Microsoft recently expanded its Surface lineup to include desktop PCs. The first Surface desktop is an All-in-one PC in the view of the iMac. Yet it has a lot of features the iMac does not have – namely that big, beautiful touch screen.
Yet, Apple’s iMac is no slouch either. Though older, it sports a beautiful 5K display.
The question for those in the All-in-one PC market is, which is better? Here we take a look at both the high-end models of each PC.
Why the high-end? Because those are the best of the best, with the ultimate components inside.
So without further ado let's look at Microsoft’s Surface Studio vs Apple’s iMac.
Microsoft’s Surface Studio vs Apple’s iMac: Specs
Microsoft Surface Studio
- Display: 28in PixelSense Display at 4500 x 3000
- CPU: 3.6GHz Intel Core i7
- RAM: 32GB
- Storage: 2TB hybrid drive
- Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M with 4GB GDDR5 memory
- Ports: 4 USB 3.0, SD card reader, Mini Displayport
- Connectivity: 802.11ac, Bluetooth 4.0
Apple iMac
- Display: 27in Retina 5K Display at 5120 x 2880
- CPU: 4.0GHz Intel Core i7
- RAM: 32GB
- Storage: 2TB Fusion Drive
- Graphics: AMD Radeon R9 M395X with 4GB of GDDR5 memory
- Ports: 4 USB 3.0, SD card reader, 2 Mini Displayports (aka Thunderbolt 2)
- Connectivity: 802.11ac, Bluetooth 4.0
Microsoft’s Surface Studio vs Apple’s iMac: Display
That being said, the Surface Studio display is a touch screen and can pick up 10 points of contact at the same time. The iMac’s display is just your standard non-touch enabled IPS display.
Microsoft’s Surface Studio vs Apple’s iMac: Design and Build
Both computers are All-in-one PC’s, which means averting is built into the display or base and there is no separate tower. While the iMac is your standard All-in-one PC, the Surface Studio has a highly adjustable hinge that allows its display to be lowered towards the desktop so you can, for example, you a stylus to write or draw on the screen.
Another difference is where Apple and Microsoft decided to put the internals. The internals of the iMac are built into the screen, which means the screen is thicker. The internals of the Surface Studio are built into the base, which means that’s thicker, but the screen is thinner.
Microsoft’s Surface Studio vs Apple’s iMac: CPU, Storage and RAM
Both machines max out at a whopping 32GB of RAM. So don’t think you’ll ever be short of that. Both machines also offer 2TB hard drives, which are part flash, and part traditional HD (Apple calls this a “Fusion” drive, Microsoft calls it a “Hybrid” drive.Things are even fairly close in the CPU department. Both offer Intel Core i7 chips, but the iMac gives you the option of getting a 4Ghz chip installed, while the Surface Studio maxes out at a slightly slower 3.6GHz chip.
Microsoft’s Surface Studio vs Apple’s iMac: Graphics
The Surface Studio offers the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M with 4GB GDDR5 memory. The iMac offer the AMD Radeon R9 M395X with 4GB of GDDR5 memory. Both of these graphics cards are insanely similar in specs, which means that they should give very, very similar performance.
Microsoft’s Surface Studio vs Apple’s iMac: Cost and Verdict
Keep in mind we’ve looked at the high-end version of both these machines. Spec-wise, technically the iMac beats the Surface Studio on most accounts. It’s got the better display resolution and the slightly better high-end CPU.
However, the display on these PCs make the choice harder of which one you should buy. The Surface Studio is probably the better option for graphics artists due to its beautiful, bigger touchscreen. With the Surface Studio you can say goodbye to any drawing tablet accessories and instead draw right on the screen itself. This is a huge boon to graphics artists.
However, the iMac has the higher resolution and the better color display, which means it should appeal more to those that work in video or Photoshop.
But yeah, either way it’s a tough choice. It’s an expensive choice too. The stock high-end iMac costs £3,239 while the high-end Surface Studio costs $4,199USD (or about £3,371GBP).
by michaelg via Featured Articles
Posts
No comments: