The top end 27-inch quad core iMacs are definitely going backwards in terms of graphics horsepower for games.
While the older ATI 4850 was an underclocked version of the desktop part, the 5770 is not directly related to the desktop counterpart, sporting 400 instead of 800 shaders. On top of that, the 5770 has less bandwidth (128 vs. 256) than the 4850, which may or may not be offset by the memory (GDDR5 vs. GDDR3).
However, if you don't play games, I would argue the new GPU is better for applications like Photoshop which benefit from a larger memory buffer.
Still, if you play games, it is definitely a step back even if you consider playing DirectX 11 games under windows, because they can be played by a DirectX 10.1 card.
I don't understand your point. Do you mean that these compressed crap on iTunes stores are a waste of money ? Then we agree. I don't think Apple should sell them for 20 bucks when one could buy a Bu-ray movie well below 15 bucks these days. However, Apple is playing smart here by depriving users like me the opportunity to buy and play Blu-ray content on my MB and instead forcing me to buy that compressed crap on iTunes store. Of course I can play Blu-ray on my home theater and enjoy it, but if I can also play it on my Mac, it would a great utility. Besides I don't agree with your point that Apple cinema display and iMac are not good for playing Blu-ray. They are good enough and they should be complimented with the ability to play Blu-ray.
We're getting a bit off-topic with regards to this thread, so I'll keep this brief. There are number of other forums where this debate has been exhausted ad-nauseum.
I think that you and I are in agreement vis-a-vis the inferiority of decreased bit-rate iTunes offerings when compared to DVD, regardless of on what it is watched. Where we disagree is on the equivalence of the "lean-forward" experience (iPad, notebook, desktop monitor viewed at a close distance) to the "lean-back" experience (Full size 1080p television viewed at a distance). The primary advantage to BluRay over DVD is the ability to offer higher resolution video and multi-channel sound at higher data-rates. On small screens and low-power computer speakers, these advantages are not leveraged to their full potential. I would argue that they are so minimally leveraged as to be unnoticeable. Hence my stance that the relative premium pricing on BluRay (as compared to DVD) is a waste of money if not viewed on appropriate equipment.
Actually the 5670 is equal to the 4890, plus it's a DX11 part. I do agree that gaming should be more important to them with Steam on the platform now.
No it's not, it's not even close. The 5770 is almost as fast as the 4890 in DX10/DX10.1 and DX9 games, if you keep the resolution down - but the 5670 is miles behind.
and there are hundreds more to back this up - in that graph a single 5770 or 5750 are way behind the 4890, and the 5670 has less than half the performance of a 4890
Can you elaborate? Unless you have more than a 20mb connection why would n-protocol/hardware be better than g-protocol/hardware? You probably get a better reception over a greater distance, but other than that???
I can't believe there are people complaining about the new iMac. This is the best value for a computer I've ever seen. Some people here really need to crawl into a bush and die slowly.
It has:
Faster, newer processors
1333MHz memory
SDXC
And, as others have pointed out, it's a summer update
Plus, it's the first time the basic lines get dedicated GPUs with GDDR3 instead of stinkin 9400Ms or even the rather great (for a notebook) 320M.
This is special because this is a freaking ALL-IN-ONE. People seem to forget that, 'cuz otherwise there wouldn't be any reason to troll
Here, compared to some stinkin' Dell some loser said was better.
I pitted the standard i5 27" against a Dell XPS 9000 with the following:
So the Dell has an i7 instead of an i5, but the clock is slightly lower, so we can pretty much say they are TIED.
