TDP for i7-820QM and i7-720QM is only 45W and the TDP for the PM55 chip is only 3.5W. It looks to me like a Clarksfield iMac would have less power to dissipate compared to the current iMac.
Intel's 1Ku prices are $364 for the i7-720QM and $546 for the i7-820QM. I am sure Apple can get a better deal than this from Intel. If the i7-920XM dual-core turbo mode on data from Intel can be extrapolated to 720QM and 820QM, these chips can run at about the same clock speed as the Core 2 models in the current iMacs when only two cores are active.
I said enough! No more MMS, AT&T, or whatever relates to that here.
We have the other thread for that.
Mel, for heaven's sake, I'm not talking about MMS, I'm talking about a certain kind of argument that happened to use that as an example-- as the body of the post your reacting to makes very clear.
A lot of people have mentioned the laptop market and PCs in this thread, because they're making comparisons as well. Are you going to forbid mention of those things as well?
So once Apple went all glossy they started selling ever more iMacs and laptops even though everybody hates them, because that's all the could get. So I guess we could use the old "the would have sold even more if they had offered matte", because there's no way on earth to test that for truth.
Well I might have bought one if there had been matte offered- so yes, you can consider that as one more sold.
but chips advance on a several month step. So my Mac Pro, bought earlier this year, will have chips that are slower than machines offered later, or possibly even now.
So what? I don't buy a machine based on what some other machine will do a year from now.
Besides, you miss the point. The 8 cores and 16 threads still are very useful to me, as i often run several programs at once that are using cycles. With this machine, nothing slows down.
I also don't mind paying for a much better machine than a PC. If you want to make a fair comparison, look to a comparable machine, not a home design.
In addition, in a year and later, when more programs come out that use more cores, my machine will just get faster. Your i7, will gt slower.
You will need a new machine, but I won't.
Umm, and you'd be wrong on that - CPU Performance Benchmark Chart:
Mel, for heaven's sake, I'm not talking about MMS, I'm talking about a certain kind of argument that happened to use that as an example-- as the body of the post your reacting to makes very clear.
A lot of people have mentioned the laptop market and PCs in this thread, because they're making comparisons as well. Are you going to forbid mention of those things as well?
It began with Teckstud, and continued. I just don't want it mentioned.
Whatever Apple does, JUST GET RID OF THE MIRRORED/GLOSSY SCREENS. PLEASE!!
Or, at the very least, offer matte as an option. AND OFFER IT AS A REAL SCREEN, not some tack-on film.
I'll be buying at least two iMacs once non-mirrored screens are available again.
I'm glad that came from you and not from me.
Sertiously, they have no idea how many sales were lost in the last 3 years from users like you and me. Even more than the gloss is the black border around the monitor itself which causes a boeing like effect. Thank god Apple realizes the mistake they made modelling everything based upon the iPhones looks.
You're all formally invited to my iMac Launch Party. I'm working on a video now. I need one black guy, one older woman, a hottie, and a nerd. It's important to show that being hip crosses all ethnic and socioeconomic lines.
They need a new keyboard that has no numeric keypad but still has the cursor/pageup/pagedown keys.
Edit: If they are dual core, does that mean they are still using the Core 2 duo? That chip is getting a bit long in the tooth now. A bit hard to justify buying *another* computer with one of these.
I think instead of a mouse it will get a small glass (mousepad) plate like the laptops to maneuver around.
I have been hoping so too. I figured the laptop-sized keyboard was a step in this direction. I have found the mighty mouse is very unreliable and the right click only functions some of the time with a grip I am comfortable with.
How come every time Apple refreshes the iMac or Mini a bunch of people seem to forget that Apple has been using laptop parts in these machines since like forever? They begin to clamor for the latest and greatest desktop CPUs and GPUs, as if that were even a remote possibility.
Pro tip: not going to happen. Sorry. Just not Apple's thing, for better or worse. They've made a choice: laptop parts are "fast enough" for most people, and such parts allow them to emphasize the form factors that they want to build. Yes, I know those aren't the form factors some of you want, that doesn't necessarily mean Apple is wrong or crazy-- see also their recent market share gains.
It is true the that i7 mobile part just launched, so I guess there might be an outside chance that Apple will use it. Myself, wouldn't count on it.
Yes, the Core i7 mobile chips are out, now, and Apple is usually on the front of that curve. The plain fact of the matter is, that the market sees dual core as yesterday's technology. I think the masses are hungry for Core i7, and I also think the masses are hungry for an affordable tower based on a Core i7 and non-ECC memory and some solid desktop graphics like the GeForce 275GTX or better. If Apple could only deliver what the public wants...
