New build-to-order iMacs impress with speed

The machines include more speed and processing power and additional cost for the upgrades are worth it

When Apple released new iMacs in early May, the company also made available new build-to-order (BTO) options in addition to the standard-configuration models. Macworld Lab tested two iMacs with BTO processor upgrades that offer faster speeds and more processing power, and the results show that the additional cost for the upgrades are worth it--if you run software that takes advantage of the technology.

Processor upgrades are optional for two of the four standard-configuration iMac models. For the $1499 21.5-inch 2.7GHz Core i5 quad-core model, an upgrade to a 2.8GHz Core i7 quad-core processor is available. For the $1999 27-inch 3.1GHz Core i5 quad-core iMac, you can upgrade to a 3.4GHz Core i7 quad-core processor. Each upgrade adds $200 to the price of the respective standard-configuration computer.

The standard-configuration iMacs use processors that do not use Intel's Hyper-Threading technology, but the Core i7 upgrades do support the technology. Hyper-Threading allows two processing threads to run on a single core. In the case of a quad-core processor, Hyper-Threading would present the operating system with eight virtual cores. This can allow for faster processing. The only way to get Hyper-Threading on the new iMacs is to buy the BTO Core i7 processor option.

However, many applications do not make efficient use of multiple cores, so going from four cores to eight virtual ones doesn't make a lick of difference. Some applications, however, can and do make use of all of those cores. Processor-intensive applications such as HandBrake, Cinema 4D, and Mathematica benefit greatly from Hyper-Threading.

Whether the upgrades are worth the additional cost depends on what you plan to do with your iMac. Our system performance test suite, Speedmark 6.5, produced results that show that the 21.5-inch iMac with a BTO 2.8GHz Core i7 processor is about 7 percent faster than the standard 21.5-inch 2.7GHz Core i5 iMac. The 27-inch iMac with a BTO 3.4GHz Core i7 processor is about 11 percent faster than the standard 27-inch 3.1GHz Core i5 iMac.

In individual tasks, the 21.5-inch 2.8GHz Core i7 iMac was more than 15 percent faster than the standard 21.5-inch 2.7GHz Core i5 iMac when importing a camera archive into iMovie, 18 percent faster in our HandBrake encoding test, 22 percent faster in MathematicaMark, and 25 percent faster in the Cinebench CPU test. The BTO 21.5-inch iMac was 11 percent faster overall than the $1199 21.5-inch 2.5GHz Core i5 iMac, and 21 percent faster in our iMovie import test, 24 percent faster in HandBrake, 30 percent faster in Cinebench's CPU test, and 31 percent faster in MathematicaMark.

The BTO 21.5-inch iMac was also 5 percent faster overall than the standard $1999 27-inch 3.1GHz Core i5 iMac, and 7 percent faster in our HandBrake test, 9 percent faster in our iMovie import test, 12 percent faster in MathematicaMark, and 15 percent faster in the Cinebench CPU test.

The 27-inch iMac with a 3.4GHz Core i7 processor was 5 percent faster overall than the BTO 21.5-inch iMac, and it was 8 percent faster in our iMovie import test, 15 percent faster at HandBrake, and 17 percent faster at both Cinebench CPU and MathematicaMark.

Speedmark 6.5 results showed the BTO 27-inch iMac to be 11 percent faster than the standard $1999 3.1GHz Core i5 iMac. The 3.4GHz Core i7 iMac was 17 percent faster in iMovie, 21 percent faster in HandBrake, 29 percent faster in the Cinebench CPU test, and scored 31 percent higher than the 3.1GHz i5 iMac in MathematicaMark.

The new standard 27-inch 3.1GHz Core i5 iMac performed very similarly to a BTO model from last year, a 27-inch 2.93GHz Core i7 quad-core iMac.

Our Speedmark 6.5 test results page shows how the BTO iMacs compare to other current and discontinued Macs.

Speedmark 6.5 individual application test results: New BTO iMacs (Mid 2011)

Duplicate

1GB

File

Zip

2GB

folder

Unzip

2GB

folder

Pages '09

Open

Word Doc

21.5-inch iMac 2.8GHz Core i7 (BTO)

20

130

45

65

27-inch iMac 3.4GHz Core i7 (BTO)

20

130

45

63

21.5-inch iMac 2.7GHz Core i5 (Mid 2011)

20

134

47

65

27-inch iMac 3.1GHz Core i5 (Mid 2011)

20

144

48

70

27-inch iMac 2.93GHz Core i7 (BTO, Mid 2010)

17

157

36

71

27-inch iMac 3.6GHz Core i5 (BTO, Mid 2010)

17

140

36

65

Mac Pro 3.33GHz Xeon Westmere six-core (BTO, Mid 2010)

18

148

26

62

Results are in seconds. Lower results are better. Reference models in italics. Best result in bold.

