Now that Apple is moving to SSD options in their iMacs and Mac Pro's, it would be nice if the next upgrade in OS X will support TRIM commands and address some of the issues that are found with SSDs.
Anyone expecting Blu-Ray on this iMac revision has been, shall we say, a wee bit out of touch recently.
Blu-Ray is a mess. I was watching a Blu-Ray movie last night (or trying to) while it repeatedly connected to the internet, downloading "content" that I have absolutely no interest in watching. There's no way around watching endless previews, intros, etc... I just want to watch the goddam movie! But no, Sony says you have to do this and wade through 15 minutes of junk before you watch a movie that you thought was yours.
You really want crap like that in a computer? Doesn't matter - the more important consideration is, does Apple want that in their computers? Obviously not.
You want to play Blu-Ray? Get a Blu-Ray player. Want a computer? Get an iMac.
Want to throw your money away on utter shit? Get a Dell. Or an HP.
Interesting. I bought a blu ray player without the wi fi antenna so when it boots up, I get a spinning gear for ten seconds and it's on with the show. Agree about the previews. Shouldn't have to drill through menus to get to your movie. If I want ads I'll watch TBS or AMC or TNT.
So long as you can get a third party blu ray burner, I don't see it being a deal breaker. But I understand people wanting one. If you're going to use iMovie and edit hi def video, what exactly are you supposed to do with your masterpiece? Break it up into little pieces and put it in DVD's? Share it with the Mobile Me web gallery?
Thanks. If you go to the home user section of their site and browse i5s it doesn't show up, I guess they show a limited range there so as not to confuse people.
It's clear that Apple's focus is not on the Mac lineup, but on the iPhone these days. While USB 3.0 isn't immediately necessary because of a relative lack of accessories for it, it is a desirable feature. There was a time when the Mac lineup would rush out new technology. Now, it's become a follower. I think it's clear that Apple's efforts is in gadgets, and not it's Mac lineup. That's a shame...
Interesting. I bought a blu ray player without the wi fi antenna so when it boots up,
BD-Live movies don't MAKE you view the downloadable content and force you into a non-theater experience. I think the key is the user has to actually read the items being selected before pressing ENTER on the remote.
No USB 3.0, No eSATA, not even an ATI 5770? I'll skip also this iteration, thanks.
It seems pretty clear that they went 5750 to save nearly 20W in the thermal profile. It's a decent step up from the previous iMac and you are never going to see the highest end gpu or CPU in an iMac or a laptop. The 5750 delivers 90% of 5770's performance at <85% of it's power profile and is a good tradeoff.
For the enthusiast market (who does want the bleeding edge, latest and greatest, over clocked, etc)... I think Apple realizes they cannot compete, so why bother? These are the people who either won't be happy in MacOSX at all, or who will build a hackintosh to get there. And at the margins those companies are squabbling over, I'm sure Apple wishes you well in pursuit of that. The greatest thing that the move to Intel has done for Apple is to make the hackintosh possible. They aren't going to come out and say it (no way they are going back to the clone disaster), but I'm sure they'd be happy if you bought a copy of their OS.
Very nice. The 2.93 GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 processor (hmm, maybe the 256GB SSD is too small) is a great option for some more hard core Video Editing and Motion Graphics. Although nothing can beat out that 12 Core Mac Pro - my goodness. Well at least the iMac i7 is more affordable - relatively speaking.
Apple are STILL skimping on the GPU... despite Steam and other gaming platforms becoming more popular on Mac.
The 4670 is more than a generation old, and was an $80 GPU at the end of 2008. My 4890 in my self-built PC is at least 4x as fast in real world gaming, and is also almost 2 years old.
The 5670 is a little better (at least it's current gen) but it's still from the bargain bucket. Even the Mac Pro only has a 5770, which would lose in almost any (DX10/DX9) benchmark against my 2 year old 4890.
I understand the iMac is not supposed to be a high-end gaming rig and that heat could be an issue with really high end GPUs, but there needs to be a middle ground. I'd love to throw all in with an iMac and lose my PC tower, but GPU performance is important to me and Apple have ignored it, yet again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Programmer
It seems pretty clear that they went 5750 to save nearly 20W in the thermal profile. It's a decent step up from the previous iMac and you are never going to see the highest end gpu or CPU in an iMac or a laptop. The 5750 delivers 90% of 5770's performance at <85% of it's power profile and is a good tradeoff.
