New 27 iMac

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 30
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post


    The MacBook vietnam leak seemed a pretty good rumour/ leak. I expect that to go official in 12 hours.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mode 5 View Post


    I figured that was less like a rumour/leak and more like one of those CONFIRMED moments that used to happen on sites like this.



    CONFIRMED NOW ON ALL Apple Online Stores. (The new Macbook, sorry no iMac update)
  • Reply 22 of 30
    ssquirrelssquirrel Posts: 1,196member
    It would be very interesting (if unlikely) to see them make the entire iMac lineup quad core. More likely is 2 each of the 21 and 27" varieties, i5's across the board with an i7 in the top 27" version. Maybe the top end 21" would allow for an i7 BTO as well, but I doubt it. The MacPro needs to be rebuilt with Gulftown 6 cores or switch to AMD when a magny-cours desktop variant is available. The next version of the Mac Pro really needs to be impressive or people will write tha model off completely. People already pass it up for an i7 27" iMac.
  • Reply 23 of 30
    mr. kmr. k Posts: 114member
    Something that I think a lot of people overlook is that despite it's age, the Mobility Radeon HD 4850 Apple uses in the 27" model is still one of the most powerful mobile-class graphics cards available. Even the Mobility 5850 is only slightly more powerful overall, though it does have some advantages in general purpose computing and in hardware DirectX 11 support.. I highly doubt that they'll move to desktop GPUs given the heat produced by the mobile ones in the current design, so really, any 5000 series GPUs apple uses won't be a significant step up. And forget about mobile Fermi, that thing pumps out so much heat that a current form iMac would overheat within minutes.



    The biggest way they could (practically) improve the graphics in the iMac would be to jump to Mobile 5600/5800 series Radeon cards, and double the amount of graphics memory.
  • Reply 24 of 30
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post


    It would be very interesting (if unlikely) to see them make the entire iMac lineup quad core.



    Right now Apples only good reason to stick with dual core Core 2 is to respect the current economic climate. That is The economy isn't as good as some thinks it is thus the need to have marketable low cost machines. Taken to the absolute limit the use of Intels hardware becomes an issue when offering up low cost machines.



    I could see Apple offering a low cost 4 core AMD based iMac with the balance going to higher end Intel chips. This isn't really that radical as they are supporting two vastly different motherboards now.

    Quote:

    More likely is 2 each of the 21 and 27" varieties, i5's across the board with an i7 in the top 27" version. Maybe the top end 21" would allow for an i7 BTO as well, but I doubt it.



    I7 might come faster than you think to the 21" machine.

    Quote:

    The MacPro needs to be rebuilt with Gulftown 6 cores or switch to AMD when a magny-cours desktop variant is available. The next version of the Mac Pro really needs to be impressive or people will write tha model off completely. People already pass it up for an i7 27" iMac.



    The Mac Pro needs to continue to use the server grade chips. It serves a niche market in that configuration. Instead what Apple needs is a gap filling model. This would be the machine built with desktop processors in a smaller case.



    Dave
  • Reply 25 of 30
    lemon bon bon.lemon bon bon. Posts: 2,173member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post


    It would be very interesting (if unlikely) to see them make the entire iMac lineup quad core. More likely is 2 each of the 21 and 27" varieties, i5's across the board with an i7 in the top 27" version. Maybe the top end 21" would allow for an i7 BTO as well, but I doubt it. The MacPro needs to be rebuilt with Gulftown 6 cores or switch to AMD when a magny-cours desktop variant is available. The next version of the Mac Pro really needs to be impressive or people will write tha model off completely. People already pass it up for an i7 27" iMac.



    The Mac Pro has a state of the art case. That's where my positivism ends for the 'former love of my life.'



    Paying a statring price of about £2k for a 'supposed' Workstation that has a 'mere' single quad core is the biggest piece of BS of Steve Job's Apple. It also has a LOUSY cheap ass 'mainstream' gpu card that was out of date (in performance terms...) years ago. Is it a consumer tower? Or a 'workstation' (outmoded term...when PC towers at less than half the price, come in crap cases but bags more ram, bags more gpu power and bags more gpu ram and bags more 'hurtz', and a monitor for less than half the price.)



    The days of people paying those kind of premiums for a 'workstation' are over. With about 100k in sales (I wonder why?) you have to contemplate the days of the 'Pro' being numbered unless they lop £800 off the starting price which is...erm...pure fantasy. It's a 'taking the p*ss' kind of price.



    Now. Comparing Apples to Apples. The iMac blows it away. You get 'workstation' power and a whopping 27 inch monitor and a better gpu for less money? Drag me off to the funny farm folks, because I'd have to be NUTS to buy a Mac Pro.



    As for the next gpu update in the iMac?



    Well, the 4850 is a decent card. But ahem, IT'S A BUDGET CARD FROM NEARLY TWO YEARS AGO NOW? How much does it cost? Go on, tell me? A £50? £75 card tops? Apple should be including it as standard across the board. It's a cheap ass card with good performance.



    So, my guess it should go in the bottom two models, standard. (But I guess Apple will keep offering a 'starting' iMac with integrated crappics for a £1k UK price. Meh. No, I didn't get that right. MEHHHHHH!



    CPU. Bottom two models. i5 as standard (cheap ass cpu) which they should have had at launch. Apple screwing the pooch again, keeping the ancient Core Duo 2.



    Top two models? i7 as STANDARD. With a decent 'MODERN' gpu.



    It's not hard, Apple. Especially when you're premiums over PC prices are 100%!!!



