Is it worth upgrading a 2011 iMac?

I wouldn't. In fact, I didn't. Being stuck at High Sierra, the best you could possibly hope for would be a reasonably fast obsolete machine.

I kept my Mid 2011 iMac until last summer. Being stuck one major version of macOS behind was OK. 2 is pushing it. This fall, presumably, it will be 3 major releases behind. it's time to move on.

Whether to upgrade or not is a good question...

A few hundred to upgrade your 2011, or a few thousand to by a new 21.5" iMac & then a few hundred to upgrade it to16 MB in the first place, then to add an external SSD to boot from.

A 2011 with a new drive or SSD & adding 2*8 GB sticks of RAM will greatly increase it's speed.

In case you're still interested I answered that question in your other Discussion:

You can purchase an external USB hard disk drive and install HS on it. That will cost all of fifty or sixty bucks for a 2 TB model.

Booting macOS from it will take a long time (several minutes) but once it's up and running and all its caches are built, it should be acceptable for routine use.

If and when you decide to replace that Mac you can repurpose that external hard disk drive for Time Machine backups. You really won't be spending any additional money on that Mac, because you need to back up those thousands of albums anyway, assuming you don't want to lose them.

To directly answer your question replacing its internal hard disk with another hard disk isn't worth the effort, financial or otherwise. I'd get the external hard disk drive (which you'll need anyway) and decide for yourself. Then, use that hard disk drive for Time Machine.

niandralades76 Said:

"[...]I guess that the conclusion is that I should probably get a new iMac.[...]Thanks again for all your input, I really appreciate it."

-------

You are welcome.

Yes: I conclude that getting a new Mac is best.

Here is why:

I'd say getting a MacBook pro is best - all due to "ease-of-maneuverability" purposes. Let's face it: elsewise, it'd be just sitting there on your desk, all this time.

As for getting one, I highly recommend getting it from none other than the Manufacturer: Apple. I say that because it is reported oh so many times on these forums that someone purchases a used item, and it ends up either not being signed out of by the previous owner, or it is locked. Of course, it is up to you as where to get it. But, I always emphasize (based on all the mentions of it) that getting a new one directly from Apple is Best.

Ten years from now, It would be the same. Right now, with a 2010 Mac, it does not meet the criteria for the specifications/requirements needed to go past macOS 10.13. And, as time goes on, computers get slow, and eventually die.

For thought, and always on successful experiences, I always get AppleCare Plus with my device - but that is just me - get as you wish. :)

niandralades76 Said:

"Is it worth upgrading a 2011 iMac?: Hi all. My question is, I have a mid 2011 iMac. I’ve posted previously that it is quite slow and it turns out it has a failing hard drive. My question is... Is it worth upgrading it financially? I’ll need more ram as it’s just 4GB, a new hard drive, better processor (if that’s poss?), graphics card? or bite the bullet and just buy a new one? Thanks for advice."

-------

What's the Way to Go?:

If this begins to not suit your needs, then its is time to move on with a new Mac - in 1/2 a year - it will be a decade old - and it's compatibility and technology has already, undoubtedly changed. So, if you do go about ridding of your Mac, refer to the following: What to do before you sell, give away, or trade in your Mac - Apple Support

Hi, and thank you all so much for your great input.

I take it that all proposed actions to repair (if this term is appropriate at all) the iMac would take a considerable amount of time and that there is no guarantee for success.

So if I take into account

• my own work (even at a most hourly rate)
• the fact that I would still get some $250 for my iMac
• the fact that a new 21..5 inch iMac sells at Costco for under $1000

I guess that the conclusion is that I should probably get a new iMac.

The only question that remains is (hoping that it is not an act of blasphemy to ask this in an iMac forum) if you think that ten years from now I'd be better of if now I bought an iMac or a MacBook (Pro)

Thanks again for all your input, I really appreciate it.

Mike

Hi, John Galt,

and first of all, thanks for your many insightful answers to really hard problems concerning MacBooks, iMacs and iOS.

I have a similar problem to niandralades76's.

I have an iMac:

iMac (21.5-inch, Late 2012)

2.9 GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5

8 GB 1600 MHz DDR3

NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M 512 MB

and ever since I upgraded to Catalina (10.15.4 (19E287) the computer runs incredibly slow.

I have:

• eliminated all third party software with the exception of a printer driver (Canon) and a driver software for a connection to an external server (Synology Drive)
• reinstalled iOS

but nothing seems to help.

Especially Apple Mail is inconceivably slow.

