Topic: 27" retina iMac owners: real world differences between configurations? (Read 25726 times)

Ellis Vener · « **on:** May 16, 2015, 02:26:03 pm »

Hi,
Im getting ready to update from my late-2009 27" 2.66Ghz iMac to a 27" Retina iMac

When you were testing or evaluating what did you see as the real world differences between

- the 3.5 GHZ Quad-core i5 or 4.0GHz quad-core i7 processors?

and the

-AMD Radeon R9 M290X 2GB GDDR5 vs the AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4GB GDDR5 ?

I am planning on going with the 512GB Flash storage for boot drive and applications, and will max out the RAM (from OWC).

Thank you,

Ellis

Image and video (not a lot but some Storage will be external (Thunderbolt and some USB 3.0)

graeme · « **Reply #1 on:** May 16, 2015, 03:02:50 pm »

Hi Ellis

I recently bought a retina iMac. I went for the higher end processor & graphics card since they're not user upgradeable & only added 20% to the price of the iMac. I went for the 256GB SSD option. This drive only has OS / apps on it - Lightroom catalogue / PS scratch & some working files are on a thunderbolt 500GB RAID 0 drive. Most files / Time Machine are on external USB 3 drives. 32GB RAM from Crucial.

I'm still setting the machine up ( & getting pissed off by Yosemite ) but initial impressions are positive. The screen is marvellous. For the first time I feel like I'm looking at an actual photo / artwork rather than a bunch of pixels. Colour matching to prints is good enough for me ( on a par with my NEC PA231 Multisync ). I calibrated it using BasicColor & a DTP94 puck.

Photoshop CS5 runs well on it & Lightroom 4 is OK: I was getting some weird graphics glitches in the print module a couple of days ago but nothing like some of the horror stories I've read on the net. I'll be trying out PS / Lightroom CC soon.

Wish I could get my Microsoft Intellimouse working properly, the 'Magic' Trackpad will be flying out of the window soon. ( Actually thats not fair, the trackpad is OK I'm just not a trackpad guy ).

Enjoy your new iMac.

Graeme

Ellis Vener · « **Reply #2 on:** May 16, 2015, 03:58:41 pm »

Hello Graeme and thank you for your prompt reply.
The point you make about difference in cost is a good one. My experience is that I get about five years of heavy use of an iMac so amortized over 60 months it isn't that much of a cost difference is it?

A 256SSD is a little small for my needs - if I keep my Lightroom catalog on the boot drive.

Which graphics option did you go with, the AMD Radeon R9 M290X 2GB GDDR5 vs the AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4GB GDDR5?

graeme · « **Reply #3 on:** May 17, 2015, 04:31:28 am »

I went for the M295X 4GB GDDR5 option. Thought it might help with the sheer quantity of pixels that the thing has to display & possibly remain compatible with various software upgrades for longer. That might be wishful thinking.

I was impressed with the Retina iMacs value for money compared to the regular iMac. I configured them both on the Apple Store ( best processor & graphics available ). The retina version wasn't really much more expensive & had slightly higher spec components.

Graeme

PS When you come to upgrade your RAM there's a brilliantly designed little cover on the back of the mac that pops off when you press a little button by the power lead socket. Well it would be brilliantly designed if it did actually pop off. Ended up using the sucker on one of these to get the thing off.

Ellis Vener · « **Reply #4 on:** May 18, 2015, 10:56:52 am »

I have decided to go with the 5K Retina iMac and will configure it this way:

Processor: 3.5Ghz i5 processor

RAM: 8Gb (stock configuration , will immediately upgrade to 32GB RAM from OWC)

Storage: Originally I was thinking that I would go with the 256GB Flash, but after doing a bit more research and thinking about my needs and from what I've read about Fusion at http://www.anandtech.com/show/6679/a-month-with-apples-fusion-drive , I have decided to go with the 512GB Flash memory option.

Graphics: no question: the AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4GB GDDR5

Here’s the tricky part. Do I buy now or wait to see if t an update to the Retina iMac is announced at the June Apple WWDC or at a product launch in August? I suspect any update will be fairly minor.

Ken Bennett · « **Reply #5 on:** May 18, 2015, 08:48:47 pm »

We have a pretty good Mac tech support guy in our office, and I ran these questions by him last week, since I have to replace my 2009 27-inch iMac soon.

The processor upgrade is a total no-brainer - do it. The i7 makes a big difference in processing power, like exporting from Lightroom or building previews.