The 5750 is a good GPU, but Apple plonked it into a machine that sports a 2560 x 1440 display, so it's going to choke. A 5770 will stuggle at that resolution, let alone a 5750 which has 10% fewer texture units and slower memory clock (meaning lower fill rate).
To give your iMac a real performance boost, configure your 27-inch iMac on the Apple Online Store with an optional 256GB solid-state drive. You can choose it as your only drive or have it installed in addition to the built-in hard drive, allowing you to store the operating system, critical applications, and important files on the solid-state drive and your other files on the hard drive.
This is really puzzling for me that Apple sells SSDs but doesn't want to offer TRIM support in OS X. This is really annoying . Apple shouldn't advertise Mac OS X as the most advanced OS while it doesn't actually support advanced technology like TRIM.
Thank you for agreeing, now if Steve is reading this thread, OS 10.6.5 will support TRIM and SSD's on all macs and MBP's
Very nice. The 2.93 GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 processor (hmm, maybe the 256GB SSD is too small) is a great option for some more hard core Video Editing and Motion Graphics. Although nothing can beat out that 12 Core Mac Pro - my goodness. Well at least the iMac i7 is more affordable - relatively speaking.
Interesting that you can get an SSD + SATA drive via CTO at Apple.com, but not two SATA drives or two SSDs...
Now that Apple is moving to SSD options in their iMacs and Mac Pro's, it would be nice if the next upgrade in OS X will support TRIM commands and address some of the issues that are found with SSDs.
Comments
Now that Apple is moving to SSD options in their iMacs and Mac Pro's, it would be nice if the next upgrade in OS X will support TRIM commands and address some of the issues that are found with SSDs.
Hoping there's hope in 10.6.5.
-Chris
The 1499$ iMac with i3 processor does offer Turbo boost. You don't need to go Wikipedia for that. Read on the Apple website.
Intel's site doesn't show the i3-550 as Turbo Boost...
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=48505
One of these CPUs plus an SSD would make for a screamer of a box.
Edit: ah, wait - maybe it is the i5-680
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=48504
Where did the 3.6GHz i5 come from? I can't find it on Intel's site or the PC component site I usually shop on. Does it turbo boost above 4GHz?
One of these CPUs plus an SSD would make for a screamer of a box.
This might be it: http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=48504
If so, it turbos to 3.86GHz
ROTFLMAO.
Yeah, go back to Dell.
Anyone expecting Blu-Ray on this iMac revision has been, shall we say, a wee bit out of touch recently.
Blu-Ray is a mess. I was watching a Blu-Ray movie last night (or trying to) while it repeatedly connected to the internet, downloading "content" that I have absolutely no interest in watching. There's no way around watching endless previews, intros, etc... I just want to watch the goddam movie! But no, Sony says you have to do this and wade through 15 minutes of junk before you watch a movie that you thought was yours.
You really want crap like that in a computer? Doesn't matter - the more important consideration is, does Apple want that in their computers? Obviously not.
You want to play Blu-Ray? Get a Blu-Ray player. Want a computer? Get an iMac.
Want to throw your money away on utter shit? Get a Dell. Or an HP.
Interesting. I bought a blu ray player without the wi fi antenna so when it boots up, I get a spinning gear for ten seconds and it's on with the show. Agree about the previews. Shouldn't have to drill through menus to get to your movie. If I want ads I'll watch TBS or AMC or TNT.
So long as you can get a third party blu ray burner, I don't see it being a deal breaker. But I understand people wanting one. If you're going to use iMovie and edit hi def video, what exactly are you supposed to do with your masterpiece? Break it up into little pieces and put it in DVD's? Share it with the Mobile Me web gallery?
This might be it: http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=48504
If so, it turbos to 3.86GHz
Thanks. If you go to the home user section of their site and browse i5s it doesn't show up, I guess they show a limited range there so as not to confuse people.
Interesting. I bought a blu ray player without the wi fi antenna so when it boots up,
BD-Live movies don't MAKE you view the downloadable content and force you into a non-theater experience. I think the key is the user has to actually read the items being selected before pressing ENTER on the remote.