Yes, the Core i7 mobile chips are out, now, and Apple is usually on the front of that curve. The plain fact of the matter is, that the market sees dual core as yesterday's technology. I think the masses are hungry for Core i7, and I also think the masses are hungry for an affordable tower based on a Core i7 and non-ECC memory and some solid desktop graphics like the GeForce 275GTX or better. If Apple could only deliver what the public wants...
Yup, everywhere I go, I hear about the Core i7, the GeForce 275GTX, and non-ECC memory. It's what's on everyone's mind these days.
I agree with Steve, Blu Ray is expensive and kinda useless on a computer.
First off, most programs still fit nicely on a DVD.
Second you would need a much larger then 24' display for blu ray to be useful, and for that you would need a TV, not an iMac.
Third making iMacs more expensive right now is not a very good move, the economy is not good enough to support a price increase right now.
Therefore if blu ray does come about it would have to be an option for the most expensive iMac in the family. Just my prediction.
I love this. You don't need Blu-ray - jedi mind trick.
How about I make that decision thanks
You'd need at least a 24'' screen to enjoy Blu-ray - really? How about I know that already but still want to build a collection of blu-ray discs for portable viewing which I can view later in life sitting on my couch with my large bloody prosumer plasmoid screen?
This thinking has delayed blu-ray on macs for years now. It's simply a matter of giving people the option. and while I appreciate that you are not arguing against choice, please let us just get on with it finally. let's implement Steve Job's so called big bag of hurt which I'm sure actually is another big fat bag of cash for apple
Yup, everywhere I go, I hear about the Core i7, the GeForce 275GTX, and non-ECC memory. It's what's on everyone's mind these days.
I know! I was just talking to my brother, and he was all like, "I hear they might be bringing out new iMacs, but whither quad core? I am hungry."
Seriously though, does anyone outside of gear hounds think in terms of "yesterday's technology", especially when it comes to chip sets?
Once upon a time there might have been some awareness of clock speed, but that's just because Intel was flogging same as a metric of awesomeness. Number of cores are a much harder thing to drive into the public consciousness, partly because no one much knows what that even means, and because "4 instead of 2" doesn't have quite the impact of "3GHz overclocked extreme!"
I think the iPhone is a great example of where things are headed, if they're not already there: people react to the entire device, and don't know or care what's inside. In the case of the iPhone, there was a noticeable speed up of system processes in the move from 3G to 3Gs, so people took note of that, still without caring what, exactly, had been done to the internals to make that happen.
Since the move from 2 to 4 cores is not going to have anything like that impact on the day to day use of a desktop or laptop computer, most people really have no reason to care.
What, exactly, are the folks in this thread proposing the impact of quad core is going to be on 95% of what people do with their computers? Is Firefox going to load pages 4 times as fast? Is Office going to make letters appear on the screen before you type them? Will your emails fly off your computer like missiles? Will your music sound better?
For the few that are doing genuinely processor intensive things like batch processing media or editing HD movies or doing 3D animation work, then, yes, you would probably be advised to seek the latest and greatest. But that's the few, a fact that hasn't been lost on Apple.
It's like Apple should just buy PsyStar and make 'em legit so they have a discount line. No in-store support, no glitz. But affordable, somewhat customizable hardware.
I know Apple's been down that road before when they licensed their OS to Power and it didn't work out so well, but if they produced the bargain brand themselves, they'd reap the revenue.
An interesting idea.... but they would never, ever, EVER buy PsyStar. That would be rewarding someone that had the balls to take on Apple in court. No. Way. That. Happens.
But, Apple stealing PsyStar's business model and profiting from it after shutting them down in court would be the ultimate FU. It would also stop the defections of the power user who can't justify the price of the MacPros, and vastly increase the market share with the hobbyist crowd. They could afford to do this on the cheap, keep prices near PsyStar's level, and still maintain the industry's highest margins.
They could even make customers pre-qualify themselves by shipping only partially-assembled hardware. If you aren't comfortable installing the RAM, Hard Drive(s), Optical Drive(s) and GPU card yourself, you shouldn't be buying it. That way, they could ship only the hard drives from Apple directly (with the latest software and drivers pre-loaded), and everything else drop-ships from the hardware manufacturer. It would prevent the cannibalization of the consumer base, since DIY buyers are not buying from the current line anyway.
What, exactly, are the folks in this thread proposing the impact of quad core is going to be on 95% of what people do with their computers? Is Firefox going to load pages 4 times as fast? Is Office going to make letters appear on the screen before you type them? Will your emails fly off your computer like missiles? Will your music sound better?
Comments
TDP for i7-820QM and i7-720QM is only 45W and the TDP for the PM55 chip is only 3.5W. It looks to me like a Clarksfield iMac would have less power to dissipate compared to the current iMac.
