imac 21.5" configuration help

beachBOYken

beachBOYken

beachBOYken

Soldato
Joined
18 Feb 2007
Posts
13,623
Location
London
Hi

In the next month or so I plan to get an Imac. I'm replacing a windows desktop computer which is starting to play up after a good run, think its almost 8 years!

Main uses:
emails/internet/office(word), pretty much it, nothing to intensive basically for use as a family computer but no games.

Would like some advice on configurations, I was thinking about the 2.9ghz 21.5" mac with the dedicated graphics card at £1199, with a few custom tweaks.


But I dont play games or plan to on the imac so am leaning towards the 2.7ghz with the integrated graphics. Although I would change it to 16gb ram and a 1tb fusion drive.

Would you say the 2.7ghz is a better choice for me.

thanks
 
TheUncookedPie said:
By the time you've added the upgrades and tweaks, you're within striking distance of the baseline 27 inch 3.2 GHz. If you can stretch that far, I would.
Click to expand...
Not entirely true, because the 21.5" Iris Pro model with the upgrades comes out to £1369, whereas the 27" comes in at £1609 without the RAM upgrade (which you'd do yourself for around £40-50 all in once you've sold off the old stuff).

OP, I'd be asking yourself the following questions:
  • Are you sure you won't need a dedicated graphics card in the long run?
  • Are you sure you need 16GB of RAM? (why do you need this?)
If the answer is "Yes" and "No" respectively, then I'd consider the 21.5" with a second monitor if you ever need more real estate. The 27" from a specifications perspective may come out on top as better value, however that's of little use if you aren't taking advantage of whatever extra it offers. I can't think of an area where the 21.5" iMac with 8GB of RAM wouldn't be sufficient, even running a Windows VM for Office it would be more than adequate (heck, my MBA is more than enough for that).

Also, the 1GB of VRAM is going to be pretty useless unless you'd like to game at all on lower resolutions and/or older games. So really, for a "gaming" capable iMac you're looking at the 780M or 5K iMac.
 
Last edited:
lamboman said:
Not entirely true, because the 21.5" Iris Pro model with the upgrades comes out to £1369, whereas the 27" comes in at £1609 without the RAM upgrade (which you'd do yourself for around £40-50 all in once you've sold off the old stuff).
Click to expand...

The 27 inch has a 7200 rpm drive rather than then 5400 which you get with the 21 inch, so the fusion drive upgrade isn't essential. Neither is the RAM really. Personally, I think the extra pixels are a steal given how little extra they cost.

I refute the "usefulness" argument of the extra pixels. It's just plain nicer to look at, and that's a benefit you'll get every second you use it.

From a functional point of view, there's little between the options. What it boils down to is are you the type of person who pats himself on the back for being frugal, or kicks himself for settling on "OK" when "gorgeous" is in the same ballpark?
 
lamboman said:
Not entirely true, because the 21.5" Iris Pro model with the upgrades comes out to £1369, whereas the 27" comes in at £1609 without the RAM upgrade (which you'd do yourself for around £40-50 all in once you've sold off the old stuff).

OP, I'd be asking yourself the following questions:
  • Are you sure you won't need a dedicated graphics card in the long run?
  • Are you sure you need 16GB of RAM? (why do you need this?)
If the answer is "Yes" and "No" respectively, then I'd consider the 21.5" with a second monitor if you ever need more real estate. The 27" from a specifications perspective may come out on top as better value, however that's of little use if you aren't taking advantage of whatever extra it offers. I can't think of an area where the 21.5" iMac with 8GB of RAM wouldn't be sufficient, even running a Windows VM for Office it would be more than adequate (heck, my MBA is more than enough for that).

Also, the 1GB of VRAM is going to be pretty useless unless you'd like to game at all on lower resolutions and/or older games. So really, for a "gaming" capable iMac you're looking at the 780M or 5K iMac.
Click to expand...


I'm pretty sure I don't plan to play games or anything that requires the dedicated graphics card.

As for the ram I thought it would be best to go highest possible as this is not user upgradable
In the 21".

Im still deciding maybe 8gb of ram would be better for me.
 
