New to forum, hoping to be new to Mac soon.

I'd looked around, checked out some threads here (sidebar: great community, almost everyone appears to want to help and assist others esp. the newbs like myself.)

Anyway, I had a 3k budget in mind, and had just about decided on the following:-

24" 3.06GHz
2Gb RAM
ATI RADEON HD 2600 w/256 Mb
750Gb HDD
Wireless Mouse
Wireless Keyboard (I think I got a bit click happy here, and may reconsider)
AppleCare Protection
iWorks

All up $3091 (edu price).

All okey dokey until about 4:40 this morning when I had a thought (thanks to my 2yr old son who thought he had a dragon in his room - I checked - he hadn't) Anyway I'd heard that the NVIDIA GeForce 8800 was a cracking card if you're into gaming - which I'm not - so I saved a few quid and went with the 'standard - at least for the 2.8GHz' ATI Radeon HD 2600, with the cash saving earmarked for increasing the RAM to 4Gb (non Apple) at a later date.

I plan on doing video editing on the machine eventually (via FCP cash permitting) and appreciate that maxing out the RAM is a given, but I was wondering if the 8800 would have any benefits in relation to High Def video editing? The likelyhood is that my next video camera will be high def, so I was wondering if its worth breaking my budget to get the full 3.06 CTO option with the NVIDIA 8800?

Any and all help much appreciated

Many thanks.

Apple does utilise graphics processor in some of its pro apps such as motion but im unsure if its used in FCP

Motion + Livetype

Get as much in it now as you can, so you don't have to worry about it later.
If you know you're getting a HD camera and want to use Final Cut Express/Pro/Studio, then you should get a better Graphics card and more RAM (also the highest processor).

And tell the son, I have a dragon in my room, and his name is Ralph.

Best value is the 2.8ghz without any upgrades, seriously, you won't notice the difference and will save a bucket-load of money

Anyone telling you to spend the extra money on the 3.06 over the 2.8 is delusional IMO - 9% extra clock speed for 12.5% extra cost? especially when you are very unlikely to use maximum processor?

Do what you will, but don't try and convince yourself it is worth the money - cause it isn't.

Basically rule of thumb - If you need to ask, you won't notice the difference (this goes for graphics too)

$3,000 - This is where Apple is lease competitive unfortunately

You could build a PC for $1500 that would flog that in performance (with a 24" screen too) - if you are after performance (you could run OS X on it too with some nous)

At that price range, I would bite the bullet, save a bit more and go for a Mac Pro, which will flog the iMac in FCP performance

Keep your osx86 bullshit out of MTAU - cheers.

Also save money on not getting the 3.06Ghz option - it's very expensive and not worth the extra money for the tiny bit of performance.

The 2.4Ghz iMac is only $1800 for a refurbished model and a 320GB HDD. $1800 is almost half of what you plan to pay now, for the exact same machine just with a slightly slower CPU and a 320GB HDD. Buy a 1TB external HDD for $250 and 4GB of RAM for $150 and you're laughing

Thanks decryption.


Oh.




Anyway, the 8800 isn't worth it if you don't play games because the Radeon is actually better at Core Image. Therefore, the base model would be better value.

Someone asks for Mac advice and some jerkoff suggests to go the osx86 route? I thought MacTalk was a Mac community, not a "build PC boxes and install hacked copies of OS X" community

Unfortunately, it is you who is coming off as a jerkoff

I merely highlighted that this pricepoint is where apple is at its worst Price/performance - So you are better off spending less and getting a better machine for the money - Or buying a PC for that amount of money, I wasn't suggesting he run osx86, I was highlighting that the hardware is the same

Perhaps you should settle down a bit

I think the refurb Decryption suggested is the best bet - save heaps of money and the performance for your uses will not be noticeably different

No, I'm with Aaron. Telling people to buy a PC in a Mac community is the height of rudeness. And then suggesting they use illegal hacks which is expressly forbidden by the forum rules goes to prove you don't really care for the community at all.

But then, this is a side issue which should be kept out of this thread.

Sigh....

I didn't tell him to buy a PC, please read the post

I offered (probably the most) useful advice as to what spec iMac to get for his purposes

I then offered justification for this by comparing the price/performance to other things

I added an addendum about osx86 to bring to light the hardware is the same - I don't get why people take personal offense to hacking OSX when the iPhone, ATV and everything else is fine?

And would it be so bad if for the money a PC (with Vista) would be a better buy in one specific instance? Was my point that the $3000 price point is where apple is least competitive wrong?

I want the poster to get the best possible computer for his money for his particular uses - But apparently I'm rude if that includes the possibility of a PC (with Vista)?

Fanboyism is what makes forums like this a yawnfest - when you know youre going to get biased responses every time




Edit: Red text added for those who apparently only read selectively

What you're recommending, is along the lines of: I really want to get a Mercedes, but don't think they are good cost / benefit... I know i'll steal it. Regardless of apple's hardware price point; building a PC to run the Mac OS X (whether it's fair or not) is a breach of the license agreement of the software.

I have an iMac C2E 2.8GHz (previous generation top of the line) with the ATI 2600 card. I have used it to edit HD footage from my HV20. I find the performance adequate, but not fast. I would recommend that you get the 3.06GHz for the extra performance (it may cost 12.5% more for a 9% performance increase - but when your sitting there waiting for your video to be processed every bit of speed helps). I'd skip the 8800 as it doesn't increase performance in FCP compared to the stock ATI.
If you were planning on doing a lot of video editing, I would recommend saving up for the Mac Pro. The 4-core version is very close to the 3k mark, although it doesn't have a screen. I only do very occasional stuff and find that it still takes my iMac a good 2-3 hours to render 40 minutes of HD (HDV-1080i) footage. If I was doing this on a daily/weekly basis I would definitely go for a Mac Pro.

A MacPro is another $1,000 above what he wants to spend and even then, he's looking to make it cheaper.

Not only that, but the MacPro is end of cycle. Now is not the time to be buying one.

Personally, I'd go the 2.8GHz with the Nvidia and upgrade the RAM through a third-party vendor for $120 to up it to 4GB for a total cost of $2,760.

I'd also recommend getting a proper mouse.

And another forum question degenerates into a fight and gets waylaid…

macrob, I concur with decryption's sentiments; the top spec iMac is not really worth the extra bucks over the performance of the lesser spec models AND refurbished machines are a great bargain. I have a refurb bought from Apple, saved big time, got a complete warranty and never had a problem.

Apple have a few iMac refurbs for sale but even a brand new 2.8GHz/24"/2GB/500GB is $2399 (standard price - no ed discount) - add the Apple Care extended warranty and it is around $2650. Remember, you don't have to buy the extended warranty now, you can buy it anytime up to the end of the standard one year warranty.

As for the graphics card, here's a review of the top spec card vs the "base" card… Max OS X 10.5.3 - Core Image improved, the top spec card has not been outperforming the base card (in fact it has quite often been the other way around), so I would tend to keep your $220 for the upgraded card, throw that into a 750GB internal hdd upgrade and come out at $300 less than your $3k budget - and spend the bucks on the extended warranty next year (why pay for it before you need it).

FCP recommends the iMac 24" standard video card, 2GB RAM for compressed HD, 4GB RAM for uncompressed HD, and a separate hard drive as the scratch disk to render files. Good luck with your decision.