Speedmark 6.5 individual application test results: New BTO iMacs (Mid 2011)

iPhoto '09

200 JPEG

import

Photoshop

CS5 action

HandBrake

0.9.4

encode

Cinebench

R11.5

graphics

21.5-inch iMac 2.8GHz Core i7 (BTO)

35

50

194

42.6

27-inch iMac 3.4GHz Core i7 (BTO)

33

51

165

43.2

21.5-inch iMac 2.7GHz Core i5 (Mid 2011)

33

52

236

41.6

27-inch iMac 3.1GHz Core i5 (Mid 2011)

28

53

209

38.3

27-inch iMac 2.93GHz Core i7 (BTO, Mid 2010)

29

53

208

34.8

27-inch iMac 3.6GHz Core i5 (BTO, Mid 2010)

33

55

340

31.0

Mac Pro 3.33GHz Xeon Westmere six-core (BTO, Mid 2010)

27

55

144

34

CineBench R11.5 Graphics results are a score; higher results are better. All other test results in the above chart are in seconds; lower results are better. Reference models in italics. Best result in bold.

Speedmark 6.5 individual application test results: New BTO iMacs (Mid 2011)

Cinebench

R11.5 CPU

Mathematica

Mark 7

Parallels

World-Bench

Multitask

test

Aperture

3 import

and

process

Multi-tasking

21.5-inch iMac 2.8GHz Core i7 (BTO)

72

13.1

254

101

59

27-inch iMac 3.4GHz Core i7 (BTO)

60

15.3

226

100

55

21.5-inch iMac 2.7GHz Core i5 (Mid 2011)

96

10.7

262

104

61

27-inch iMac 3.1GHz Core i5 (Mid 2011)

85

11.7

247

107

58

27-inch iMac 2.93GHz Core i7 (BTO, Mid 2010)

77

12.5

282

108

62

27-inch iMac 3.6GHz Core i5 (BTO, Mid 2010)

130

7.0

293

109

72

Mac Pro 3.33GHz Xeon Westmere six-core (BTO, Mid 2010)

48

19.2

253

101

59

MathematicaMark 7 results are scores; higher results are better. All other test results in the above chart are in seconds; lower results are better. Reference models in italics. Best result in bold.

How we tested. Speedmark 6.5 scores are relative to those of a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo Mac mini (Mid 2010) with 2GB of RAM, which is assigned a score of 100. We duplicated a 1GB file, created a Zip archive in the Finder from the two 1GB files and then unzipped it. We converted 135 minutes of AAC audio files to MP3 using iTunes' High Quality setting. In iMovie '09, we imported a camera archive and exported it to iTunes using the Mobile Devices setting. We ran a Timedemo at 1024-by-768 with 4X anti-aliasing on in Call of Duty 4. We imported 200 JPEGs into iPhoto '09. The Photoshop Suite test is a set of 23 scripted tasks using a 50MB file. Photoshop's memory was set to 70 percent and History was set to Minimum. For our multitasking test, we timed the Photoshop test again, but with the iTunes MP3 encoding and file compression tests running in the background. We used Handbrake to encode four chapters from a DVD previously ripped to the hard drive to H.264. We recorded how long it took to render a scene with multiprocessors in Cinebench and ran that application's OpenGL, frames per second test. We ran the Evaluate Notebook test in MathematicaMark 7. We ran the WorldBench 6 multitasking test on a Parallels 6 VM running Windows 7 Professional. We timed the import and processing time for 200 photos in Aperture.--Macworld Lab testing by James Galbraith, William Wang, and Mauricio Grijalva

James Galbraith is Macworld's lab director.

Join the newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.
Rocket to Success - Your 10 Tips for Smarter ERP System Selection

Tags MacApplehardware systemsdesktop pcs

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

James Galbraith

Macworld.com
Show Comments

Cool Tech

Breitling Superocean Heritage Chronographe 44

Learn more >

SanDisk MicroSDXC™ for Nintendo® Switch™

Learn more >

Toys for Boys

Family Friendly

Panasonic 4K UHD Blu-Ray Player and Full HD Recorder with Netflix - UBT1GL-K

Learn more >

Stocking Stuffer

Razer DeathAdder Expert Ergonomic Gaming Mouse

Learn more >

Christmas Gift Guide

Click for more ›

Most Popular Reviews

Latest Articles

Resources

PCW Evaluation Team

Walid Mikhael

Brother QL-820NWB Professional Label Printer

It’s easy to set up, it’s compact and quiet when printing and to top if off, the print quality is excellent. This is hands down the best printer I’ve used for printing labels.

Ben Ramsden

Sharp PN-40TC1 Huddle Board

Brainstorming, innovation, problem solving, and negotiation have all become much more productive and valuable if people can easily collaborate in real time with minimal friction.

Sarah Ieroianni

Brother QL-820NWB Professional Label Printer

The print quality also does not disappoint, it’s clear, bold, doesn’t smudge and the text is perfectly sized.

Ratchada Dunn

Sharp PN-40TC1 Huddle Board

The Huddle Board’s built in program; Sharp Touch Viewing software allows us to easily manipulate and edit our documents (jpegs and PDFs) all at the same time on the dashboard.

George Khoury

Sharp PN-40TC1 Huddle Board

The biggest perks for me would be that it comes with easy to use and comprehensive programs that make the collaboration process a whole lot more intuitive and organic

David Coyle

Brother PocketJet PJ-773 A4 Portable Thermal Printer

I rate the printer as a 5 out of 5 stars as it has been able to fit seamlessly into my busy and mobile lifestyle.

Featured Content

Latest Jobs

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?