He was not sure about the video card, but suggested that since LR and some other apps can now use the processors in the video card that it is probably worth the upgrade - I need to do more research on that one.

Morris Taub · « **Reply #6 on:** May 19, 2015, 04:10:39 am »

Hi Ellis, I too have been watching apple because I need a new computer. I found this this morning. Just a rumor. So maybe it will be wwdc announcement.

http://www.macrumors.com/2015/05/18/15-macbook-pro-27-imac-expected/

Maybe worth the wait. Maybe not. These days I'm never sure if apple will disappoint or not. I personally want a new macbook pro but waiting to see what they do. I may just try and order the current version if I'm not happy with what is changed.

M

GregShapps · « **Reply #7 on:** May 20, 2015, 12:49:56 am »

http://blog.macsales.com/30480-apple-updates-imac-and-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-introduces-new-lightning-dock

Ellis Vener · « **Reply #8 on:** June 02, 2015, 01:00:09 pm »

Went with a 27" i7 4.0 Ghz model with the more powerful graphics processor and a 512Gb Flash drive. I saved $500.00 by buying it through Apple's refurb store. This configuration, because I bought it on Apple's refurbished site, came with 16GB RAM installed. I am adding 16GB more RAM (from OWC)

Here's a possible tip: if you are looking buy from Apple's refurb store, Apple seems to repopulate it at 6pm Pacific time, if not daily then they definitely do it at 6pm on Friday nights. I had been looking all week and several different ones appeared at 9:01 that were noter at 8:45pm.

michael_mutmansky · « **Reply #9 on:** June 05, 2015, 02:11:36 pm »

Has anyone looked at the issue of color gamut and calibration with the iMac monitors? The new 5K ones are sRGB only with respect to gamut, and I've seen complaints that they do not calibrate well.

I am thinking of going this route, but don't want problems with poor color fidelity...

If they are less capable, I suppose one option would be to connect them with a much better second monitor for the main editing and palette screens.

Ellis, what do you think so far of your purchase?

---Michael

graeme · « **Reply #10 on:** June 06, 2015, 06:03:40 pm »

Quote from: michael_mutmansky on June 05, 2015, 02:11:36 pm

Has anyone looked at the issue of color gamut and calibration with the iMac monitors? The new 5K ones are sRGB only with respect to gamut, and I've seen complaints that they do not calibrate well.

I am thinking of going this route, but don't want problems with poor color fidelity...

If they are less capable, I suppose one option would be to connect them with a much better second monitor for the main editing and palette screens.

Ellis, what do you think so far of your purchase?

---Michael

Hi Michael

As I mentioned in my earlier reply to Ellis, I calibrated my retina iMac using a DTP94 puck & Basicolor Display. I bought Basicolor for my NEC PA321 Multisync. ( This display is a step below the top end Spectraview displays ).

The iMac display works perfectly well with this calibration setup & in fact Basicolor reported slightly better delta measurements for the iMac display than for the NEC. ( Fair enough - the NEC is 3 years older ).

I haven't done too much colour work with the iMac yet but my initial impression is that the colour accuracy is good as the NEC .

( The colour work I do consists largely of preparing prints of my partners stained glass designs to present to clients & also prints of her completed work. I have to deal with a lot of very saturated, often unprintable colours so I need a monitor setup good enough to give me a decent soft proof. However, I've never felt that a 'top end' display setup would be a justifiable expense for me. Your requirements may be quite different ).

Graeme

michael_mutmansky · « **Reply #11 on:** June 08, 2015, 12:36:09 pm »

Thanks...

I shoot primarily for B&W, and I'm worried about having decent linearity in the image, especially into the highlights, where I've had trouble in the past getting the monitor to fairly represent the file.

I do end up with a lot of color images, but all of "my" work is the B&W...

I'll look into it a bit more, but I think the iMac is going to be the computer to get for me.

---Michael

michael_mutmansky · « **Reply #12 on:** June 10, 2015, 11:59:36 am »

OK, I have a machine on order...

Does anyone know how far back I can go with the OS in a dual-boot setup? I have a scanner that is a few years old and can't go higher than 10.6.8, so my current Mac Pro has a dual boot setup on it so I can use it when needed. I'll do some research if nobody knows and report back.

---Michael

Jeremy Roussak · « **Reply #13 on:** June 10, 2015, 12:50:17 pm »

Quote from: michael_mutmansky on June 10, 2015, 11:59:36 am

Does anyone know how far back I can go with the OS in a dual-boot setup? I have a scanner that is a few years old and can't go higher than 10.6.8, so my current Mac Pro has a dual boot setup on it so I can use it when needed. I'll do some research if nobody knows and report back.

