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.
I hope so, I have a Corsair RealSSD in my MacBook... it works great, but I am sure it could be even better. The rumor is that TRIM in OS X will need the latest hardware controller, which would be terrible especially as Windows 7 and Vista doesn't have this requirement.
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.
I tried that with the original i7 iMac and ended up buying another PC tower 6 months later. I found that trying to turn an iMac in to a gaming machine just got me a noisy Mac and mediocre gaming performance. Separate boxes is the go.
Yes that is very nice. I would have preferred the lower end configuration to offer integrated graphics (320M) and BTO SSD, so you could configure the ultimate silent iMac. But it appears it's discrete graphics all round (which means +1 fan), and SSD is for the 27" only. So the Ultimate Silent iMac (TM) is not a possibility.
I hope so, I have a Corsair RealSSD in my MacBook... it works great, but I am sure it could be even better. The rumor is that TRIM in OS X will need the latest hardware controller, which would be terrible especially as Windows 7 and Vista doesn't have this requirement.
I would hope that any upgrade in OS X would be backward compatible to earlier SSD's that Apple supplied with the MA and MBP. Have a 17" 2009 MBP and have had no problems with my 256 GB SSD. See that OWC has some solutions @
Also curious what happens if you are using VM Fusion and Windows XP (yea I run windows--but only to run Office 2007 and so I can read CD ROMS at the LA Law Library).
Yeah the 3.06GHz i3 has no Turbo Boost, all the other models do. That's probably fine for the lowest end model, but it does seem odd. Does the line of i3 with turbo boost go no lower than 3.2GHz? If so that would explain it, another way for Apple to differentiate the product line.
You seem to misunderstand what Turbo Boost is - it's a marketing name for the enginineering concept "Runs Too Hot".
It's not a boost, but rather a reduction from the full speed of the core - the marketing weenies turned the problem on its head to create a 'feature'.
Well, I don't want to buy a compressed crap, sold as HD movie, on iTunes store for 20 bucks, when I can get a true HD movie for 10 bucks. That's called throwing away your money on utter shit.
I would say that paying for 1080p video on 27 inches and paying for high-bitrate, multi channel audio through stereo computer speakers, is throwing your money away. If you want home theater experience, invest the money into a home theater. Otherwise, accept the fact that computers are to HD video as Kia's are to motoring!
Is the speed bump from i3 to i5 worth the 150 bucks if I use it mostly for Photography through Aperture? I assume that getting the 1G video upgrade for sure is.
Wow. What a bunch of whiners. As though any of the stuff they did not include, e.g., BR, was news.
It's a fantastic upgrade, esp. at the entry level price (and even more so with the education discount). The 21.5s will sell like hot cakes: I predict a mega-hit this back-to-school season.
Breaking this down... what speed/performance improvements does a Core i3 bring to the table...
Currently, I have a (early 2008) 2.66Gz C2D with 4GB RAM (20" model), with a ATi HD 2600 PRO GPU ... Am I going to see moderate or greatly improved performance? I don't do alot of gaming, but I did install Steam and get Portal and it seems to run fine on my current machine, but I have not ventured out to try other Steam games like HL2, etc...
I do some HD video editing and encoding and currently, it can take a few hours to render out a video of about an hour of length. Other than that, I don't do any real work on the machine.
The rumor is that TRIM in OS X will need the latest hardware controller, which would be terrible especially as Windows 7 and Vista doesn't have this requirement.
This rumor can't be true. The same MacBook hardware booting to Windows supports TRIM. Driver and filesystem needs a bit of work.
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...
I keep seeing this kind of argument and it never quite makes sense to me. The Mac product line continues to outsell itself quarter by quarter, so why wouldn't this continue to be a focus for Apple? I'm going out on a limb here, but I would guess that Apple has different development teams for Mac, iPad, iPod, etc. In fact, I would even guess that there is further differentiation at Apple in that there are most likely specific design teams for the MacBook, one for the iMac, another for the Mac Pro, etc.