The iMac WINS in RAM since it's 1333Mhz versus 1066Mhz
Both have the same HD. TIED
iMac's ATI 5750 not only is faster by itself, but its GDDR5 is also more advanced than the Dell's GDDR3 memory. iMac WINS, which is quite satisfying since it proves Apple isn't 3 years behind in GPU tech anymore. And the 5450 is Dell's recommended option. LOL
The UltraSharp is LED backlit, but doesn't have IPS. I've seen IPS and non-IPS screens side-by-side, and it is a noticeable difference. iMac WINS
The DVD is faster on the Dell (probably because of the vertical position on the iMac), but strangely no Double Layer. TIED
Both have 2.1 speakers with no fluff, and both have 7.1. However, the iMac has Optical I/O, something the Dell lacks.WIN for the iMac.
The Dell has Wireless-N but no Bluetooth. iMac WINS
I gave the Dell a wireless set with some fluff to compensate for Magic Mouse's own fluff. TIED
iMac has a precision aluminum enclosure. Dell has a painted plastic enclosure. iMac WINS
iMac has an SDXC card slot. Dell doesn't have a card reader at all. iMac WINS
No iSight or Mic for the Dell either. iMac WINS
So the iMac won 10 (9 if you are a M$ sheep), tied 4, and lost none.
Please DO NOTE that while iMac's memory come in 2x2Gb DIMMs, Dell's come in 4x1Gb DIMMs. Yay to Dell cheapo bastards.
Price:The iMac costs $1999. The Dell costs $2633.98
YOU SEE THAT TROLLS? That's 31.7% more expensive. MORE EXPENSIVE.
Did I mention the Dell IS NOT AN ALL-IN-ONE?.
Apple iMac. Faster, sleeker, and cheaper. How's that Apple tax working for ya, Microsoft trolls?
EDIT: I forgot to mention there is no eSATA or USB3 on the Dell either. Quit yer whining. Also added iLife to the list.
Wow, that's absolutely laughable, especially at the price. Well at least I don't to find the money for a new PC for another 6 months at least, or I'll just go back to Dell.
So YOU are the guy who said a Dell would be better.
Next to my giant comparison post, you simply look like a troll.
Dual 1GB GDDR5 ATI Radeon™ HD 5670 CrossfireX™ Enabled
6GB Triple Channel 1333Mhz DDR3
1TB - SATA-II, 3Gb/s, 7,200RPM, 32MB Cache HDD
Single Drive: 24X CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) w/double layer write capability
Dell UltraSharp U2711 27-inch Monitor
$2,588.00
Of course anyone who typically takes shots at Apple doesn't buy from Dell so it's all moot point... you could newegg that system for dirt cheap. Unfair comparison? Sure.. but you need to realize what people are comparing against Apple before you go off on tangents like this IMHO.
As the title says, 11 days ago (unaware of the refresh) I purchased the low end previous generation iMac (3.06gHz core 2 duo, 4gb ram, geforce 9400). It appears to me that apple charges a 10% restocking fee if a computer is returned within 14 days of the purchase date (please let me know if this is incorrect). Is it worth my money to return the previous generation in order to get the refreshed intel i3 generation? Aside from the processor upgrade and the graphical update, it seems like an irrelevant refresh.
Any opinions on this please?
Take it back to your local Apple Store. Today. This afternoon, if possible. And be nice about it. No, be exceedingly nice. The store manager has the power to help you out, so do everything in your power to make that as easy as possible.
You're only getting a slightly faster clock speed and drawing more power with the 5770 vs. 5750.
The same memory bandwidth, number of streams processors for OpenCL, etc.
They chose the 5750 to save on Heat and power consumption while retaining the same set up options for OpenGL and OpenCL.
Good choice.
The 5750 has 10% fewer texture units than the 5770 (36 Vs 40) and 10% fewer stream processor (720 Vs 800) as well as lower clock speed and a much lower fill rate. On high resolution screens, this can make a difference between playable and not playable.
Great lineup. Really excited about the new iMac's capabilities...
...just really wanted a Blu-ray drive...\ so I guess I'll just stick with my current iMac until the beginning of next year and hope for the best that the next iteration includes one.