• If I write a new email, I type a sentence, and then see it slowly appear in the email window, letter by letter.
• If I click on a (HTML) email in the preview window it takes 15-20 seconds for it to display in the preview window
• If I use the option "Export as PDF" a window appears, "Exporting content to PDF" and remains there for 3-5 minutes before the PDF file of the email is created

I have:

• rebuilt all mailboxes (3, iCloud, Google, AOL) many times,
• archived most emails (each mailbox contains < 500 emails)

and it didn't help.

I used Etrecheck which concluded that I might have a damaged HD. But the OS proprietary Disk Utility says that the HD is good.

In conclusion my questions are the following:

• is there anything more I can do to get the computer run at a normal speed?
• should I perhaps uninstall Catalina and go back to High Sierra?
• Is it worthwhile to buy a new HD and/or RAM and DIY it into the computer?
• if I were to buy a new computer should I rather opt for an iMac or a Macbook

Thank you so much for your help

best,

Michael

I'm with Tim. My g/f has a mid 2011 running High Sierra and it works fine for her needs. However, if it starts to fail we're not going to put any money into it.

Michael,

You may want to create your own thread on your issue with your 2012 iMac. Trying to use this thread is confusing for others and we can give you the attention you need for your problem.

Financially? That's just an expected cost over time.

[Cost of Upgrades] / [years_extended] * [chance_of_failure] ) -vs- [Cost of New] / [expected lifespan]

If +8GB RAM (~$50), a 480GB SSD (~$170) has a 90% chance of lasting just two more years (equivalent to running El Capitan today) that's a financial cost of $122/year. Maybe $172/year if you assume the upgrade takes $100 worth of your time.

On the other hand a new iMac as good today as your 2011 was when it was new would arguably cost $1800-$2100: ~$220/year if it too lasted 9 years before needing major upgrades or replacement.

So financially the upgrade is probably worth it.*

*If you can get by staying with an older version of MacOS and if you are OK staying with the same CPU/GPU. For a better CPU/GPU combo biting the bullet is the only option.

I am in a similar boat, I have a functioning 2011 27" iMac and intend to replace it. However for the time being it is working fine and I have plenty of backup. So while I intend to replace it I am waiting for it to be necessity. If I were in your shoes, I'd spend any money on your current machine's replacement.

Hi, RKaufmann,

and thanks a lot for your fast reply.

I will try an dopen my own thread.

I have one question. You write (in your first post):

> If I were in your shoes, I'd spend any money on your current machine's replacement.

So your recommendation is to buy a new computer and not spend money on replacing/adding to HD or RAM, right?

Thanks again so much,

Michael

MWEsser wrote:

I used Etrecheck which concluded that I might have a damaged HD. But the OS proprietary Disk Utility says that the HD is good.

Unfortunately that's the best EtreCheck and Disk Utility can do.

Whereas Disk Utility can perform cursory disk integrity verification checks and equally cursory repairs, it's inadequate to draw a definitive conclusion regarding disk failures. In fact if you were to attempt to mount an operable yet damaged hard disk drive, Disk Utility will just churn and spin and become unresponsive as it tries in vain to extract useful information from it, conceivably for hours on end.

That sad fact gives rise to popular suggestions to use this or that third party product to more conclusively diagnose and quantify and present the extent of the failure in excruciating detail, but who cares. It can't be fixed so why bother. Throw it out. As long as you have a Time Machine backup your only losses will be time and money.

Failed hard disk drives are almost always diagnosed anecdotally—in the symptoms you observe and the actions you take to address them, while also considering their age, assumed environment, and typical use. A definitive conclusion could be drawn by installing macOS on an external hard disk drive, booting from it, and determining if the symptoms are alleviated while running macOS from that startup disk. To do that read How to select a different startup disk. If the external hard disk installation works properly while the internal one does not, that is all the justification you need to condemn the internal disk.

That leaves EtreCheck. Bearing in mind I am by no means an expert at using it (which only its author can claim) as I understand its algorithm it performs certain extensive read / write operations and compares that performance to known benchmarks. If the performance of the disk being evaluated falls below a threshold, it concludes the disk may be operating in a state of failure. That's still not a conclusive determination, but it's better than Disk Utility. In extreme cases EtreCheck may take a half hour or more to run. That's about as conclusive as anything is likely to get.

Looks the same to me. Sure this time MacOS managed to somehow avoid using swap space for virtual memory, didn't have a timeout when writing to the disk, and finished in the etrecheck test on time... but you still have the same software installed, same google backup/sync running in the background, and same inadequate 4GB RAM, etc.