The Mac product line seems to be a cash cow for Apple. Why would Apple ever as a company decide to simply neglect this revenue stream? Are they simply starstruck with their own ingenuity over the iPad and iPhone? Do they really believe that the desktop computer is going the way of the dodo? Even if this were true, doesn't it make more sense for them to ride this cash cow all the way into the sunset rather than abandoning it before it's time? Especially with ever increasing sales?
My guess is that once you start seeing USB 3.0 devices at BestBuy and WalMart you'll also see it in Macs. In fact, I'm pretty confident that you'll see it in Macs well before you can go into BestBuy and have anything other than one or two out of stock USB 3.0 drives. It's nice to have all the latest bells and whistles, but there is a point at which it simply doesn't make sense to throw in the bleeding edge just to say it's there.
Well iMac is a solid computer but no longer the one that used to have best of technologies to justify its price. Getting 1 GB of memory is nice. However, lack of faster connections is a deal breaker for me.
And what, exactly, are you going to connect to eSATA? Is it faster than FW800? Sure. But other than a fast RAID, which is still fairly uncommon for consumers to own, what peripheral are you going to connect that will take advantage of eSATA's speed? You might get a slight benefit if you have a very fast single external drive, but not enough to justify adding that new port.
i thought the only difference between the i5 and i7 chips was faster ram and hyper threading. Why would that even matter if the imac doesn't come with the faster ram the i7 supports. that means you're limited to hyper threading which isn't even important for desktop machines not fully optimized for multicore operations. Grand Central and multicore programming are far from universally adopted features. It's not like this thing is the ps3 where they design for multicore from the start... so I don't understand why anyone would want the upgrade. Also, no usb3? wtf apple? I don't need esata. that's for server nerds. Firewire is at least still relevant for video editing. usb3 should be a mandate. Also partly agree on the bluray. Big wtf on this release. Seems VERY lack luster. super huge WTF on the not allowing you to have 2 hard drives unless one is SSD and one is HDD
Seems like a fair update, and Apple finally dumped integrated graphics, and Nvidia at that.
There's no point about arguing about USB 3/eSATA/BR, as Apple will never offer those with current implementations. If you want all that, it's easy enough to do with a PC.
Comments
That is new, these are the first iMac with SSD option. Prior to today, only the MBP and Xserve had SSD.
The point is that you can have both SSD + HD.
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.
I hope so, I have a Corsair RealSSD in my MacBook... it works great, but I am sure it could be even better. The rumor is that TRIM in OS X will need the latest hardware controller, which would be terrible especially as Windows 7 and Vista doesn't have this requirement.
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.
I tried that with the original i7 iMac and ended up buying another PC tower 6 months later. I found that trying to turn an iMac in to a gaming machine just got me a noisy Mac and mediocre gaming performance. Separate boxes is the go.
The point is that you can have both SSD + HD.
Yes that is very nice. I would have preferred the lower end configuration to offer integrated graphics (320M) and BTO SSD, so you could configure the ultimate silent iMac. But it appears it's discrete graphics all round (which means +1 fan), and SSD is for the 27" only. So the Ultimate Silent iMac (TM) is not a possibility.
I hope so, I have a Corsair RealSSD in my MacBook... it works great, but I am sure it could be even better. The rumor is that TRIM in OS X will need the latest hardware controller, which would be terrible especially as Windows 7 and Vista doesn't have this requirement.
I would hope that any upgrade in OS X would be backward compatible to earlier SSD's that Apple supplied with the MA and MBP. Have a 17" 2009 MBP and have had no problems with my 256 GB SSD. See that OWC has some solutions @
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/inter..._SSD_Sandforce
only wish that Apple would offer some.
Also curious what happens if you are using VM Fusion and Windows XP (yea I run windows--but only to run Office 2007 and so I can read CD ROMS at the LA Law Library).
Yeah the 3.06GHz i3 has no Turbo Boost, all the other models do. That's probably fine for the lowest end model, but it does seem odd. Does the line of i3 with turbo boost go no lower than 3.2GHz? If so that would explain it, another way for Apple to differentiate the product line.
You seem to misunderstand what Turbo Boost is - it's a marketing name for the enginineering concept "Runs Too Hot".