Apple has really got to get off of this anti-Blu-ray kick as I believe a whole lot of Mac faithful wants the tech inside their Mac hardware. It just seems they (Apple) are blinded by their downloadable movie content paradigm and most certainly the claim of high licensing fees from the BDA (not just Sony, but Panasonic, Philips, Pioneer, etc) is just posturing as these "fees" haven't stopped any other computer manufacturer in putting it in their lineups at a very cheap cost.
At least offer it as a more expensive BTO option, my gosh. It has only been 4/5 years since Blu-ray has been out and the BDA has even simplified its licensing scheme a year ago at an estimated 40%...
The 5750 has 10% fewer texture units than the 5770 (36 Vs 40) and 10% fewer stream processor (720 Vs 800) as well as lower clock speed and a much lower fill rate. On high resolution screens, this can make a difference between playable and not playable.
...just really wanted a Blu-ray drive...\ so I guess I'll just stick with my current iMac until the beginning of next year and hope for the best that the next iteration includes one.
All available evidence at this point makes me believe that Apple has not the intention to include BR drives.
Dual 1GB GDDR5 ATI Radeon? HD 5670 CrossfireX? Enabled
6GB Triple Channel 1333Mhz DDR3
1TB - SATA-II, 3Gb/s, 7,200RPM, 32MB Cache HDD
Single Drive: 24X CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) w/double layer write capability
Dell UltraSharp U2711 27-inch Monitor
$2,588.00
Of course anyone who typically takes shots at Apple doesn't buy from Dell so it's all moot point... you could newegg that system for dirt cheap. Unfair comparison? Sure.. but you need to realize what people are comparing against Apple before you go off on tangents like this IMHO.
You are omitting lots of things that could greatly alter price should you put it. With W7 Ultimate, an i5 with 2.66, one 5770, card reader, 4Gb of memory, and no FireWire, or Optical Audio, or Wireless/Fancy Mouse and Keyboard, or being an All-in-one, still get you a (slightly better looking and faster) system that is still inferior to the $1999 iMac for $2658.
And people who take shots at Apple rarely are the "LOLZ I GOT IT CHEAPA" kind; those don't even pretend they care about eSATA and whatever, they just drool over CPUs and GPUs.
The people who take shots at Apple are people like kotatsu: they think they are getting a better deal with Dell/Alienware/Whatever and that we are Mac Sheep who pay much more for a pretty logo. They conveniently forget those little big details that make Macs so superior, and actually cheaper.
Comments
While the older ATI 4850 was an underclocked version of the desktop part, the 5770 is not directly related to the desktop counterpart, sporting 400 instead of 800 shaders. On top of that, the 5770 has less bandwidth (128 vs. 256) than the 4850, which may or may not be offset by the memory (GDDR5 vs. GDDR3).
However, if you don't play games, I would argue the new GPU is better for applications like Photoshop which benefit from a larger memory buffer.
Still, if you play games, it is definitely a step back even if you consider playing DirectX 11 games under windows, because they can be played by a DirectX 10.1 card.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Mob...0.23245.0.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-ATI...0.13975.0.html
The refurbished iMac 2.8 Quad Core i7 can be picked up here:
http://store.apple.com/us/product/G0...co=MTU0MzQ1NjE
Yes she would see a difference.
I would not go back to g.
Thanks dorotea...plus she likes getting presents from her Dad, especially if it's an Apple procduct!
Quick question: My daughter just got a MacBookPro but is still using an old non 'n' airport express.
If I get her a new Express, would she see a noticeable difference in speed when online?
Upgrading from G to N will make her LAN faster, but it won't necessarily make Internet faster since maybe her DSL/cable is slower than G already.
I don't understand your point. Do you mean that these compressed crap on iTunes stores are a waste of money ? Then we agree. I don't think Apple should sell them for 20 bucks when one could buy a Bu-ray movie well below 15 bucks these days. However, Apple is playing smart here by depriving users like me the opportunity to buy and play Blu-ray content on my MB and instead forcing me to buy that compressed crap on iTunes store. Of course I can play Blu-ray on my home theater and enjoy it, but if I can also play it on my Mac, it would a great utility. Besides I don't agree with your point that Apple cinema display and iMac are not good for playing Blu-ray. They are good enough and they should be complimented with the ability to play Blu-ray.