Intel's 1Ku prices are $364 for the i7-720QM and $546 for the i7-820QM. I am sure Apple can get a better deal than this from Intel. If the i7-920XM dual-core turbo mode on data from Intel can be extrapolated to 720QM and 820QM, these chips can run at about the same clock speed as the Core 2 models in the current iMacs when only two cores are active.
You're talking about the lower chips in the line.
I said enough! No more MMS, AT&T, or whatever relates to that here.
We have the other thread for that.
Mel, for heaven's sake, I'm not talking about MMS, I'm talking about a certain kind of argument that happened to use that as an example-- as the body of the post your reacting to makes very clear.
A lot of people have mentioned the laptop market and PCs in this thread, because they're making comparisons as well. Are you going to forbid mention of those things as well?
So once Apple went all glossy they started selling ever more iMacs and laptops even though everybody hates them, because that's all the could get. So I guess we could use the old "the would have sold even more if they had offered matte", because there's no way on earth to test that for truth.
Well I might have bought one if there had been matte offered- so yes, you can consider that as one more sold.
Those i7's don't get better performance.
but chips advance on a several month step. So my Mac Pro, bought earlier this year, will have chips that are slower than machines offered later, or possibly even now.
So what? I don't buy a machine based on what some other machine will do a year from now.
Besides, you miss the point. The 8 cores and 16 threads still are very useful to me, as i often run several programs at once that are using cycles. With this machine, nothing slows down.
I also don't mind paying for a much better machine than a PC. If you want to make a fair comparison, look to a comparable machine, not a home design.
In addition, in a year and later, when more programs come out that use more cores, my machine will just get faster. Your i7, will gt slower.
You will need a new machine, but I won't.
Umm, and you'd be wrong on that - CPU Performance Benchmark Chart:
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html
Or, at the very least, offer matte as an option. AND OFFER IT AS A REAL SCREEN, not some tack-on film.
I'll be buying at least two iMacs once non-mirrored screens are available again.
Mel, for heaven's sake, I'm not talking about MMS, I'm talking about a certain kind of argument that happened to use that as an example-- as the body of the post your reacting to makes very clear.
A lot of people have mentioned the laptop market and PCs in this thread, because they're making comparisons as well. Are you going to forbid mention of those things as well?
It began with Teckstud, and continued. I just don't want it mentioned.
Whatever Apple does, JUST GET RID OF THE MIRRORED/GLOSSY SCREENS. PLEASE!!
Or, at the very least, offer matte as an option. AND OFFER IT AS A REAL SCREEN, not some tack-on film.
I'll be buying at least two iMacs once non-mirrored screens are available again.
I'm glad that came from you and not from me.
Sertiously, they have no idea how many sales were lost in the last 3 years from users like you and me. Even more than the gloss is the black border around the monitor itself which causes a boeing like effect. Thank god Apple realizes the mistake they made modelling everything based upon the iPhones looks.
It gets tiring hearing people complain that they don't want to move their machine so that glare isn't a problem.
That's something I'd expect to hear from Dell.
When there are a tiring amount of complaints, Apple should listen.
You're all formally invited to my iMac Launch Party. I'm working on a video now. I need one black guy, one older woman, a hottie, and a nerd. It's important to show that being hip crosses all ethnic and socioeconomic lines.
"Hottie" = "Cougar" ?
Because glare iMacs are the only thing offered- Are you that dense?
Heh heh. On the matter of density, man, you have no peer! You da stud!
Edit: If they are dual core, does that mean they are still using the Core 2 duo? That chip is getting a bit long in the tooth now. A bit hard to justify buying *another* computer with one of these.
I think instead of a mouse it will get a small glass (mousepad) plate like the laptops to maneuver around.
I have been hoping so too. I figured the laptop-sized keyboard was a step in this direction. I have found the mighty mouse is very unreliable and the right click only functions some of the time with a grip I am comfortable with.
How come every time Apple refreshes the iMac or Mini a bunch of people seem to forget that Apple has been using laptop parts in these machines since like forever? They begin to clamor for the latest and greatest desktop CPUs and GPUs, as if that were even a remote possibility.
Pro tip: not going to happen. Sorry. Just not Apple's thing, for better or worse. They've made a choice: laptop parts are "fast enough" for most people, and such parts allow them to emphasize the form factors that they want to build. Yes, I know those aren't the form factors some of you want, that doesn't necessarily mean Apple is wrong or crazy-- see also their recent market share gains.
It is true the that i7 mobile part just launched, so I guess there might be an outside chance that Apple will use it. Myself, wouldn't count on it.
Yes, the Core i7 mobile chips are out, now, and Apple is usually on the front of that curve. The plain fact of the matter is, that the market sees dual core as yesterday's technology. I think the masses are hungry for Core i7, and I also think the masses are hungry for an affordable tower based on a Core i7 and non-ECC memory and some solid desktop graphics like the GeForce 275GTX or better. If Apple could only deliver what the public wants...
