2.8GHz and 3.06Ghz

[Trevowski]

I am looking into getting an imac, and i have a few questions.

Is there a big difference between the 2.8 Ghz and the 3.06?
Will i notice a difference?

I plan on doing quite a bit of movie and picture editing, and storeing music as well.

what would be a good over all package?

[Eragon]

I am looking into getting an imac, and i have a few questions.

Is there a big difference between the 2.8 Ghz and the 3.06?
Will i notice a difference?

I plan on doing quite a bit of movie and picture editing, and storeing music as well.

what would be a good over all package?

Very tough question. The brute force answer would be to tell you to max out the CPU, the RAM, and the size of the hard drive. Additionally, buy as many external hard drives as you have money for in your bank account. :smile:

The honest answer is to exercise common sense. You can always buy more memory, cheaper, from non-Apple sources. You can always buy additional external hard drives. Once you've bought your iMac, you can't change the screen size. Likewise, you can't change the internal hard drive (very easily) or the processor.

The iMac is a Core 2 Duo machine. You may or may not see a tremendous amount of difference in speed with your intended applications. If you needed to render huge globs of video or graphics, a Mac Pro, with up to 8 processors in your speed range (2.8-3.2 GHz) is available.

Bottom line: match your budget with your needs. Spending more on the very high end iMac may not get you more performance.

[SpongebObiWan]

I considered this same question as I made my decision as to which iMac to purchase. And as you said, realizing that there are certain aspects I cannot upgrade, such as processor speed, hard disk size, screen size, I decided my best option was to go the max in those areas: 24" screen, 3.06 processor, 1TB hard drive. But that is my typical purchasing philosophy for computers over the years; to get the max I can get at this time, and use it for as many years as it is still viable. As I was deciding this, I wondered how long it might be until Apple released a quad-core processor in the iMac as the Windows machines are now on the market and have been for some time. But realizing that Apple just recently released the 3.06 processor, I figured that was going to be some time yet, perhaps early next year or so I was guessing.

[eplantz]

see performance comparisions:

http://www.macworld.com/article/133332/2008/05/alumimac2008.html

[Swagger]

I considered this same question as I made my decision as to which iMac to purchase. And as you said, realizing that there are certain aspects I cannot upgrade, such as processor speed, hard disk size, screen size, I decided my best option was to go the max in those areas: 24" screen, 3.06 processor, 1TB hard drive. But that is my typical purchasing philosophy for computers over the years; to get the max I can get at this time, and use it for as many years as it is still viable. As I was deciding this, I wondered how long it might be until Apple released a quad-core processor in the iMac as the Windows machines are now on the market and have been for some time. But realizing that Apple just recently released the 3.06 processor, I figured that was going to be some time yet, perhaps early next year or so I was guessing.

Just a quick note: Core 2 Duo (Core 2= (2 cores) + Duo (two more cores) = Quad Core. You already have it (Quad Core) and didn't even know. Don't you feel much better now...M

[Eragon]

http://www.macworld.com/article/133357/2008/05/mwpodcast120.html

[SpongebObiWan]

Just a quick note: Core 2 Duo (Core 2= (2 cores) + Duo (two more cores) = Quad Core. You already have it (Quad Core) and didn't even know. Don't you feel much better now...M

Oh my gosh!! Are you serious? LOL I didn't realize, if this is correct. I may wet myself now. LOL

[Eragon]

Just a quick note: Core 2 Duo (Core 2= (2 cores) + Duo (two more cores) = Quad Core. You already have it (Quad Core) and didn't even know. Don't you feel much better now...M

Sorry, but not correct. See the following link:

http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/8263?comment_start=6&comment_count=20

[acosmichippo]

yeah, "core 2" just designates the second revision in the line of "Core" products.

it's a terrible naming scheme.