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 26 of 30
    programmerprogrammer Posts: 3,410member
    Well after ten minutes at Dell's online store, I figured out how to build a MacPro equivalent... and the pricing is fairly close. The problem is that there are far fewer options, and the combination Apple has chosen for you isn't likely what most people or businesses would choose from the Dell site. Apple really does have a large market (not price) oasis between the iMac and the MacPro. This is the "traditional" desktop computer segment that they bowed out of in the late-90s. I expect Apple doesn't want to compete in this segment since it tends to be very low margins, and this lack of a price premium would cannibalize iMac and MacPro sales. As for the past decade, it leaves the more tech savvy users frustrated with lack of choice... perhaps its just time for those users to go Hackintosh, eh?
  • Reply 27 of 30
    ssquirrelssquirrel Posts: 1,196member
    Hell if it's just straight number crunching on something that can be distributed, buy 3 i7 Imacs w/16GB RAM for the same cost as one maxed out 32GB 2.93GHz mac pro and get 50% more performance. Hmm that would be interesting. Distributed processing project using iMacs. Wall mount all of them and feed all their results together. Maximize space in the server room
  • Reply 28 of 30
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Programmer View Post


    Well after ten minutes at Dell's online store, I figured out how to build a MacPro equivalent... and the pricing is fairly close. The problem is that there are far fewer options, and the combination Apple has chosen for you isn't likely what most people or businesses would choose from the Dell site. Apple really does have a large market (not price) oasis between the iMac and the MacPro. This is the "traditional" desktop computer segment that they bowed out of in the late-90s. I expect Apple doesn't want to compete in this segment since it tends to be very low margins, and this lack of a price premium would cannibalize iMac and MacPro sales. As for the past decade, it leaves the more tech savvy users frustrated with lack of choice... perhaps its just time for those users to go Hackintosh, eh?



    Welcome back, Programmer. Long time no see.



    Try overclockers.co.uk. Dell indeed...



    When we talk of equivalent, that can mean a good many things.



    Still, it's academic. As you point out, Apple's consumer desktop strategy has (been sucking) been there for some time.



    I like the iMac. I have it.



    But I think consumers should be given the choice of a tower/cube/midi tower. To me, it's simple to reduce the starting price gulf between the iMac and the Mac 'Pro'. The starting price between the consumer and pro laptops is nowhere near that stark. I don't get it.



    Quad towers shouldn't start at 2000k. They could merely use consumer cpus to give the Mac tower more breadth and reach...



    Or to put it simply, in the 'real world'...here's what consumers like my mate buy...



    http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showpr...odid=FS-101-OE



    £1322.97 inc VAT for a 'kick the snot out of the entry Mac Pro' and still have money left to buy a spade to bury the body. And £700 towards a life time subscription to porn bundled with your iPhone and iPad.



    And in a not so crappy case these days...



    Looks at the Mac Pro starting price and specs.



    No, SHAME isn't what I feel...?



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 29 of 30
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,478moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    Quad towers shouldn't start at 2000k. They could merely use consumer cpus to give the Mac tower more breadth and reach...



    Or to put it simply, in the 'real world'...here's what consumers like my mate buy...



    http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showpr...odid=FS-101-OE



    £1322.97 inc VAT for a 'kick the snot out of the entry Mac Pro' and still have money left to buy a spade to bury the body. And £700 towards a life time subscription to porn bundled with your iPhone and iPad.



    Apple will use common parts between Mac Pro models to reduce inventory but allow them to get 8-cores, which you can't get with that Core i7 system. Plus, that example is heavily overclocked so I wouldn't be assured of its longevity.



    Apple could probably use cheaper Xeons to at least allow people to hit a reasonable entry point and just give us some better GPUs. The £1500 model they had before wasn't all that bad. £1900 is way too steep as you still have to add another GPU on top.



    We're nearing the end of the update cycle though so they look terrible just now.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    And in a not so crappy case these days...



    I much prefer Apple's minimalist style to the transparent, Transformer-esque design but each to his own.
  • Reply 30 of 30
    lemon bon bon.lemon bon bon. Posts: 2,173member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    Apple will use common parts between Mac Pro models to reduce inventory but allow them to get 8-cores, which you can't get with that Core i7 system. Plus, that example is heavily overclocked so I wouldn't be assured of its longevity.



    Apple could probably use cheaper Xeons to at least allow people to hit a reasonable entry point and just give us some better GPUs. The £1500 model they had before wasn't all that bad. £1900 is way too steep as you still have to add another GPU on top.



    We're nearing the end of the update cycle though so they look terrible just now.







    I much prefer Apple's minimalist style to the transparent, Transformer-esque design but each to his own.



    Yes. How did they go from £1500 to 1900 again? Remind me, somebody. Then you have to pay for a 'mid range' gpu to go on top of that? No thanks.



    Marv', not all the overclockers examples are 'overclocked.' That was kind of my point. The 'normal' quads are even cheaper with kick ass gpus. It was there to highlight the point that Apple are charging outrageous prices for access to quad technology and they need calling out on it and their lame gpus gpu choices whilst charging a premium.



    Happy with premiums if I'm getting premium parts.



    As for longevity. The warranties for those systems are return to base. You get the same 'year' Apple gives you. My friend still has his. 2+ years now.



    As for the transformer-esqe design. Yeah. That's an aesthetic issue. Sure, it aint classy, but having seen on in person...they aint 'crap'. PC cases have been catching up for some time now.



    But sure, nothing beats the Rolls Royce Mac Pro chassis...



    As for the iMac update. *Shrugs. They could do it now.



    Bump the entry models to i5.

    Bump the uppers to i7 as standard.

    Bump the gpu across teh board to 4850.

    4870 for the top end iMac.



    No need to wait for a 'new' cpu at all. Given Apple's history of iMac sidegrades, that shouldn't provide a major technological stumbling block for a company that gave us the iPad?



    Yeesh. And they're now inventory parts in plenty supply.



    Lemon Bon Bon.
Sign In or Register to comment.