We're getting a bit off-topic with regards to this thread, so I'll keep this brief. There are number of other forums where this debate has been exhausted ad-nauseum.
I think that you and I are in agreement vis-a-vis the inferiority of decreased bit-rate iTunes offerings when compared to DVD, regardless of on what it is watched. Where we disagree is on the equivalence of the "lean-forward" experience (iPad, notebook, desktop monitor viewed at a close distance) to the "lean-back" experience (Full size 1080p television viewed at a distance). The primary advantage to BluRay over DVD is the ability to offer higher resolution video and multi-channel sound at higher data-rates. On small screens and low-power computer speakers, these advantages are not leveraged to their full potential. I would argue that they are so minimally leveraged as to be unnoticeable. Hence my stance that the relative premium pricing on BluRay (as compared to DVD) is a waste of money if not viewed on appropriate equipment.
Actually the 5670 is equal to the 4890, plus it's a DX11 part. I do agree that gaming should be more important to them with Steam on the platform now.
No it's not, it's not even close. The 5770 is almost as fast as the 4890 in DX10/DX10.1 and DX9 games, if you keep the resolution down - but the 5670 is miles behind.
5770/5750
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2856/5
and there are hundreds more to back this up - in that graph a single 5770 or 5750 are way behind the 4890, and the 5670 has less than half the performance of a 4890
5670
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2917/5
I know this is rude, but you're so far out on this one, I wonder why you posted on the subject?
Yes she would see a difference.
I would not go back to g.
Can you elaborate? Unless you have more than a 20mb connection why would n-protocol/hardware be better than g-protocol/hardware? You probably get a better reception over a greater distance, but other than that???
It has:
Faster, newer processors
1333MHz memory
SDXC
And, as others have pointed out, it's a summer update
Plus, it's the first time the basic lines get dedicated GPUs with GDDR3 instead of stinkin 9400Ms or even the rather great (for a notebook) 320M.
This is special because this is a freaking ALL-IN-ONE. People seem to forget that, 'cuz otherwise there wouldn't be any reason to troll
Here, compared to some stinkin' Dell some loser said was better.
I pitted the standard i5 27" against a Dell XPS 9000 with the following:
Genuine Windows® 7 Ultimate, 64bit, English
Intel® Core™ i7-920 processor(8MB L3 Cache, 2.66GHz)
4GB Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM at 1066MHz - 4 DIMMs
1TB 7200 RPM SATA Hard Drive
ATI Radeon HD 5450 1GB DDR3
Dell UltraSharp U2711 27-inch Monitor
16X DVD+/-RW Drive
AY410 2.1 Stereo Speakers with Subwoofer
Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio
Dell 1525 Wireless-N PCIe Card
Logitech Cordless Desktop MX 5500 Revolution
Mac OS X WINS. No question about that.
iLife. WIN for the iMac.
So the Dell has an i7 instead of an i5, but the clock is slightly lower, so we can pretty much say they are TIED.
The iMac WINS in RAM since it's 1333Mhz versus 1066Mhz
Both have the same HD. TIED
iMac's ATI 5750 not only is faster by itself, but its GDDR5 is also more advanced than the Dell's GDDR3 memory. iMac WINS, which is quite satisfying since it proves Apple isn't 3 years behind in GPU tech anymore. And the 5450 is Dell's recommended option. LOL
The UltraSharp is LED backlit, but doesn't have IPS. I've seen IPS and non-IPS screens side-by-side, and it is a noticeable difference. iMac WINS
The DVD is faster on the Dell (probably because of the vertical position on the iMac), but strangely no Double Layer. TIED
Both have 2.1 speakers with no fluff, and both have 7.1. However, the iMac has Optical I/O, something the Dell lacks.WIN for the iMac.