TheUncookedPie said:
The 27 inch has a 7200 rpm drive rather than then 5400 which you get with the 21 inch, so the fusion drive upgrade isn't essential. Neither is the RAM really. Personally, I think the extra pixels are a steal given how little extra they cost.
Click to expand...
I have the Fusion Drive. As Windows doesn't support it, Boot Camp Assistant partitions off a portion of the mechanical drive for Windows. It is absolutely horrible. My MBA running a single-core VM boots up significantly faster and is more responsive. So I'd have to disagree, having at least some sort of SSD in there is essential. Never again will a mechanical drive see the inside of one of my machines aside from a server. Agree that the RAM upgrade is unnecessary, even in the long run.

TheUncookedPie said:
I refute the "usefulness" argument of the extra pixels. It's just plain nicer to look at, and that's a benefit you'll get every second you use it.
Click to expand...
I never said anything about the larger display and usefulness :confused: I stated that the dedicated graphics card would be of little use - it isn't really enough for gaming, yet it is overkill for bog standard office work. Display aside, while the 27" is better value in terms of spec, it offers nothing more in the real-world while costing more money.

TheUncookedPie said:
From a functional point of view, there's little between the options. What it boils down to is are you the type of person who pats himself on the back for being frugal, or kicks himself for settling on "OK" when "gorgeous" is in the same ballpark?
Click to expand...
Agree with this. My solution, however, was to purchase an external display (and a nicer one than the 27" iMacs at that) if such real-estate is needed.

Assuming that the £1049 21.5" iMac is purchased with the 1TB Fusion Drive/256GB SSD upgrade (total £1209), the OP could purchase:
  • A Dell U2515H (£269.99), total £1478.99 (£130.01 less than the 27")
  • A Dell U2715H (£449.99), total £1658.99 (£49.99 more than the 27")
The 27" just doesn't offer anything over the 21.5" for this particular scenario. If a large display isn't needed then it's pointless, if a large display is desired it can be done for far less cash, and unless gaming will be very light, the dedicated card on offer isn't good enough. It just doesn't make much sense.
 
Last edited:
thanks for your replies everyone, I will perhaps think about just getting 8gb of ram but I do like the sound of the 1tb fusion drive after reading up on it.

So this is what I might get soon.

21.5" at 2.7ghz
8gb ram
1tb fusion drive

£1209
 
Last edited:
beachBOYken said:
thanks for your replies everyone, I will perhaps think about just getting 8gb of ram but I do like the sound of the 1tb fusion drive after reading up on it.

So this is what I might get soon.

21.5" at 2.7ghz
8gb ram
1tb fusion drive

£1209
Click to expand...
Good choice. The 1TB Fusion drive comes with a 128GB SSD, not some horrible 8GB cache or something (it's all done in software, it's simply two separate drives), so you're absolutely making the right choice. It's very unlikely that any user on their "office" system needs 256GB of data on an SSD.
 
lamboman said:
Good choice. The 1TB Fusion drive comes with a 128GB SSD, not some horrible 8GB cache or something (it's all done in software, it's simply two separate drives), so you're absolutely making the right choice. It's very unlikely that any user on their "office" system needs 256GB of data on an SSD.
Click to expand...

I read that basically the fusion drive arranges everything for you depending on what you use the most to make it faster, is that correct.

Cheers
 
Hi


Thread resurrection!

I held off getting an imac but my windows pc is playing up more so now.

I originally planned on the 21.5 2.9ghz spec but as I don't game or do intensive tasks I think the middle imac will do me just fine.

Im thinking

21.5 imac 2.7ghz With 16gb ram and fusion drive.

It may be a bit extreme for my basic needs but I plan on keeping my imac for a long period as possible.

I have decided waiting on a refresh is not really a big deal for me, after all tech is changing all the time anyway.

I did get some suggestions before but it was a while ago, what do you guys recommend for email client and office program's?

Thanks
 
beachBOYken said:
I did get some suggestions before but it was a while ago, what do you guys recommend for email client and office program's?

Thanks
Click to expand...

Try the bundled stuff first. I'm perfectly happy with the mail that's part of OS X, and all new Macs come with iWork. Other than that, MS Office has just been updated to 2016 for 365 customers.
 