Yes, the Core i7 mobile chips are out, now, and Apple is usually on the front of that curve. The plain fact of the matter is, that the market sees dual core as yesterday's technology. I think the masses are hungry for Core i7, and I also think the masses are hungry for an affordable tower based on a Core i7 and non-ECC memory and some solid desktop graphics like the GeForce 275GTX or better. If Apple could only deliver what the public wants...
Yup, everywhere I go, I hear about the Core i7, the GeForce 275GTX, and non-ECC memory. It's what's on everyone's mind these days.
It began with Teckstud, and continued. I just don't want it mentioned.
Very well, my captain!
I agree with Steve, Blu Ray is expensive and kinda useless on a computer.
First off, most programs still fit nicely on a DVD.
Second you would need a much larger then 24' display for blu ray to be useful, and for that you would need a TV, not an iMac.
Third making iMacs more expensive right now is not a very good move, the economy is not good enough to support a price increase right now.
Therefore if blu ray does come about it would have to be an option for the most expensive iMac in the family. Just my prediction.
I love this. You don't need Blu-ray - jedi mind trick.
How about I make that decision thanks
You'd need at least a 24'' screen to enjoy Blu-ray - really? How about I know that already but still want to build a collection of blu-ray discs for portable viewing which I can view later in life sitting on my couch with my large bloody prosumer plasmoid screen?
This thinking has delayed blu-ray on macs for years now. It's simply a matter of giving people the option. and while I appreciate that you are not arguing against choice, please let us just get on with it finally. let's implement Steve Job's so called big bag of hurt which I'm sure actually is another big fat bag of cash for apple
Yup, everywhere I go, I hear about the Core i7, the GeForce 275GTX, and non-ECC memory. It's what's on everyone's mind these days.
I know! I was just talking to my brother, and he was all like, "I hear they might be bringing out new iMacs, but whither quad core? I am hungry."
Seriously though, does anyone outside of gear hounds think in terms of "yesterday's technology", especially when it comes to chip sets?
Once upon a time there might have been some awareness of clock speed, but that's just because Intel was flogging same as a metric of awesomeness. Number of cores are a much harder thing to drive into the public consciousness, partly because no one much knows what that even means, and because "4 instead of 2" doesn't have quite the impact of "3GHz overclocked extreme!"
I think the iPhone is a great example of where things are headed, if they're not already there: people react to the entire device, and don't know or care what's inside. In the case of the iPhone, there was a noticeable speed up of system processes in the move from 3G to 3Gs, so people took note of that, still without caring what, exactly, had been done to the internals to make that happen.
Since the move from 2 to 4 cores is not going to have anything like that impact on the day to day use of a desktop or laptop computer, most people really have no reason to care.
What, exactly, are the folks in this thread proposing the impact of quad core is going to be on 95% of what people do with their computers? Is Firefox going to load pages 4 times as fast? Is Office going to make letters appear on the screen before you type them? Will your emails fly off your computer like missiles? Will your music sound better?
For the few that are doing genuinely processor intensive things like batch processing media or editing HD movies or doing 3D animation work, then, yes, you would probably be advised to seek the latest and greatest. But that's the few, a fact that hasn't been lost on Apple.
It's like Apple should just buy PsyStar and make 'em legit so they have a discount line. No in-store support, no glitz. But affordable, somewhat customizable hardware.
I know Apple's been down that road before when they licensed their OS to Power and it didn't work out so well, but if they produced the bargain brand themselves, they'd reap the revenue.
An interesting idea.... but they would never, ever, EVER buy PsyStar. That would be rewarding someone that had the balls to take on Apple in court. No. Way. That. Happens.
But, Apple stealing PsyStar's business model and profiting from it after shutting them down in court would be the ultimate FU. It would also stop the defections of the power user who can't justify the price of the MacPros, and vastly increase the market share with the hobbyist crowd. They could afford to do this on the cheap, keep prices near PsyStar's level, and still maintain the industry's highest margins.
They could even make customers pre-qualify themselves by shipping only partially-assembled hardware. If you aren't comfortable installing the RAM, Hard Drive(s), Optical Drive(s) and GPU card yourself, you shouldn't be buying it. That way, they could ship only the hard drives from Apple directly (with the latest software and drivers pre-loaded), and everything else drop-ships from the hardware manufacturer. It would prevent the cannibalization of the consumer base, since DIY buyers are not buying from the current line anyway.
What, exactly, are the folks in this thread proposing the impact of quad core is going to be on 95% of what people do with their computers? Is Firefox going to load pages 4 times as fast? Is Office going to make letters appear on the screen before you type them? Will your emails fly off your computer like missiles? Will your music sound better?
Yes, no, yes and definately!