It's not a boost, but rather a reduction from the full speed of the core - the marketing weenies turned the problem on its head to create a 'feature'.
Well, I don't want to buy a compressed crap, sold as HD movie, on iTunes store for 20 bucks, when I can get a true HD movie for 10 bucks. That's called throwing away your money on utter shit.
I would say that paying for 1080p video on 27 inches and paying for high-bitrate, multi channel audio through stereo computer speakers, is throwing your money away. If you want home theater experience, invest the money into a home theater. Otherwise, accept the fact that computers are to HD video as Kia's are to motoring!
Fixed that for you.
'Felating?' Learn to spell.
Is the speed bump from i3 to i5 worth the 150 bucks if I use it mostly for Photography through Aperture? I assume that getting the 1G video upgrade for sure is.
Opinions/advice? Thanks!
What?!?! The least expensive iMac with the i3 chip has no Turbo Boost?!?!
WTF!!!!!
According to Intel's spec page none of the i3's have Turbo Boost. Either Apple or Intel has wrong information.
It's a fantastic upgrade, esp. at the entry level price (and even more so with the education discount). The 21.5s will sell like hot cakes: I predict a mega-hit this back-to-school season.
And, the stock market likes it! Me happy.
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.
If there's a dedicated card, any IGP is ignored by default.
Currently, I have a (early 2008) 2.66Gz C2D with 4GB RAM (20" model), with a ATi HD 2600 PRO GPU ... Am I going to see moderate or greatly improved performance? I don't do alot of gaming, but I did install Steam and get Portal and it seems to run fine on my current machine, but I have not ventured out to try other Steam games like HL2, etc...
I do some HD video editing and encoding and currently, it can take a few hours to render out a video of about an hour of length. Other than that, I don't do any real work on the machine.
The rumor is that TRIM in OS X will need the latest hardware controller, which would be terrible especially as Windows 7 and Vista doesn't have this requirement.
This rumor can't be true. The same MacBook hardware booting to Windows supports TRIM. Driver and filesystem needs a bit of work.
-Chris
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...
I keep seeing this kind of argument and it never quite makes sense to me. The Mac product line continues to outsell itself quarter by quarter, so why wouldn't this continue to be a focus for Apple? I'm going out on a limb here, but I would guess that Apple has different development teams for Mac, iPad, iPod, etc. In fact, I would even guess that there is further differentiation at Apple in that there are most likely specific design teams for the MacBook, one for the iMac, another for the Mac Pro, etc.
The Mac product line seems to be a cash cow for Apple. Why would Apple ever as a company decide to simply neglect this revenue stream? Are they simply starstruck with their own ingenuity over the iPad and iPhone? Do they really believe that the desktop computer is going the way of the dodo? Even if this were true, doesn't it make more sense for them to ride this cash cow all the way into the sunset rather than abandoning it before it's time? Especially with ever increasing sales?
My guess is that once you start seeing USB 3.0 devices at BestBuy and WalMart you'll also see it in Macs. In fact, I'm pretty confident that you'll see it in Macs well before you can go into BestBuy and have anything other than one or two out of stock USB 3.0 drives. It's nice to have all the latest bells and whistles, but there is a point at which it simply doesn't make sense to throw in the bleeding edge just to say it's there.
Well iMac is a solid computer but no longer the one that used to have best of technologies to justify its price. Getting 1 GB of memory is nice. However, lack of faster connections is a deal breaker for me.
And what, exactly, are you going to connect to eSATA? Is it faster than FW800? Sure. But other than a fast RAID, which is still fairly uncommon for consumers to own, what peripheral are you going to connect that will take advantage of eSATA's speed? You might get a slight benefit if you have a very fast single external drive, but not enough to justify adding that new port.
The 1499$ iMac with i3 processor does offer Turbo boost. You don't need to go Wikipedia for that. Read on the Apple website.
That is funny, I could not find it on Apple's website or Intel's website. Turbo Boost is offered only for i5 and i7
There's no point about arguing about USB 3/eSATA/BR, as Apple will never offer those with current implementations. If you want all that, it's easy enough to do with a PC.