or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple ads hint at thinner iMacs, lighter MacBooks, cheaper Mac minis
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple ads hint at thinner iMacs, lighter MacBooks, cheaper Mac minis - Page 5

post #161 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Messiah View Post

Yeah, that's one of those designs where you see it for the first time and think to yourself 'why hasn't that been around before now?'

Instant classic, and far more elegant that what Mr. Ive was able to come up with for the alu iMac. Its clean and minimal, and it makes the current iMac look really dated.

I hope you're right I'd love to see Apple producing an iMac like this!

Yeah, I think NVIDIA nailed that one.
post #162 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.metcalf View Post

The Apple logo is offensively bright in that design. I don't mind seeing one but it has to be subtle, your one is far too distracting.

That was my first impression. It was like, "hey look at me! I have a shiny Apple logo where my balls should be!"
post #163 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post

With hyperthreading, it's actually capable of running four threads at that speed. And there are a number of minor architectural improvements which make an i7 processor faster than Core 2 clock-for-clock, plus that on-die memory controller. But I digress.

Of course you do. And you still wrong, the Ci7-820QM top speed is 3.06GHz on ONE core (that means 2 threads not four). And it's already more expensive than the 3.06GHz C2D.

Yes, Core i7 cpus are better processors than core 2 duo, I am not saying that Apple should stay with C2D in the iMac. I am just saying that most Clarksfields would not be an improvement: they are not THAT fast and they are MORE expensive.

Intel has already a better solution in the Xeon L3426 that is very close in performance to the top of the line Clarksfield and costs a lot less. This cpu and a couple other faster ones custom-made by Intel for Apple would be way more suited for the iMac in terms of performance and will keep the prices low for the user.

With it's TDP of 45W and 3420 chipset at 4.5W, it's not even incompatible with thinner iMacs (as per the rumors), also the power hungry and expensive 9400M chipset would not be used and it would make room (space and cost and TDP) for better dedicated gpus.
post #164 of 178
The one issue is that the L3426 is a unique part.
post #165 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

The one issue is that the L3426 is a unique part.

Good point. Where's the L3425 and L3427?
post #166 of 178
It looks the Imac update is not for today?

Regards
post #167 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by jraffin View Post

It looks the Imac update is not for today?

Regards

If it is more than a speed bump, then it would warrant a special event. There has been a Fall event for Macs for several years running, with last years falling on Tuesday, October 13th. Im predicting that well get word by Thursday of an event next week.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #168 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

Good point. Where's the L3425 and L3427?

Don't exist AFAIK. Here's the Xenon lineup, straight from Intel:



This shows the L3426 running at 1.86 ghz at base line. No QPI which I find curious. I really don't know much about the chip but I doubt its substantially different from the clarksfield cpus. They can't just create a faster, cooler chip out of thin air.
post #169 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

Don't exist AFAIK. Here's the Xenon lineup, straight from Intel:



This shows the L3426 running at 1.86 ghz at base line. No QPI which I find curious. I really don't know much about the chip but I doubt its substantially different from the clarksfield cpus. They can't just create a faster, cooler chip out of thin air.

I know, I was being facetious. It is interesting they chose such a specific number. Sort of alludes to a whole family of L34xx series Xeon (minus the N :P ). Also, it doesn't have QPI, obviously because it's based on the Lynnfield core. No QPI because it already has an on board PCI-E controller and memory controller. All it needs is a pretty fast DMI for basic IO (USB, SATA, sound, ethernet, etc.).
post #170 of 178
They may want to synchronize the whole thing with the opening of the two first french AppleStores (which will eventually allow them to distribute directly the new hardware).
Just a guess, but would be a real boost for them to do so if the new stuff is cool.

Anyway, as we don't know when they will open, the mystery is still there. I recall reading somewhere it would be around the 25th of October, but I am not sure about this one...
post #171 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjteix View Post

Of course you do. And you still wrong, the Ci7-820QM top speed is 3.06GHz on ONE core (that means 2 threads not four). And it's already more expensive than the 3.06GHz C2D.

Yes, Core i7 cpus are better processors than core 2 duo, I am not saying that Apple should stay with C2D in the iMac. I am just saying that most Clarksfields would not be an improvement: they are not THAT fast and they are MORE expensive.

Intel has already a better solution in the Xeon L3426 that is very close in performance to the top of the line Clarksfield and costs a lot less. This cpu and a couple other faster ones custom-made by Intel for Apple would be way more suited for the iMac in terms of performance and will keep the prices low for the user.

With it's TDP of 45W and 3420 chipset at 4.5W, it's not even incompatible with thinner iMacs (as per the rumors), also the power hungry and expensive 9400M chipset would not be used and it would make room (space and cost and TDP) for better dedicated gpus.

So you dismiss the i7-QM processors and then plug Lynnfield-derived Xeons, which are essentially the same thing. The same piece of silicon, on a different package, using the same chipset. That's great.
post #172 of 178
WOW. Such negative thinking!