-Chris
From reading Wikipedia, no i3 has Turbo Boost...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...22_.2832_nm.29
Wouldn't be the first time there has been a special processor model or GPU designed just for Apple.
"Hey Intel, we like your i3, but we want you to turn on Turbo Boost on them"
"Ok"
No USB 3.0, No eSATA, not even an ATI 5770? I'll skip also this iteration, thanks.
It seems pretty clear that they went 5750 to save nearly 20W in the thermal profile. It's a decent step up from the previous iMac and you are never going to see the highest end gpu or CPU in an iMac or a laptop. The 5750 delivers 90% of 5770's performance at <85% of it's power profile and is a good tradeoff.
For the enthusiast market (who does want the bleeding edge, latest and greatest, over clocked, etc)... I think Apple realizes they cannot compete, so why bother? These are the people who either won't be happy in MacOSX at all, or who will build a hackintosh to get there. And at the margins those companies are squabbling over, I'm sure Apple wishes you well in pursuit of that. The greatest thing that the move to Intel has done for Apple is to make the hackintosh possible. They aren't going to come out and say it (no way they are going back to the clone disaster), but I'm sure they'd be happy if you bought a copy of their OS.
Since that's the case I wish Apple would, once and for all, sell a mini-DP -> HDMI cable (not an adapter or dongle) that supports audio.
No matter, there is definitely a quad-core 27" iMac in my immediate future.
The 4670 is more than a generation old, and was an $80 GPU at the end of 2008. My 4890 in my self-built PC is at least 4x as fast in real world gaming, and is also almost 2 years old.
The 5670 is a little better (at least it's current gen) but it's still from the bargain bucket. Even the Mac Pro only has a 5770, which would lose in almost any (DX10/DX9) benchmark against my 2 year old 4890.
I understand the iMac is not supposed to be a high-end gaming rig and that heat could be an issue with really high end GPUs, but there needs to be a middle ground. I'd love to throw all in with an iMac and lose my PC tower, but GPU performance is important to me and Apple have ignored it, yet again.
It seems pretty clear that they went 5750 to save nearly 20W in the thermal profile. It's a decent step up from the previous iMac and you are never going to see the highest end gpu or CPU in an iMac or a laptop. The 5750 delivers 90% of 5770's performance at <85% of it's power profile and is a good tradeoff.
The 5750 is a good GPU, but Apple plonked it into a machine that sports a 2560 x 1440 display, so it's going to choke. A 5770 will stuggle at that resolution, let alone a 5750 which has 10% fewer texture units and slower memory clock (meaning lower fill rate).
Let me quote:
To give your iMac a real performance boost, configure your 27-inch iMac on the Apple Online Store with an optional 256GB solid-state drive. You can choose it as your only drive or have it installed in addition to the built-in hard drive, allowing you to store the operating system, critical applications, and important files on the solid-state drive and your other files on the hard drive.
Was this available before or it is new?
This is really puzzling for me that Apple sells SSDs but doesn't want to offer TRIM support in OS X. This is really annoying
Thank you for agreeing, now if Steve is reading this thread, OS 10.6.5 will support TRIM and SSD's on all macs and MBP's
Was this available before or it is new?
That is new, these are the first iMac with SSD option. Prior to today, only the MBP and Xserve had SSD.
I am wondering if the i3 and i5 chips have integrated graphics that is being ignored by the OS, or if they are somehow variants without an IGP.
Very nice. The 2.93 GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 processor (hmm, maybe the 256GB SSD is too small) is a great option for some more hard core Video Editing and Motion Graphics. Although nothing can beat out that 12 Core Mac Pro - my goodness. Well at least the iMac i7 is more affordable - relatively speaking.
Interesting that you can get an SSD + SATA drive via CTO at Apple.com, but not two SATA drives or two SSDs...
Originally Posted by FineTunes
Now that Apple is moving to SSD options in their iMacs and Mac Pro's, it would be nice if the next upgrade in OS X will support TRIM commands and address some of the issues that are found with SSDs.
Hoping there's hope in 10.6.5.
-Chris
STEVE: ARE YOU READING THIS?????