors would be of significant benefit then I think you might seriously consider this MacPro refurb:

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/We...=FB052LL/A

It's a $100 more than the top-of-the-line iMac but its got so much more:

Two 3.0GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon processors
2GB [4 x 512MB] memory (667MHz DDR2 fully-buffered DIMM ECC)
250GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s 7200-rpm hard drive
Two 16x SuperDrives (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
ATI Radeon X1900 XT graphics with 512MB memory

Notice that it has two SuperDrives and a really nice graphics card. It's incredibly easy to add ram and hard drives to that machine. And I can't imagine that it won't hold its resell value way more than the iMac. It is the previous generation of MacPro, but I don't think the new ones are significantly more capable than that one unless you are doing something like heavy duty video work.

If you are looking at the 2.8Ghz 24" iMac for $1800 then there isn't much of any Mac Pros in that price range; although you might consider this one for $2000:

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/We...=FA356LL/A

Two 2.66GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon processors
1GB [2 x 512MB] memory (667MHz DDR2 fully-buffered DIMM ECC)
250GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s 7200 rpm hard drive
16x SuperDrive (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT graphics with 256MB memory

[incognegro]

I sort of like the 24" white imac refurb for $1200... matte screen especially.

http://lowendmac.com/musings/08mm/penryn...ation.html

"At the 24" size, the 2.16 GHz 2006 model at $1,199 is attractive. Unlike the aluminum iMacs, it doesn't have a glossy display, and that's what we prefer. With 90% of the processing power of last year's 2.4 GHz iMac and a 14% lower price, we think it's a steal."

[sekker]

I have an original 2 GHz Mactel iMac. It's a great machine - very capable (when the hardware has not failed).

It also works great with a second monitor.

The main reason to get the mac pro IMHO is when you are a serious power user and/or need to be able to install a special card.

[Filliam H. Muffman]

.
OpenPro http://www.psystar.com/index.php?page=sh...ct_details&category_id=3&flypage=flypage_images.tpl&product_id=19&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=72 (

[clay]

I think either the imac or macpro will do fine for you. If you can afford the macpro, go for it, if not, go with the imac.

I had one of the original intel imacs and upgraded to a mac pro in december. The imac was a great machine, but I really missed the internal expandability and performance boost from a tower. All that said, the MacPro is the best mac I've ever owned. I expect it to last me 2-3 years at least before I get the urge to upgrade again.

[bazookaman]

thanks for all the input.

not quite ready yet. but definitely in the next 30 days...probably.

good food for thought.

[bazookaman]

[quote Ted King]Two 3.0GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon processors
2GB [4 x 512MB] memory (667MHz DDR2 fully-buffered DIMM ECC)
250GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s 7200-rpm hard drive
Two 16x SuperDrives (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
ATI Radeon X1900 XT graphics with 512MB memory
heh. thats one of the ones I was considering. Is there a comparison between that one and the new 08 macpros?

[Ted King]

Here's one comparison I was able to Google:

http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2008/01/m...uary-2008/

It's hard to tell just how "fair" the comparison is but it may give you some idea. It makes sense that even a 2.8Ghz dual quad 2008 Mac Pro would be a bit faster than a 3.0Ghz dual quad "old" Mac Pro because of faster bus speed and newer processor, but I don't think the difference is all that great and for the same price as the old model 3Ghz model you can only buy a single quad core 2.8Ghz 2008 model. Plus, the refurb 3Ghz old model has the Radeon X1900 XT 512MB graphics card which is better than the ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB that comes standard on the new Mac Pros (you can buy the option 8800 GT card but that adds another $150 onto the cost).