‽
|
Also, GeForce 8800 GS on the top end.
Disappointing: the hard drive configurations, and no 2 GB on the low end model. No press release yet. Last edited by chucker : 2008-04-28 at 07:48. |
quote |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
OK, the new iMac is go. All the specs and prices are almost exactly the same as the old model, with the exception of the processor:
The low-end, $1,199 20-incher is 2.4 GHz. The mid-range, $1,499 20-incher is 2.66 GHz. The high-end, $1,799 24-incher is 2.8 GHz. The top-of-the-line, Apple-online-store exclusive (?) $2,199 model is 3.06 GHz. Wow! The top-of-the-line model also sees the only non-processor change: an Nvidia GeForce 8800 GS (512MB memory). At least, I don't think the iMac had that before. Those speeds are...different from the mobile Penryns currently available. IOW, I think Apple is actually using desktop processors! But other people know far more about Intel's chips than I do, so I'll leave that to smarter folk. What an exciting update! and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
quote |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
DAMN IT
I was beaten. I had a pre-made post ready and waiting for the updates, too. I just had to fill in the speeds and prices...and I was still beaten. Curses. Well, *my* post is more informative. and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Near Indianapolis
|
It's actually the 8800 GS, not GTS.
|
quote |
‽
|
Press release out: http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2008/04/28imac.html
6 MB L2 cache (up from 4) and 1066 MHz bus (up from 800) means they're using Penryns now; not a big surprise there either. A solid update, nothing else. |
quote |
‽
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
quote |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
Are you saying Apple is under- and over-clocking the processors? and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
|
quote |
Veteran Member
|
Still being stingy with the hard drives - at least the upgrade prices aren't a complete rip-off.
Nice to see the optional upgrade to the 8800GS. |
quote |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
The only thing I really have a *problem* with in the iMac is the screen, but I wasn't expecting them to fix that in a spec bump. That will have to wait for the next design change (this fall?). After the screens, I'd like to see 2) better graphics and 3) Blu-ray. Hard drives aren't really on my list of desired updates. Like increasing RAM, they're a nice way to add value when you're not A) redesigning the product or B) increasing the clock speed by, like, 400MHz overnight. But that's getting into S&R territory, so I'll just say this for now: I'm totally happy with the new iMacs, and even if they don't update them before I buy one, I'll still be cool. I mean, 2.7 GHz? That's, like, my lucky number. (Oh, and it's hella fast, too.) EDIT: Thanks to the mod that merged the threads. and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
|
quote |
‽
|
Quote:
|
|
quote |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
|
|
quote |
‽
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
quote |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
I'd like higher resolutions, too. There's talk about resolution independence, there's talk about Blu-ray...I think it'd be nice if the 20" iMac was true HD (basically, the resolution of Apple's current 23- and 24-incb displays). And LED backlighting. "Environment aside"? Um, yeah, let's just put, oh, idunno, the health of our only planet aside for a minute... I know it might be expensive (as if Apple didn't already charge a premium for their displays?), but Apple did commit to LED backlighting in the past. (On that note, I noticed that the new tech specs page for the iMac has a "Greener Apple Environmental Scorecard." I like that.) Basically, my dream would be for new, HD-across-the-board Cinema Displays to be released at WWDC - at 20-, 24-, and 30-inches - and then for the iMac to start using those same higher-resolution panels with its next design change. and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris, France
|
Even the lowest iMac should have a bigger hard disk than 250 GB, which is almost comically small now. Sheesh, there are now notebook disks on the market with double that capacity. Since the switch to Intel Apple has placed too much emphasis on the processor, and not enough on disk and memory. This iMac update continues that trend, IMO.
Still, the iMacs are very nice. Screen-wise, the 24-inch iMac has one of the best screens on the market. I suspect the panel will end up in a Cinema Display at some point. It's expensive, bleeding edge tech. The 20-inch iMac does have a relatively poor screen, though it used to have a better one in the days of the G5 and perhaps early Intel (can't remember when they switched to the TN panel). … engrossed in such factional acts as dreaming different dreams. |
quote |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
I'm sure you will all hate this, but...maybe Apple is letting their hard drives lag behind a bit, so that they can eventually switch to 2.5-inch drives in the iMac without hurting capacity? Such an iMac could be quite thin... Of course, I'm sure everyone will bitch about the performance, but lots of demanding professionals use laptops with 2.5-inch drives these days... Or else Apple just believes that the majority of users don't need more than 500GB. Quote:
The 24-inch panel is good, though. The only thing I'd want out of that is perhaps a higher resolution (if this really is the year of resolution independence) and LED backlighting (which is probably a ways off). I've wondered why Apple hasn't just replaced the 23" Cinema Display with the 24" iMac's screen - it has the same resolution, and (from what I've heard) far fewer problems. and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
||
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Near Indianapolis
|
Did the last revision allow up to 4 GB RAM? I can't remember, but I think that's new.
