Is iMac with retina worth the extra money?

[nhanekom]

I'm looking at getting an iMac. Has anyone owned both the older and new retina models and in your opinion is the retina worth the extra R10k?

 

[bwana]

I can't comment on the iMac but having recently upgraded from a non retina MBP to a retina model I have to say the increased resolution is worth the extra coin for me.

 

[DrJohnZoidberg]

Guess it all depends on your use case.

If you're going to be editing 4k video all day long then I'd say yes. The question is do you need that amount of screen real estate?

 

[SYNERGY]

I can't comment on the iMac but having recently upgraded from a non retina MBP to a retina model I have to say the increased resolution is worth the extra coin for me.

Likewise.

 

[ScottulusMaximus]

I can't comment on the iMac but having recently upgraded from a non retina MBP to a retina model I have to say the increased resolution is worth the extra coin for me.

10 000 of them? For an extra 10k that screen should reach out and give me a helping hand(if you know what I mean).

 

[zippy]

It is if you don't have to borrow it.

 

[akescpt]

if its for work then yes but if its just porn then no. save the 10k.

 

[surfs-up]

I bought the new iMac retina 5K yesterday. Absolutely amazing screen, but what also sold me on it is the extra's that come with it - the fast 1TB fusion drive.....and the graphics card !!!

In my case I had a house break-in last month. Among the many items stolen were two iMacs, a 24" and a 27". I decided I would take the payout from insurance to buy one really awesome iMac.

It is still too new to give a more meaningful review on it. But damn, impressions so far are very good. It blows away my previous two iMacs.....the resolution jumps out at you....makes my old non-retina iMacs that were stolen look a decade older.

 

[SYNERGY]

It's like a(n) SSD drive. Once you go black you can't go back.

 

[bwana]

10 000 of them? For an extra 10k that screen should reach out and give me a helping hand(if you know what I mean).

Is it R10k? The retina 27" goes for R35k while the closest non-retina spec machine on offer at the iStore is R28k and that doesn't have the fusion drive either.

I think if you work with photos/video a lot it's probably worth the extra.

 

[$m@Rt@$$]

One obviously has to pay a premium for that epic resolution and considering the added performance increase I would say so yes!

 

[surfs-up]

Is it R10k? The retina 27" goes for R35k while the closest non-retina spec machine on offer at the iStore is R28k and that doesn't have the fusion drive either.

I think if you work with photos/video a lot it's probably worth the extra.

I forgot to mention that - I don't know where the OP got R 10K from - maybe he is comparing the smaller 21.5 " iMac to the 27 " retina. A true comparison would be a 27 " iMac with the same spec to the 27" one with the 5K display. I think the difference in price is only a few K, and that fusion drive and extra graphics make it all worth while.

I am not sorry I purchased the 27 " retina 5K yesterday

 

[PostmanPot]

It's worth it. The r5K iMac is a relatively small difference in price compared to the Retina iMac. It's almost worth it alone just for the SSHD and increased graphics performance, especially for gaming.

When you consider you get a 5K IPS screen in the R7,000 difference, it's excellent value.

...the fast 1TB fusion drive...

It's like a(n) SSD drive. Once you go black you can't go back.

I can just imagine all the Windows users (and even some Android users) who've had SSHDs for 2 years being annoyed at this and the marketing.

 

[SYNERGY]

I can just imagine all the Windows users (and even some Android users) who've had SSHDs for 2 years being annoyed at this and the marketing.

Actually, I am a Windows user Running Windows on mBP Retina.

Still have my original SSD (Almost 3 years old) running on another PC.

 

[PostmanPot]

Actually, I am a Windows user Running Windows on mBP Retina.

Still have my original SSD (Almost 3 years old) running on another PC.

Me too (desktop), soon to be a dual boot Hackintosh. Do you not have OS X installed?

Just for reference, I'm talking about the SSHD hybrid hard drive/SSD cache drives AKA 'Fusion Drive', which have been out for about 2 years. They are new to iMacs as a standard.

 

[bwana]

I can just imagine all the Windows users (and even some Android users) who've had SSHDs for 2 years being annoyed at this and the marketing.

solid-state hybrid drives (SSHD) have been around a lot longer than two years. I put one in my MBP back in 2010 and then later incorporated that same drive into a fusion drive.

But… a fusion drive is not a SSHD.

 

[PostmanPot]

solid-state hybrid drives (SSHD) have been around a lot longer than two years. I put one in my MBP back in 2010 and then later incorporated that same drive into a fusion drive.

But… a fusion drive is not a SSHD.

Time flies. They've become a lot more affordable and popular in the past 2 years

Oh dear, I thought it was an SSHD. Off to Google/Wiki I go.

*edit*

Very cool. At first I thought it was one of these, but see it's like this in a Mini. Makes me think of an SSHD on crack. Awesome tech and in 3TB too.

 

[bwana]

Very cool. At first I thought it was one of these, but see it's like this in a Mini. Makes me think of an SSHD on crack. Awesome tech and in 3TB too.

It's a nice compromise. My old MBP has a 120gb SSD + 500gb SSHD fusion drive - sure, it meant sacrificing the CD/DVD but it was worth it.

 

[nhanekom]

I forgot to mention that - I don't know where the OP got R 10K from - maybe he is comparing the smaller 21.5 " iMac to the 27 " retina. A true comparison would be a 27 " iMac with the same spec to the 27" one with the 5K display. I think the difference in price is only a few K, and that fusion drive and extra graphics make it all worth while.

I am not sorry I purchased the 27 " retina 5K yesterday

No, I am comparing the 3.2 GHz 27" iMac (R24,999) to the Retina 27" iMac (R34,999). I know it might not be a fair comparison in terms of price, but for my requirements, the processor, hdd, etc is not a big factor. The 3.2 GHz processor would be fine for my needs, so I see that extra R10k as paying purely for the retina display.
I do a lot of photography and editing, so this is mainly why I am considering the retina, else I would be buying the cheaper iMac.

 

[PostmanPot]

...but for my requirements, the processor, hdd, etc is not a big factor...

But they're the most important factors which make getting work/photos done faster. Especially that Fusion Drive.

If you've used an SSD/SSHD before, it's difficult going back to/working on a hard drive.

I think the r5K iMac is aimed exactly at photographers.