Mac Pro or iMac 5k
November 14, 2015 8:38 PM   Subscribe

I'm thinking of replacing my current 3+ year old Mac mini workstation for a 2015 27" iMac 5k but after doing some research I think the 2013 Mac Pro might make more sense.

The new iMac is fast and the display is gorgeous. I would be doing mostly image editing in Photoshop/ Lightroom and some occasional video editing. I'm shooting large files 100mb+ and frequently working in layers. The iMac should easily do everything I need it to do but when I spec'd it out I was within spitting distance of a cylinder Mac Pro. I'd spec both machines with 32 gb of ram, 512 SSD drives and the fastest video card on the iMac and mid tier video card on the MP. The iMac features quad core i7 4ghz processors while the MP sports a 6-core 3.5ghz i7. I've looked at bench marks and the few comparisons I've been able to find and there is no clear winner except that the iMac is slightly cheaper and the MP is about 15% faster. Another consideration is I own a very nice 30" NEC 3090 pro monitor with hardware calibration that would work with a thunderbolt adapter on the MP. I'd need to invest in a new color calibrator for the iMac which would run about $200 making the price difference almost a wash. The MP is more upgradeable than the iMac but the only thing I might consider is more ram in the MP. Does anyone have any experience with the Mac Pro? I don't know a single person who owns one which leads me to believe it's not been embraced. It's also a little long in the tooth but if Apple releases an upgrade early next year it will likely be a faster 8 or 12 core that will be out of my price range.
posted by photoslob to Computers & Internet (11 answers total)
 
Damn, that's a nice monitor.

The thing is, HiDPI is the biggest game changer with displays of my entire life. I stretched and bought the first retina macbook pro and it ruined all non-4k displays for me. The jump in detail when reviewing photos is jaw dropping. I'm never buying another laptop or desktop display without a high resolution screen again. You can view 1080p without filling the display on a 1440p monitor, but on a HiDPI screen you can really shrink it and it's still 1:1. And really, the photos thing, oh my god.

Another thing worth noting is the ram in the imac is user upgradeable(there's a little access panel like the old imacs), so you can shave some of the price by ordering the minimum and buying a kit yourself.

I'm almost always against buying imacs, but i think the 5k one presents an interesting deal. A similar system + a 5k monitor does not come out much cheaper, and a mac pro + a 4k or 5k display is a HUGE cash bonfire. The dell one costs about as much as that NEC you already have.
posted by emptythought at 9:08 PM on November 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


Response by poster: I really love my NEC monitor and so even though the thought of a built in 5k display in the iMac excites me I still think the NEC would be a better monitor because it's not glossy and it's easily hardware calibrated. But that 5k screen sure is pretty.

I'm figuring on saving money to upgrade the ram on both machines.
posted by photoslob at 9:20 PM on November 14, 2015


If getting the latest and greatest is important, MacRumors Buyer's Guide says don't buy a Mac Pro.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 11:00 PM on November 14, 2015


Best answer: Here's Marco Arment's thoughts on the 5K Retina iMac vs the Mac Pro from last year. He's a programmer and tech guy semi-obsessed with finding the best coffees, headphones, computers, and BMWs. He's also one-third of the great Accidental Tech Podcast.
posted by blueberry at 2:22 AM on November 15, 2015 [1 favorite]


Response by poster: Arment's thoughts and the machines he's comparing are exactly what I'm seeing in the research I'm doing. I'm looking at the 6 core MP and it edges out the 5k iMac just barely. I'll be using Photoshop mostly which will take advantage of the additional cores. I would wait for an update to the MP but I need to spend a little money by the end of the year for tax purposes.
posted by photoslob at 7:15 AM on November 15, 2015


I've got a 5k iMac and it's the best computer I've ever owned. It absolutely flies. Specs here.

Honestly, going back to a normal resolution screen is like going back to the '90s for me now. That NEC has quite a poor resolution for 30". And external 5k monitors cost almost as much as the whole iMac! Also in single core tasks the iMac is significantly faster than the Pro.
posted by derbs at 7:34 AM on November 15, 2015


Response by poster: The 5k monitor in the iMac is ridiculous but the gamut isn't as wide as the NEC. The NEC has a few advantages for retouching work. Any idea how hard it would be to run the NEC as a 2nd monitor on the iMac?
posted by photoslob at 7:44 AM on November 15, 2015


Best answer: That's a good idea actually. There's 2 thunderbolt ports on the back and adaptors are very cheap, like $10. Honestly you won't be disappointed with the iMac.

Another big benefit for me was it is light and quite portable for when I take it into the office.
posted by derbs at 7:53 AM on November 15, 2015


Response by poster: Good to know. I occasionally shoot tethered on location and it would be nice to have that pretty monitor to work with
posted by photoslob at 8:05 AM on November 15, 2015


Best answer: Yeah I got one of these cases. ~$150.
posted by derbs at 8:10 AM on November 15, 2015


Response by poster: I spent 30 mins in the Apple Store today comparing the MP and iMac 27 5k and I came home and ordered a .... MP. The display on the 5k is gorgeous but I'm not convinced it's what I need. I want to keep my NEC and I don't need a second monitor. I bought the MP on Amazon so I have a few days to make sure it's the right machine for my needs and if it's not I'll send it back and buy something else.
posted by photoslob at 4:03 PM on November 15, 2015 [1 favorite]


« Older Making friends when you're 30   |   Recurring Headaches, Only At Work Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.