[edit] Oh, plus the base configuration now is one SO-DIMM, not two. I think the last revision was 2 x 512, not 1 x 1024. That's a much-needed improvement. |
quote |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
The last revision did allow for 4 GB RAM, up from 3 in the plastic iMacs. But you're right - having the 1 GB of RAM on one SO-DIMM is new. That's rather nice of Apple, since I'm sure many people will want to double their own RAM.
and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
quote |
Banging the Bottom End
Join Date: Jun 2004
|
IIRC, 4GB was available with the last revision.
|
quote |
Lord of the Rant.
Formerly turtle2472 Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Upstate South Carolina
|
This is making the new iMac more tempting for me...but I'd still rather have a Mini. Though with the Mini-DVI out I can still hook an external monitor up without a problem and end up with two big screens to stare at.
Going up to 4GB of RAM is a must. After moving my MB up to 4GB it screams. Louis L'Amour, “To make democracy work, we must be a nation of participants, not simply observers. One who does not vote has no right to complain.” Visit our archived Minecraft world! | Maybe someday I'll proof read, until then deal with it. |
quote |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
Now we just need to get, like, five thousand dollars. Then we'll be all set. and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
|
quote |
Veteran Member
|
Quote:
Exactly. I would have expected something more along the lines of $1199 250GB, $1499 320GB, $1799 500GB, $2199 750GB. Quote:
|
||
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
|
Low end model 999€. Finally. That is by far the best part of the update.
The 8800GS should be the default in the 24". Those 30% additional pixels compared to the 20" don't move themselves. The 8800GS is a cheap part, even the retail cards have dropped to $130 ($100 after rebate) at Newegg. Component costs can't be far from the 2600 Pro's. I'd have bought a 20" today if the GS could be BTOed in it. With the 24", I can get a more powerful PC and pocket a grand, no sale. |
quote |
ಠ_ರೃ
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
|
Yeah, I wish they had actually upgraded the graphics instead of just providing a BTO option on only the 24" models (meaning it's $1949, minimum, to get a Mac with a GeForce 8800 in it).
Hell, they should have gone 8800GS 256MB on the 20" (standard) and 8800GT 512MB on the 24". Turn the iMacs into somewhat viable gaming machines (not economical at all, but not the embarrassment they currently are). |
quote |
Veteran Member
|
Quote:
I'm surprised about the low hard drive options. Apple's a proponent of downloads versus renting on discs. Well that means that people need above average hard drives storage ...not below average. All in all a good update. However it appears that computer hardware is in a lull right now. There's very little to get truly excited about. Welcome to commodity village. omgwtfbbq |
|
quote |
New Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
|
Quote:
-Keith |
|
quote |
Banging the Bottom End
Join Date: Jun 2004
|
I for one am glad that Apple is at least offering a more recent GPU for the iMac. I've been trying to figure out how to afford it for $2K plus tax though and other than donning a ski mask, nothing is coming to mind.
|
quote |
Sneaky Punk
|
Quote:
|
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
|
Have you looked at what a 3GHz dualcore, a 2.4GHz quadcore or a 8800GT costs in retail these days? (All <$200!) Desktop parts' value has improved incredibly and there's no end in sight for it anytime soon. Apple just refuses to use them.
|
quote |
Stallion
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Milwaukee
|
When is Apple going to learn?!? I can build a much faster system with an equal display for 600-700 even with a Leopard license through third party vendors. I imagine that could be drastically reduced when buying by the 1000 unit manufacturer direct. C'mon Apple. Stop gouging us with your 50%+ markups.
...and calling/e-mailing/texting ex-girlfriends on the off-chance they'll invite you over for some "old time's sake" no-strings couch gymnastics... |
quote |
Posting Rules | Navigation |
|
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
MacBook Pro: 1.8 GHz or 2.0 GHz? | Sketch | Purchasing Advice | 4 | 2006-03-16 05:45 |
How good is an 1 GHz AMD for video playback compared to my iBook? | Dorian Gray | Genius Bar | 4 | 2006-03-09 12:34 |
Why No > 2 Ghz Duo? | JK47 | Apple Products | 20 | 2006-02-14 10:51 |
Intel slower than G5? | webmotiva | Apple Products | 10 | 2006-01-18 11:15 |
Apple releases updated Power Mac G5s | staph | Apple Products | 43 | 2004-06-09 13:20 |