Intel iMac refresh...
I am looking for a half decent audio editing workstation, and it was rumoured that a refresh of the Intel iMac will happen soon due to processor's getting cheaper and such.
I was wondering, is this refresh likely to happen before July?
And also, would anyone recommend the iMac for audio editing. I will be running Ableton Live 5.2 with a few plugins and filters, and GarageBand. Are there any known issues with iMac with regards to audio editing/composing.
Also, check out some of the tunes I have been involved in here: http://theblog.kilvo.com/
Cheers!
Jan
I was wondering, is this refresh likely to happen before July?
And also, would anyone recommend the iMac for audio editing. I will be running Ableton Live 5.2 with a few plugins and filters, and GarageBand. Are there any known issues with iMac with regards to audio editing/composing.
Also, check out some of the tunes I have been involved in here: http://theblog.kilvo.com/
Cheers!
Jan
Comments
The iMac went Intel in January. It could be refreshed anywhere in the July-September timeframe, and the next version will feature either Merom (a more efficient, cooler processor) or Conroe (a very fast desktop processor) with speeds anywhere from 2.16 - 3.0 GHz.
Merom on the high end goes from 2.0 to 2.33 GHz, and Conroe goes from 2.13 to 2.66 on the high end.
Originally posted by ZachPruckowski
The iMac went Intel in January. It could be refreshed anywhere in the July-September timeframe...
or it could stick around till January, which is not unprecidented. I think that the average refresh for Apple's computer line in is in 8 month cycles.
Originally posted by @homenow
or it could stick around till January, which is not unprecidented. I think that the average refresh for Apple's computer line in is in 8 month cycles.
Intel is rolling out a slew of new chips this summer and fall. It would be foolish and arrogant for Apple not to introduce them (either Conroe or Merom) into iMac IMO. This isn't Freescale or IBM, you can actually get speed bumps several times in one year.
I will just have to wait and see I guess. I read rumours that the refresh would be in June thanks to Intel dropping CPU prices at the end of this month (May).
Thanks for your help!
Jan
Originally posted by @homenow
or it could stick around till January, which is not unprecidented. I think that the average refresh for Apple's computer line in is in 8 month cycles.
Impossible. That would be commercial suicide.
Actually those long update cycles where dictated by the bad scalability of the G4/G5 processors.
Apple used to update much more frequent in the years before that.
It was very common to have a 3-6 month update cycle instead the rather stagnant G4/G5 era.
So:
It is highly possible the iMac gets a small speedbump before july, like the MacBook Pro has had, followed by a fall 2006 update to Core2 Duo. (Conroe or Merom)
I would wait for Core2 Duo.
Originally posted by gar
...Actually those long update cycles where dictated by the bad scalability of the G4/G5 processors.
Apple used to update much more frequent in the years before that.
It was very common to have a 3-6 month update cycle instead the rather stagnant G4/G5 era....
I know that the long upgrade cycles were somewhat dictated by slow release of improved chips by Moto/IBM. However, even when they had faster chips available Apple did not use them in all cases. Case in point, the PowerBook, iBook and Mac Mini G4's. Moto had chips running at least up to 1.8 (and possibly 2.0) Ghz but the fastest that Apple used was the 1.67 G4 in the PowerBook, and they kept the Mac Mini down to an official 1.42 Ghz when the iMac was running 1.8 G5', plenty of room to install a 1.5-1.7 G4 in the Mini's top end unit, Apple didn't do it.
Apple has also stated a preference for longer, not shorter upgrade cycles. I do realize the comercial realities that the switch to Intel processors brings, but how will this come into play is something to be seen. Back in the Clone days Apple was often the last on the block to release the fastest processor. I think that this will be different now, but that is hope as much as anything with nothing to base it on but history.
One thing I'm pretty sure on, if Apple is going to release a new processor in the iMac this fall then chances are not great for a speed bump this late in the game. A small speed bump would cost a relatively large amount of money when all the marketing material, web pages, and so on are calculated.That is probably why they never made an official release of the 1.5 Ghz Mac Mini.