The Dell has Wireless-N but no Bluetooth. iMac WINS
I gave the Dell a wireless set with some fluff to compensate for Magic Mouse's own fluff. TIED
iMac has a precision aluminum enclosure. Dell has a painted plastic enclosure. iMac WINS
iMac has an SDXC card slot. Dell doesn't have a card reader at all. iMac WINS
No iSight or Mic for the Dell either. iMac WINS
So the iMac won 10 (9 if you are a M$ sheep), tied 4, and lost none.
Please DO NOTE that while iMac's memory come in 2x2Gb DIMMs, Dell's come in 4x1Gb DIMMs. Yay to Dell cheapo bastards.
Price:The iMac costs $1999. The Dell costs $2633.98
YOU SEE THAT TROLLS? That's 31.7% more expensive. MORE EXPENSIVE.
Did I mention the Dell IS NOT AN ALL-IN-ONE?.
Apple iMac. Faster, sleeker, and cheaper. How's that Apple tax working for ya, Microsoft trolls?
EDIT: I forgot to mention there is no eSATA or USB3 on the Dell either. Quit yer whining. Also added iLife to the list.
E.g. OCZ indicates always 2 speeds for writing the data. And in my testing it really lies in this range.
* Read: Up to 260 MB/s
* Write: Up to 260 MB/s
* Sustained Write: 140 MB/s
* Max IOPS: 15,000 (4K random)
No USB 3, no eSATA, no Blu-Ray...
Wow, that's absolutely laughable, especially at the price. Well at least I don't to find the money for a new PC for another 6 months at least, or I'll just go back to Dell.
So YOU are the guy who said a Dell would be better.
Next to my giant comparison post, you simply look like a troll.
Oh, I forgot, that's what you are.
You're only getting a slightly faster clock speed and drawing more power with the 5770 vs. 5750.
The same memory bandwidth, number of streams processors for OpenCL, etc.
They chose the 5750 to save on Heat and power consumption while retaining the same set up options for OpenGL and OpenCL.
Good choice.
Price: The iMac costs $1999. The Dell costs$2633.98.
YOU SEE THAT TROLLS? That's 31.7% more expensive. MORE EXPENSIVE.
Why not just go alien ware?
Intel® Core™ i7 920 2.66GHz (8MB Cache) Quad Core Processor
Dual 1GB GDDR5 ATI Radeon™ HD 5670 CrossfireX™ Enabled
6GB Triple Channel 1333Mhz DDR3
1TB - SATA-II, 3Gb/s, 7,200RPM, 32MB Cache HDD
Single Drive: 24X CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) w/double layer write capability
Dell UltraSharp U2711 27-inch Monitor
$2,588.00
Of course anyone who typically takes shots at Apple doesn't buy from Dell so it's all moot point... you could newegg that system for dirt cheap. Unfair comparison? Sure.. but you need to realize what people are comparing against Apple before you go off on tangents like this IMHO.
As the title says, 11 days ago (unaware of the refresh) I purchased the low end previous generation iMac (3.06gHz core 2 duo, 4gb ram, geforce 9400). It appears to me that apple charges a 10% restocking fee if a computer is returned within 14 days of the purchase date (please let me know if this is incorrect). Is it worth my money to return the previous generation in order to get the refreshed intel i3 generation? Aside from the processor upgrade and the graphical update, it seems like an irrelevant refresh.
Any opinions on this please?
Take it back to your local Apple Store. Today. This afternoon, if possible. And be nice about it. No, be exceedingly nice. The store manager has the power to help you out, so do everything in your power to make that as easy as possible.
If that doesn't work, call Apple instead.
Let us know how it worked out.
http://www.amd.com/us/products/noteb...750-specs.aspx
You're only getting a slightly faster clock speed and drawing more power with the 5770 vs. 5750.
