Modest performace upgrade expectation

[kaelaria]

Like I said - you just don't KNOW till you do it.  I just went from a Core2 Quad to an i7 and it's a HUGE difference overall.  You can't just look at the numbers and know.  I know where my bottlenecks are, I chose to put my money where it best balances the system.  I could have easily spent 3x the cash for another 20% overall improvement, but that's just silly IMO.

Upgrading old systems to a degree is like putting gold rims and new seats on a 10 year old car.  No matter what you do, the engine is always going to be slow compared to something modern.  Sure you might enjoy it more but you could have put that cash towards something that will blow it away for many more years to come.

[douvidl]

I second what kbennett said. I would rather put my $ into a camera upgrade.

[dturina]

The problem with upgrading Macs is that they are designed against it. You aren't supposed to be able to do it, they are designed as throwaway products. With a PC, when it gets too slow, I usually take the motherboard, CPU and RAM out and get the new stuff in. Also, every now and then a HDD either becomes full or dies, and I put the new one in. It's a straightforward process not unlike shopping for new shoes. But a Mac is like a laptop, you aren't supposed to just replace the stuff that got worn out or is behind the times. You're supposed to treat it like a single appliance without user-serviceable parts inside, like a toster or a TV.

And it really makes sense, at least for most people, who use the computer to perform standard task it was made to do well. But it's not for people who live on the bleeding edge of technology, using the latest Adobe products. That's why I love Mac laptops, but I'm less thrilled about having the entire desktop machine in a monitor. A desktop machine is the one I upgrade most often because I use it for heavy lifting - massive raw conversions, panoramas, etc.; the laptop is usually a typewriter, and even an IBM T41 was ok for me until it died. However, the tech of today is so good, I really don't expect it to grow exponentially. Even core2duo machines are very quick, expecially when you run them from an SSD.

[kaelaria]

Even core2duo machines are very quick, expecially when you run them from an SSD.

Not compared to an i7 system. 

[Ellis Vener]

The problem with upgrading Macs is that they are designed against it. You aren't supposed to be able to do it, they are designed as throwaway products. With a PC, when it gets too slow, I usually take the motherboard, CPU and RAM out and get the new stuff in. Also, every now and then a HDD either becomes full or dies, and I put the new one in. It's a straightforward process not unlike shopping for new shoes. But a Mac is like a laptop, you aren't supposed to just replace the stuff that got worn out or is behind the times. You're supposed to treat it like a single appliance without user-serviceable parts inside, like a toster or a TV.

And it really makes sense, at least for most people, who use the computer to perform standard task it was made to do well. But it's not for people who live on the bleeding edge of technology, using the latest Adobe products. That's why I love Mac laptops, but I'm less thrilled about having the entire desktop machine in a monitor. A desktop machine is the one I upgrade most often because I use it for heavy lifting - massive raw conversions, panoramas, etc.; the laptop is usually a typewriter, and even an IBM T41 was ok for me until it died. However, the tech of today is so good, I really don't expect it to grow exponentially. Even core2duo machines are very quick, expecially when you run them from an SSD.

You seem to be confusing Macs in general with the iMac which does have limited user upgradeability. Mac Pros are very different machines from iMacs.

[dturina]

Not compared to an i7 system. 

Depends on what you do with it. If you run many normal apps simultaneously and don't often run CPU-intensive processes, you might never see a real difference. For instance, watching full screen video on i7 isn't any better than on core2duo. You won't see dropped frames on either. Also, for typical raw conversions, you won't see much difference, except when you order a batch process of all selected files in the end, i7 will finish sooner. But if you render video or work with java app server, you will see significant difference.
For most applications, an i7 will be only marginally snappier than a well designed core2duo.

[dturina]

You seem to be confusing Macs in general with the iMac which does have limited user upgradeability. Mac Pros are very different machines from iMacs.

I know, but this speciffically is an iMac thread so I wrote in shorthand.

But, as a post scriptum, can you really gut the Mac Pro and perform a significant, generational upgrade? I mean, when the new Mac Pro with thunderbolt and all the goodies comes out, can you really upgrade your old Mac Pro box by buying a new motherboard from Apple? It's a beautiful box, but Apple still expects you to throw it away when the new one comes along. With PC machines, I'm not used to that. A box usually outlasts at least two motherboard replacements.

[kaelaria]

You obviously have not used both and have only theoretical information to base your opinions on.  I use them, build them, fix them, upgrade them, test them.  Believe what you wish, those of us that have first hand info on this know better. 

[dturina]

You obviously have not used both and have only theoretical information to base your opinions on.

Not only have I used them, I even built them, so stick your ignorant arrogance where the sun don't shine.

[kaelaria]

Suuuure you have.  Sorry but anyone comparing a core2 duo system to an i7 is full of it.

[dturina]

Suuuure you have.

I am amazed to find a person like you here. You usually troll gaming forums, but this place seldom attracts teenagers with bad attitude.

[kaelaria]

lol uhhhh wrong person   38, no gaming forums, ever

[kaelaria]

And here's someone else that just did the same testing - 4x improvement core2 to i7 http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=68330.msg540837#msg540837

[Ellis Vener]

I've ordered the OWC Data Doubler kit with a 240GB Mercury Electra 3G SSD to replace  the optical drive in a late 2009 2.66Ghz quad core i5 iMac. it will be come my boot/apps and lightroom catalog disk with the existing 1TB HDD becoming the scratch disk and location for files I am currently working on. This iMac is already max'd out at 16GB RAM. Once installed and checked out I'll report back on the performance gains or lack thereof.