I think the best guage to see what will happen might be to look at projected pricing of the Conroe and Morem chips and compare them to those of the Yonah before it was released. This would give a rough guide on what is possible for these chips to go into without a parts price increase for Apple. I can't keep all the different chips, I'm not used to having this many potential chips to choose from or a development cycle that is working and bringing new chips to market to be used by Apple. What I think will happen between now and November is this:
- Mac Mini speed boost/drop the Core Solo, stays with Yonah though. Possible entry model at $499, and the $799 goes down to $699. New top end at $799 or $899 with the fastest Yonah processor available without equiling the iMacs low end speed.
- Macbook Pro line switching over to the chip that is truely designed for laptops. It is possible that the Macbook will get this as well, but I'm not optamistic on this since it was just released.
- iMac released with the best fit for it's purpose while keeping the price of the processor in line with where it is using the Yonah.
- MacPro models released with the latest and greatest processors, most likely at WWDC.
- Potential for a Mac line priced between the MacMini and the MacPro's, similar specs to the iMac but without the AIO design.
Now I would change these expectations if Apple is ready with Leopard before January, and if they make a big deal out of 64 bit computing at WWDC. This might signal a marketing campaign for a full 64 bit line-up at or shortly after the release of the new OS. Of course since some of these chips are pin compatible with the existing ones they could hold off a switch to a fully 64 bit line-up and OS in January which could make a big splash in the media with a refreash of Apple's entire line as well as a new OS.Originally posted by @homenow
I know that the long upgrade cycles were somewhat dictated by slow release of improved chips by Moto/IBM. However, even when they had faster chips available Apple did not use them in all cases. Case in point, the PowerBook, iBook and Mac Mini G4's. Moto had chips running at least up to 1.8 (and possibly 2.0) Ghz but the fastest that Apple used was the 1.67 G4 in the PowerBook, and they kept the Mac Mini down to an official 1.42 Ghz when the iMac was running 1.8 G5', plenty of room to install a 1.5-1.7 G4 in the Mini's top end unit, Apple didn't do it.
It's not that Apple didn't want to do it, the heat issues for PPC chips prohibited it. In case you didn't know, speed issues (due to heat problems in Apple form factor) is the primary reason Apple switched to Intel. To not take advantage of the best Intel has to offer, is contradictory to the reason for switching. While I agree that Apple won't be the first out of the starting gate, they will have to be more agressive in chip upgrades or risk losing inherent product value. Especially in the Mac Professional line where buyers tend to be more educated and want/need the power.
I was wondering this - and wondering if it's going to be an issue relative to heat.
Do you think Apple will redesign the iMac in any signficant way? Since the MacBook has integrated graphics, do you think Apple would step backwards in this area and give the iMac IG?
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...0&pagenumber=1
BTW, I had a similar concern but after this thread I think Conroe goes in the iMac.
A 20-inch iMac with an Intel Core 2 Extreme processor? Whoa!
That would be dual-cores at 3.33GHz.
Bring. It. On.
Originally posted by backtomac
Conroe apparantly has power usage less than g5 and heat prodction is similar. It has been discussed in this thread.
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...0&pagenumber=1
BTW, I had a similar concern but after this thread I think Conroe goes in the iMac.
While they may look the same, the G5 iMac and Core Duo iMacs are quite different beasts. Personally, I thik they're going to drop in merom and leave the rest of the setup as it.
Originally posted by DHagan4755
OoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoO
A 20-inch iMac with an Intel Core 2 Extreme processor? Whoa!
That would be dual-cores at 3.33GHz.
Bring. It. On.
iMac, firehazard edition. Seriously, if they are going to add conroe, they need a consumer tower.
Originally posted by BenRoethig
iMac, firehazard edition. Seriously, if they are going to add conroe, they need a consumer tower.
As has been pointed out earlier, if they can engineer a g5 into iMac then they could do the same with conroe. That doesn't mean they will only that they can.
Core duo clocking @ 2.16 Ghz only rite?
Conore has more L2 cache i guess 4 MB, decent CPU for iMac