- You guys have already forgotten that the iMac has been using custom cpus (E8x35) for about 2 years and that E8x35 series cpus are nowhere to be found in Intel's own lists of processors. That doesn't mean a thing.

_ IF there were other Xeons of the L34xx series, they would probably be L3436, L3446, etc. since the third digit is for the speed/clock, the fourth being for particular features.

- The L3426 is "just" a low-voltage Lynnfield with a memory controller that supports ECC RAM (hence the Xeon denomination). It doesn't have all the temperature related features of full mobile chips (aimed for notebooks) but those aren't required for small server (or desktop) systems.

- Not all Xeons are based on the multiple processors capable Xeons, some, like all the ones from the x34xx series, are based on the desktop Core i5/i7 cpus, Intel updates/activates ECC RAM support, and that's all.

- The L3426 uses a 3400/3420 chipset that is very similar to the desktop P55 chipset. Cheap and only 4.5W. FWIW, the 3420 chipset will also support Jasper Forest 32nm cpus that will be launched in Q1 2010.

- There are about as many SKUs in the xeon family than desktop and mobile SKUs combined. Where do you think you can find to most diverse types of cpus?

- Intel has always offered custom chips for some clients, Apple is no stranger to that and there is absolutly no reason why they couldn't get custom-made cpus based on the L3426 if they wanted to.

- Yes, the L3426 is not much different from a Clarksfield, it is just faster and way less expensive. The iMac doesn't need a mobile cpu, when alternatives are available at the same TDP, and they certainly don't need more expensive cpus for the sake of it.

- What's so difficult to understand:
Xeon L3426 1.86/3.20GHz 45W $284, chipset 4.5W $25 (3400) or $31 (3420)
Ci7-720QM 1.60/2.80GHz 45W $364, chipset 3.5W $40 (PM55)
Ci7-820QM 1.73/3.06GHz 45W $546, chipset 3.5W $40 (PM55)
Ci7-920XM 2.00/3.20GHz 55W $1,054, chipset 3.5W $40 (PM55)

- Stop calling Xeon cpus Xenon.
post #173 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjteix View Post

- Stop calling Xeon cpus Xenon.

Oops. My bad, I'll fess up to my error.

PS I hope you're right. I'm just not holding my breath.
post #174 of 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post

So you dismiss the i7-QM processors and then plug Lynnfield-derived Xeons, which are essentially the same thing. The same piece of silicon, on a different package, using the same chipset. That's great.

Of course I do. One thing that I don't want is for the iMac to cost more than it does already. The L3426 has better performances than both QM chips, pretty close to the XM chip, AND is way less expensive. That's being GREAT.

FWIW, it doesn't use the same chipset. It uses a cheaper 3400/3420 chipset. Ain't that GREAT?

If you think that it's GREAT to pay more (up to 4x more) for the "same piece of silicon", you can have them all.

Intel has offered quad-core mobile chips for about 2 years, none to be seen on any Mac computer. Overpriced, just like Clarksfield. What makes you think that Apple will use Clarksfield, this time?


Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac

Oops. My bad, I'll fess up to my error.

PS I hope you're right. I'm just not holding my breath.

Nor do I. This is not a prediction. I've learned to always expect something different (good or bad) from Apple over the years. I just can't stand people wanting Clarksfield in the iMac (and dismissing everything else) while there are better alternatives in line with the current design/price points.
post #175 of 178
Shipping times on the iMac and Mini have slipped again on the Apple Store - Mini is now 3-5 days out. Low end 24" iMac is 1-2 days.
The grass is always greener above the septic tank
Reply
The grass is always greener above the septic tank
Reply
post #176 of 178
My imac is being replaced through Apple (corporate level). The replacement was supposed to be shipped around 10/01/09. I got a call this week to let me know that the imac probably won't ship until 10/15/09. They are experiencing big back-order problems. I assume this will be after the announcement of the new imac and everything settles back down.
post #177 of 178
Neflix CEO Reed Hastings states that “streaming will be bigger than DVDs at Netflix in under two years.”

http://arstechnica.com/media/news/20...ks-netflix.ars
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #178 of 178
So when will the new Macbook be revealed?

iPod nano 5th Gen 8GB Orange, iPad 3rd Gen WiFi 32GB White
MacBook Pro 15" Core i7 2.66GHz 8GB RAM 120GB Intel 320M
Mac mini Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 8GB RAM, iPhone 5 32GB Black

Reply

iPod nano 5th Gen 8GB Orange, iPad 3rd Gen WiFi 32GB White
MacBook Pro 15" Core i7 2.66GHz 8GB RAM 120GB Intel 320M
Mac mini Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 8GB RAM, iPhone 5 32GB Black

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple ads hint at thinner iMacs, lighter MacBooks, cheaper Mac minis