Many thanks, will try the bundled software first then. As for the retina display, the 27" 5k imac is to big for my work area.
Are the non retina diplays really that bad?

Thanks
 
They're not bad at all, far from it. It is just that once you've seen a 5K screen there is no unseeing it. They're absolutely splendid.
 
The 27" is a nice size increase of the 21.5... but if you're sure you'll be happy with the 21.5 then OK.

Fusion drive minimum is a must if you don't want dedicated SSD. Bare in mind... the 256GB SSD is the same price as the 1TB fusion drive and then everything on your primary OS drive will be nicely quick. External storage is very cheap now, so you could add an external drive or two or more if you wished for more than 256GB storage... by the sounds of your use, you don't need a primary OS drive greater than 256GB.

Good choice on 16GB ram... OSX loves ram and like you say, on the 21.5 it's not user upgradeable (it is on the 27, however).

For your use, the base dual core i5 would probably be fast enough for you... but the quad core is so little extra it'd be silly not to go for it... but then you already plan to :)

21.5 - 2.7 - 16gb - 1tb fusion / 256gb ssd = 1369
21.5 - 2.9 w/ DGPU - 16GB - 1tb fusion / 256gb ssd = 1519
27 - 2.9 w/ DGPU - 8GB - 1tb fusion / 256gb ssd = 1609 (user ram upgrade = 40-50)

You were already considering the middle option at 1519... given that the 27 is only 90-140 more expensive... I would HIGHLY recommend this upgrade.

Of course you have the external monitor option as mentioned above... but I get the impression that isn't what you're looking for and would prefer the self contained unit?

Having used 2560x1440 minimum for a long time... I would be hard pressed to go back to a 1920x1080 screen... you can do a lot more with the larger screen & it's easier to, for example, have a web browser window and office document open side-by-side - the smaller screen is too small for that to be comfortable.

To put it in context... you kept your last PC for 8 years... these are built well so could easily last as long or longer... let's take a look at the figures over that time.

Basic option = 1369
Recommended upgrade = 1609

240 difference (with the second option, you can try it with 8GB to see how you get on an upgrade at a later date if need be)

Over 4 years... the difference is 5 pounds / month and that's only half the time you kept your last PC.

To throw a massive spanner on the works... you should get down to your local apple store and take a look at the difference between the normal 27 screen and the retina screen.

Relatively, for what you get - the price difference is tiny... it's really not that much more money and the screen is absolutely gorgeous. Even the office documents will be nicer to work on with this screen, hehe... let alone when you look at pictures or whatever :)

The base 27 retina with 3.3 processor, 8GB ram (also user upgradeable) and 1tb fusion drive or 256gb ssd is 1759.

Basic option = 1369
27 retina = 1759 (plus 40-50 for ram if need be)

difference = 390

or just a shade over 8 pounds / month

I think it's worth it... take a look in-store and decide for yourself... make sure you have a look before you buy.

The fusion drive works well... I have a 3TB fusion in my 27... but I would rather have had even "only" a 256GB SSD... it's just the price difference was much greater when I purchased.

Don't even consider the non-fusion spinning platter drive options... they're too slow.

Also, don't know if you're preferring the mouse or trackpad. The apple wireless mouse is HORRIBLE... the lag on it is the worst I've come across. Check out the trackpad, it works well.

beachBOYken said:
Many thanks, will try the bundled software first then. As for the retina display, the 27" 5k imac is to big for my work area.
Are the non retina diplays really that bad?

Thanks
Click to expand...

The_Abyss said:
They're not bad at all, far from it. It is just that once you've seen a 5K screen there is no unseeing it. They're absolutely splendid.
Click to expand...

Exactly... the normal screens are good too... it's just the retina is that much better.
 
Thanks for the informative reply.

The 27" really is a no go for me, it's just to big for my work area and would look out of place in the room I want it in.

As for the hdd, I may consider the 256gb ssd as our current pc has 1tb of space and I don't think we have got close to 150gb yet over the 8 years. Saying that, with the added ipad/Ipod synced that may take more space with music,photos and such.

Although if i got the 1tb fusion, I would have plenty of space and I think ssd speed performance if I keep within the refinements of the ssd storage implemented on the drive?

I'm also considering the trackpad.


Thanks:)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom