Dose is seem odd to anyone else that the low end power mac is only a 1.8GHz G5 with only 256MB ram , 80GB hard drive and a NVIDIA GeForce FX. I would have expected this to at least be bumped up to = the imac 20inch rev b. Unless they indented to update it once the rev b imac is announced.
Unless they indented to update it once the rev b imac is announced.
It was introduced when the G5 iMac was, so that would stand to reason. Unless, of course, Apple has different plans for the $1k-$2k headless market... (crosses fingers)
I too often walk up to strangers on the street and start rambling on about Apple but they always run off in the opposite direction.
Next time wear an Apple t-shirt and bring a clipboard. Then people will think your taking a survey or something.
What do you think of the lack of BTO options for the ATI 9800 XT or X800 XT graphic card. Huh?
Do you think the absense of a PCI-E is going to hurt the current models. What?
Does the lack of an extra 5.25 slot on the tower case frustrate you. Waa?
and so on ....
Then after you can pull your shirt off to reveal a Dell shirt underneath and start the whole process overagain. It's really fun to do on a sunny Saturday afternoon.
I am somewhat perplexed. TS said nothing about a 23" model. Could this mean that there will be no 23" iMac in the next update? If so, this update may happen at any time from next week and there will be no a 23" model probably until next year.
On the other hand, the recent price drop in the cinema displays make a 23" model quite feasible, at least at the price point of the original 20" G4 iMac. We should at least see a price drop for the 17" and 20" models in the next update. Also, a 23" model fits very well the HD year announced by S. Jobs. The thing is that such a machine would need two G5@2 GHz at least, in order to run HD video at max. resolution. Note that the specifications say "PowerMac G5 or faster Macintosh computer"; which is the Macintosh computer that is faster than a dual 2 GHz Power Mac, apart the other Power Macs of course? Would this work in an iMac running at 3:1 ratio? And why not throw one or two SPEs from the CELL architecture to help the main CPU (G5) in decoding HD video? Questions, questions .
After seeing the powermac hiccup i think at best you will see a imac 2.0 and 9600. At worst would be more 1.8 and 9600 along with Tiger. Anyways neither machine advances much after a year. Hard to get excited about bumps that couldnt be smaller. fx5200-9600 is almost nil difference, a 200mhz bump on the 1.8 is nice but numbers wont show much. Again Apple should build a machine the consumer can configure.
After seeing the powermac hiccup i think at best you will see a imac 2.0 and 9600. At worst would be more 1.8 and 9600 along with Tiger. Anyways neither machine advances much after a year. Hard to get excited about bumps that couldnt be smaller. fx5200-9600 is almost nil difference, a 200mhz bump on the 1.8 is nice but numbers wont show much. Again Apple should build a machine the consumer can configure.
No, that isn't right, the difference between FX5200 and Radeon-9600 are tremendous, like night and day, at least when you are playing 3D-games with it. You also don't have to forget that the 9600 comes with 128 MB VRAM which is also a big difference in gaming.
But you are right on the 200 MHz-bump, that isn't much, but nearly noone has expected much in that regard, since it's just a revB-machine. What I and a lot of others expect from rev-B is just a machine without the problems rev-A had with the fan and the disk, and off course a pre-installed Tiger.
The rest, like the rumored 512MB-RAM and the new graphiccard, as well as the dual-layer-DVD-burner in the middle and best versions are just really sweet and nice bonusses.
True about the 128, i had forgot but they may keep it at 64. Help keep iMac handicap compared to powermac 1.8 Apple is cheap when it comes to video. A 9600 64 vs fx5200 64 is almost nil difference is what I ment to say.
True about the 128, i had forgot but they may keep it at 64. Help keep iMac handicap compared to powermac 1.8 Apple is cheap when it comes to video. A 9600 64 vs fx5200 64 is almost nil difference is what I ment to say.
The difference between the 9600 from ATI and the 5200 from Nvidia is not only the VRAM, but also the capabilities in 3D, the 9600 is really a whole other beast in that regard.
Here is a PC-site comparing all the different 3d-cards out there:
The conclusion one can draw from that comparison is that the standard ATI-Radeon 9600 with 128 MB RAM is way better than the Nvidia FX 5200, and right on the level, even slightly better than Nvidia's FX 5700!
I really hope that Apple indeed builds in the standard 9600 with 128 MB VRAM into the new imacs, it would right away out of the box double the 3d-performance in 3d-games.
Comments
Fitzy
Unless they indented to update it once the rev b imac is announced.
It was introduced when the G5 iMac was, so that would stand to reason. Unless, of course, Apple has different plans for the $1k-$2k headless market... (crosses fingers)
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
I dunno, just some random guy I talked to on the street.
Aha, I see. The other random guy says now that the new iMacs and eMacs may start shipping already from this Friday, alongside Tiger.
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
I dunno, just some random guy I talked to on the street. He had lots to say about Powermacs, too.
I too often walk up to strangers on the street and start rambling on about Apple but they always run off in the opposite direction.
Originally posted by 1984
I too often walk up to strangers on the street and start rambling on about Apple but they always run off in the opposite direction.
Next time wear an Apple t-shirt and bring a clipboard. Then people will think your taking a survey or something.
What do you think of the lack of BTO options for the ATI 9800 XT or X800 XT graphic card. Huh?
Do you think the absense of a PCI-E is going to hurt the current models. What?
Does the lack of an extra 5.25 slot on the tower case frustrate you. Waa?
and so on ....
Then after you can pull your shirt off to reveal a Dell shirt underneath and start the whole process overagain. It's really fun to do on a sunny Saturday afternoon.
Originally posted by 1984
I too often walk up to strangers on the street and start rambling on about Apple but they always run off in the opposite direction.
Yeah, I get that too, but maybe it helped that I was in Cupertino when I ran into this guy.
20-inch : 2GHz
$1,899.00
20-inch widescreen LCD
2GHz PowerPC G5
512K L2 cache
667MHz frontside bus
512MB DDR400 SDRAM
ATI Radeon 9600
128MB DDR video memory
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
16x slot-load SuperDrive (double-layer)
This is only a guess/wishful thinking. Maybe Tuesday? Wednesday?
On the other hand, the recent price drop in the cinema displays make a 23" model quite feasible, at least at the price point of the original 20" G4 iMac. We should at least see a price drop for the 17" and 20" models in the next update. Also, a 23" model fits very well the HD year announced by S. Jobs. The thing is that such a machine would need two G5@2 GHz at least, in order to run HD video at max. resolution. Note that the specifications say "PowerMac G5 or faster Macintosh computer"; which is the Macintosh computer that is faster than a dual 2 GHz Power Mac, apart the other Power Macs of course? Would this work in an iMac running at 3:1 ratio? And why not throw one or two SPEs from the CELL architecture to help the main CPU (G5) in decoding HD video? Questions, questions
--------------------------
Hoping in Nashvegas
Originally posted by Aurora
After seeing the powermac hiccup i think at best you will see a imac 2.0 and 9600. At worst would be more 1.8 and 9600 along with Tiger. Anyways neither machine advances much after a year. Hard to get excited about bumps that couldnt be smaller. fx5200-9600 is almost nil difference, a 200mhz bump on the 1.8 is nice but numbers wont show much. Again Apple should build a machine the consumer can configure.
No, that isn't right, the difference between FX5200 and Radeon-9600 are tremendous, like night and day, at least when you are playing 3D-games with it. You also don't have to forget that the 9600 comes with 128 MB VRAM which is also a big difference in gaming.
But you are right on the 200 MHz-bump, that isn't much, but nearly noone has expected much in that regard, since it's just a revB-machine. What I and a lot of others expect from rev-B is just a machine without the problems rev-A had with the fan and the disk, and off course a pre-installed Tiger.
The rest, like the rumored 512MB-RAM and the new graphiccard, as well as the dual-layer-DVD-burner in the middle and best versions are just really sweet and nice bonusses.
Nightcrawler
Originally posted by Aurora
True about the 128, i had forgot but they may keep it at 64. Help keep iMac handicap compared to powermac 1.8 Apple is cheap when it comes to video. A 9600 64 vs fx5200 64 is almost nil difference is what I ment to say.
The difference between the 9600 from ATI and the 5200 from Nvidia is not only the VRAM, but also the capabilities in 3D, the 9600 is really a whole other beast in that regard.
Here is a PC-site comparing all the different 3d-cards out there:
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/doom3/doom3-2.html
The conclusion one can draw from that comparison is that the standard ATI-Radeon 9600 with 128 MB RAM is way better than the Nvidia FX 5200, and right on the level, even slightly better than Nvidia's FX 5700!
I really hope that Apple indeed builds in the standard 9600 with 128 MB VRAM into the new imacs, it would right away out of the box double the 3d-performance in 3d-games.
Nightcrawler