intel might release the QX9300 late this summer, but wonder if it's not too hot to be put into the super-thin iMac anyway...?
Apple has been using Extreme edition cpus on the 24" aluminium iMac (44W/2.8GHz on the previous version and a 3.06GHz-unknown TDP on the current version).
I see no reason why they couldn't use the upcoming QX9300 in the 24" iMac.
The only thing is it price: $1,038 vs $851 (for a current EE cpu).
There are also rumors of a cheaper Q9100 (2.26GHz-35W TDP) for the end of the year.
This cpu could be used on most of Apple's mobile/hybrid computers.
It'll be an option. It won't be a standard model, partly because of the cost.
I agree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_the_dragon
apple can put a desktop cpu and chipset in the imacs if they want to.
Of course they could. But I think that given the trend to make the iMac thinner, the mobile way was a better one, not only because it requires less cooling than 65W/95W parts, but also because less cooling means less noise and as the iMac is "in your face", I think it's an important factor. For a headless desktop it wouldn't matter much because you can still put the computer under the desk or farther from your ears.
The only other option right now for a quad-core iMac would be to use LV Xeons:
Xeon L5420 12M Cache 2.50GHz 1333FSB 50W $380
Xeon L5410 12M Cache 2.33GHz 1333FSB 50W $320
Along with the cheaper 5100 MCH chipset (regular DDR2 RAM, no IDE, but integrated GbE), those could really turn the 24" iMac into a real AIO workstation, even more affordable than a QX9300-based 24" iMac.
But, maybe Apple is reserving those for the 30" iMac!
I don't like how they only bump up the spec in the models with larger screens. A large screen does not really affect what components they use. They could easily put the nvidia GPU for example into the 20" model and sell it for a little more than the base model.
Not everyone has enough room for a 27" display - some machines have to fit into a computer cabinet and to limit people to having a huge display for a quad CPU would be a bad idea.
Apple really needs to get moving with their quad options in their consumer models.
I got a leaflet through my door from Dell and they are selling a 2.4GHz Core 2 Quad tower with a 1GHz fsb, 2GB Ram and a Radeon 2400 HD Pro and 19" display for just £499 including vat and delivery.
The lowest iMac is £799 and you only get 1GB Ram and 2.4GHz dual core.
Comments
intel might release the QX9300 late this summer, but wonder if it's not too hot to be put into the super-thin iMac anyway...?
Apple has been using Extreme edition cpus on the 24" aluminium iMac (44W/2.8GHz on the previous version and a 3.06GHz-unknown TDP on the current version).
I see no reason why they couldn't use the upcoming QX9300 in the 24" iMac.
The only thing is it price: $1,038 vs $851 (for a current EE cpu).
There are also rumors of a cheaper Q9100 (2.26GHz-35W TDP) for the end of the year.
This cpu could be used on most of Apple's mobile/hybrid computers.
It'll be an option. It won't be a standard model, partly because of the cost.
I agree.
apple can put a desktop cpu and chipset in the imacs if they want to.
Of course they could. But I think that given the trend to make the iMac thinner, the mobile way was a better one, not only because it requires less cooling than 65W/95W parts, but also because less cooling means less noise and as the iMac is "in your face", I think it's an important factor. For a headless desktop it wouldn't matter much because you can still put the computer under the desk or farther from your ears.
The only other option right now for a quad-core iMac would be to use LV Xeons:
Xeon L5420 12M Cache 2.50GHz 1333FSB 50W $380
Xeon L5410 12M Cache 2.33GHz 1333FSB 50W $320
Along with the cheaper 5100 MCH chipset (regular DDR2 RAM, no IDE, but integrated GbE), those could really turn the 24" iMac into a real AIO workstation, even more affordable than a QX9300-based 24" iMac.
But, maybe Apple is reserving those for the 30" iMac!
But, maybe Apple is reserving those for the 30" iMac!
A 30-inch iMac might be nice, but a 27" is way more logical. Look at it this way: * G4 iMacs: 15" >> 17" >> New 20"
* G5 iMacs: 17" >> 20" >> New 24" (for Intel)
* Intel iMacs: 20" >> 24" >> ??? (27" C2Quad)
Seems pretty straight-forward to me -- if I knew Photoshop I could paint it.
And FWIW, I'd take a ONE.x-GHz Quad-Core over a TWO.x Dual-Core any day...
Not everyone has enough room for a 27" display - some machines have to fit into a computer cabinet and to limit people to having a huge display for a quad CPU would be a bad idea.
Apple really needs to get moving with their quad options in their consumer models.
I got a leaflet through my door from Dell and they are selling a 2.4GHz Core 2 Quad tower with a 1GHz fsb, 2GB Ram and a Radeon 2400 HD Pro and 19" display for just £499 including vat and delivery.
The lowest iMac is £799 and you only get 1GB Ram and 2.4GHz dual core.