The same memory bandwidth, number of streams processors for OpenCL, etc.
They chose the 5750 to save on Heat and power consumption while retaining the same set up options for OpenGL and OpenCL.
Good choice.
The 5750 has 10% fewer texture units than the 5770 (36 Vs 40) and 10% fewer stream processor (720 Vs 800) as well as lower clock speed and a much lower fill rate. On high resolution screens, this can make a difference between playable and not playable.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2856/6
Would Firewire 1600 and 3200 be supported by the new Intel chips?
Not Intel, probably Oxford, maybe TI.
But then again, I said specifically said to blame Intel for the lack of built-in USB 3.0 support.
FireWire is a separate issue.
...just really wanted a Blu-ray drive...
Apple has really got to get off of this anti-Blu-ray kick as I believe a whole lot of Mac faithful wants the tech inside their Mac hardware. It just seems they (Apple) are blinded by their downloadable movie content paradigm and most certainly the claim of high licensing fees from the BDA (not just Sony, but Panasonic, Philips, Pioneer, etc) is just posturing as these "fees" haven't stopped any other computer manufacturer in putting it in their lineups at a very cheap cost.
At least offer it as a more expensive BTO option, my gosh. It has only been 4/5 years since Blu-ray has been out and the BDA has even simplified its licensing scheme a year ago at an estimated 40%...
http://www.slashgear.com/blu-ray-fou...ocess-2535725/
...time to embrace the Blu-ray Apple. C'mon already.
But other than that, these new iMacs are superb! Maybe in 2011 they'll begin to adopt the Light Peak technology as well!...
http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/24/v...le-transferri/
...one can only hope.
Price: The iMac costs $1999. The Dell costs$2633.98
Does using an embiggened font somehow make your argument more compelling?
Or less...
The 5750 has 10% fewer texture units than the 5770 (36 Vs 40) and 10% fewer stream processor (720 Vs 800) as well as lower clock speed and a much lower fill rate. On high resolution screens, this can make a difference between playable and not playable.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2856/6
The 5750 is an MXM mobile part and is not comparable to the desktop part, sporting only 400 shaders:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Mob...0.23245.0.html
...just really wanted a Blu-ray drive...
All available evidence at this point makes me believe that Apple has not the intention to include BR drives.
Wish I could get one, to replace my Gaming PC.
Maybe early 2011
Why not just go alien ware?
Intel® Core? i7 920 2.66GHz (8MB Cache) Quad Core Processor
Dual 1GB GDDR5 ATI Radeon? HD 5670 CrossfireX? Enabled
6GB Triple Channel 1333Mhz DDR3
1TB - SATA-II, 3Gb/s, 7,200RPM, 32MB Cache HDD
Single Drive: 24X CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) w/double layer write capability
Dell UltraSharp U2711 27-inch Monitor
$2,588.00
Of course anyone who typically takes shots at Apple doesn't buy from Dell so it's all moot point... you could newegg that system for dirt cheap. Unfair comparison? Sure.. but you need to realize what people are comparing against Apple before you go off on tangents like this IMHO.
You are omitting lots of things that could greatly alter price should you put it. With W7 Ultimate, an i5 with 2.66, one 5770, card reader, 4Gb of memory, and no FireWire, or Optical Audio, or Wireless/Fancy Mouse and Keyboard, or being an All-in-one, still get you a (slightly better looking and faster) system that is still inferior to the $1999 iMac for $2658.
And people who take shots at Apple rarely are the "LOLZ I GOT IT CHEAPA" kind; those don't even pretend they care about eSATA and whatever, they just drool over CPUs and GPUs.
The people who take shots at Apple are people like kotatsu: they think they are getting a better deal with Dell/Alienware/Whatever and that we are Mac Sheep who pay much more for a pretty logo. They conveniently forget those little big details that make Macs so superior, and actually cheaper.