Michael,

I'd be surprised if you have any success in running any OS older than Yosemite (I suppose you might get away with Mavericks), at least natively. If you really can't find updated drivers for your scanner, your best bet might be to run 10.6.8 in a VM under Fusion or Parallels. I'm not sure that that can be done, but I suspect the odds are a lot better than those of successfully installing an old native OS.

Jeremy

michael_mutmansky · « **Reply #14 on:** June 10, 2015, 07:41:50 pm »

Hahaha, yeah, I sort of figured that would be the case.

No chance of drivers. Microtek abandoned the Apple platform a while ago and Vuescan software doesn't seem to work properly with it (I get horrible scans with Vuescan).

I may have to try Vuescan again once on the iMac, because maybe it will work better on the new machine. That would be nice.

---Michael

Craig Lamson · « **Reply #15 on:** June 10, 2015, 07:46:04 pm »

Quote from: graeme on June 06, 2015, 06:03:40 pm

Hi Michael

As I mentioned in my earlier reply to Ellis, I calibrated my retina iMac using a DTP94 puck & Basicolor Display. I bought Basicolor for my NEC PA321 Multisync. ( This display is a step below the top end Spectraview displays ).

The iMac display works perfectly well with this calibration setup & in fact Basicolor reported slightly better delta measurements for the iMac display than for the NEC. ( Fair enough - the NEC is 3 years older ).

I haven't done too much colour work with the iMac yet but my initial impression is that the colour accuracy is good as the NEC .

( The colour work I do consists largely of preparing prints of my partners stained glass designs to present to clients & also prints of her completed work. I have to deal with a lot of very saturated, often unprintable colours so I need a monitor setup good enough to give me a decent soft proof. However, I've never felt that a 'top end' display setup would be a justifiable expense for me. Your requirements may be quite different ).

Graeme

Can you successfully do 5000k?

graeme · « **Reply #16 on:** June 11, 2015, 06:12:54 am »

Quote from: Craig Lamson on June 10, 2015, 07:46:04 pm

Can you successfully do 5000k?

I don't know Craig. I tend to use either native white point or a reading taken from my ( low tech ) viewing light reflected from one of the papers I print on. When I get time I'll try it & let you know. ( Busy with deadlines at the moment ).

Graeme

Jeremy Roussak · « **Reply #17 on:** June 11, 2015, 05:00:26 pm »

Quote from: michael_mutmansky on June 10, 2015, 07:41:50 pm

Hahaha, yeah, I sort of figured that would be the case.

No chance of drivers. Microtek abandoned the Apple platform a while ago and Vuescan software doesn't seem to work properly with it (I get horrible scans with Vuescan).

I may have to try Vuescan again once on the iMac, because maybe it will work better on the new machine. That would be nice.

You could try running Windows under a VM, if you can get up-to-date Windows drivers. That would almost certainly work.

Jeremy

Ellis Vener · « **Reply #18 on:** June 17, 2015, 01:18:40 pm »

Quote from: graeme on May 17, 2015, 04:31:28 am

PS When you come to upgrade your RAM there's a brilliantly designed little cover on the back of the mac that pops off when you press a little button by the power lead socket. Well it would be brilliantly designed if it did actually pop off. Ended up using the sucker on one of these to get the thing off.

The release for the RAM cover is a button at the top of the recessed AC connection.

Ellis Vener · « **Reply #19 on:** June 17, 2015, 01:22:21 pm »

Quote from: michael_mutmansky on June 05, 2015, 02:11:36 pm

Has anyone looked at the issue of color gamut and calibration with the iMac monitors? The new 5K ones are sRGB only with respect to gamut, and I've seen complaints that they do not calibrate well.

I am thinking of going this route, but don't want problems with poor color fidelity...

If they are less capable, I suppose one option would be to connect them with a much better second monitor for the main editing and palette screens.

Ellis, what do you think so far of your purchase?

---Michael

After a couple of weeks with it. I am pretty happy. Lightroom with the GPU enabled is pretty zippy. Photoshop is very fast. As expected the gamut is close to sRGB and the display profiles nicely with using the Xrite i1 Display Pro and i1 Profiler. Setting for profile are Gamma 2.2 and 120 cfm for brightness

Author Topic: 27" retina iMac owners: real world differences between configurations? (Read 25726 times)

graeme

graeme

graeme

graeme