You can make a difference in the Apple Support Community!

When you sign up with your Apple Account, you can provide valuable feedback to other community members by upvoting helpful replies and User Tips.

Looks like no one’s replied in a while. To start the conversation again, simply ask a new question.

dwarnecke11 Author

Level 1

0 points

Real-World Performance: i5 vs i7

We've all seen the impressive benchmarks for the latest round of iMacs.

_Geekbench (64-bit)_
3.06 C2D ~ 4700
2.66 i5 ~ 7400
2.8 i7 ~ 9600

The i7 nearly matches the Mac Pro (with the $500 2.93 Ghz processor upgrade!).

I've been ready to upgrade for years now. My 1.42 Ghz G4 Mac mini has served me well since the spring of 2005 but it just can't keep up anymore. It's been utterly reliable, stable, and has aged better than any PC I've owned, but it's paltry 80 GB 4200 rpm HD, 512 MB of RAM and OS 10.3 ⚠ are definitely holding back my experience.

I've committed myself to buying a new iMac next week, either an i5 or i7. As impressive as the i7 is, would its real-world advantage mirror the impressive benchmarks or turn out to be a ~10% increase? I don't use expensive, cutting-edge software that would be able to utilize hyperthreading or perhaps even multiple cores. These benchmarks utilize every iota of power that these processors can provide and exploit all their functions. In a real-world setting, say, rendering a scene in Cinema 4D or a movie in iMovie, would the difference be all that noticeable? Futureproofing is a top concern of mine. I'd prefer to buy the best I can afford and enjoy using it for years and years. If I kept the iMac for five years, the i7 would cost be about ten cents per day over the i5.

How important will it be to have hyperthreading? The i5 lacks it. Does anyone know if the i5 runs cooler than the i7?

Some of these tests showed the 3.33 C2D outperforming the i5, but not the i7:

http://eshop.macsales.com/Reviews/Framework.cfm?page=/Benchmarks/iMacSnowBench.h tml

This greatly concerns me. I'm leaning towards the i7, but I'm not ruling out the i5. Any input would be appreciated.

Mac mini G4 1.42 Ghz, Mac OS X (10.3.x)

Posted on Nov 19, 2009 10:34 AM

24 replies

rkaufmann87

Level 10

144,186 points

Nov 19, 2009 7:17 PM in response to Thrifty One

Thanks for the correction now I don't feel as silly as I did earlier. 🙂

Roger

Nov 19, 2009 7:32 PM in response to dwarnecke11

Data at http://marketingtactics.com/Speedmark/

Luckybob

Level 1

5 points

Nov 20, 2009 2:24 AM in response to dwarnecke11

What have you decided on? I am just like you torn between the i5 and i7....and to top it off the i5's are available in store NOW!

dwarnecke11 Author

Level 1

0 points

Nov 20, 2009 7:01 AM in response to Luckybob

Seeing those render times, frame rates and scores, it seems the i5 compares better to the i7 than the Geekbench results would lead you to believe. The availability of the i5 in stores is also a factor in my decision, as is the simplified exchange procedure. With tax, the i7 nets a $200 premium, and I can think of a few things that $200 could be better spent on than saving a few seconds of rendering time. If there was a disparity in gaming frame rates, I'd have to go for the i7, but the i5 holds its own here. Leaning towards the i5 now...

MacMan 71

Level 2

300 points

Nov 20, 2009 8:26 AM in response to dwarnecke11

I went with the i7 not only because of the extra speed, but also due to the upgraded ATI Radeon 4850 graphics card.

kayjh

Level 1

140 points

Nov 20, 2009 9:10 AM in response to dwarnecke11

I decided on the i7. For $180.00 I didn't even think about it. The computer in Canada (8GB/2TB/FCE/One to One/Applecare) is $3,200.00. The $180.00 doesn't even get on the radar of concern for me, provided there is a bit more performance.

We don't know what software is coming in the next couple of years, but it will no doubt make use of the quad core setup and increased clock speeds. I keep my computers about 5 years so while an i7 doesn't future proof me (no computer really can), I can buy the quickest there is available today at a premium of $180.

What excited me about the Macworld review is the performance of a software title I use regularly which was in the article but can't be mentioned here. A 70%+ increase in performance for the i5 and probably another 10% for the i7 means a 2 hour job on a C2D will take about 70 minutes on an i5 and probably less than 60 minutes on an i7. My current 4 year old G5 20" takes 13 hours for the same job.

And the Mac Pro 8 core isn't much faster, which makes the i5/i7 an unbelievable value!!

kayjh 🙂

dwarnecke11 Author

Level 1

0 points

Nov 20, 2009 9:19 AM in response to MacMan 71

The 4850 HD is standard on the i5 and available on the C2D.

dwarnecke11 Author

Level 1

0 points

Nov 26, 2009 8:33 AM in response to dwarnecke11

Update:

I went with the i5! Price after tax and my student discount was $2053. I decided not to get AppleCare (makes sense for a MacBook but not a desktop IMO). Initial impressions have been very positive. The screen... there are no words for the screen. Anyone who calls this computer "overpriced" has never laid eyes on the screen! I can open every application on the dock almost instantaneously and watching the Activity Monitor, I never even reach 50/400 %. It's saying "give me more!".

I can't notice any real screen discoloration, maybe a very, very slight gradient to warmer whites near the bottom but nothing really noticeable or objectionable. I can hear the infamous "Seagate grumble" but its very faint, nothing I would consider returning the machine for. I can only hear it in my dead-silent room. The HD makes zero noise at idle. Startup is very fast, maybe 15 seconds or so, just make sure you select "Macintosh HD" under the Startup preference pane since it isn't selected by default.

I'm home for Thanksgiving with my parents, who don't have internet (typing this at my grandma's house). Once I get the iMac online the real fun will begin.

Cheers and Happy Thanksgiving!

Amar501

Level 1

0 points

Nov 26, 2009 6:33 PM in response to dwarnecke11

i just got my i7 with 8gb yesterday morning. ive ran geekbench and got a score of 9714 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZ98DZZbmHM

ive been doing some video conversions:

Handbrake 64bit version high profile setting with the cq up to around 70 which is really ott high.

source is a mkv video of smallville with 1280x720 resolution,

converting this to mp4 to allow playback on apple tv and front row without quality loss took around 45 mins. not bad for a 45min hd video.

i also tried the same video but this time just used the mpeg4 encoder instead of h264 and also changed the bit rate to variable and set it to 5000kbs and the file converted in a whopping *10-12 mins* i would say the quality is still the same, maybe a few percent less if you really want to be picky.

Real-World Performance: i5 vs i7