Want a better card in your new 24in iMac? READ HERE

[VortexOfPain]

Give Apple your feedback!

http://www.apple.com/feedback/imac.html

They need to hear from ALL OF US who are looking at these new iMacs and those who *WOULD BUY ONE AND PAY EXTRA* to have a more powerful video card.

Voicing our concerns in forums will hardly get their attention, but giving them direct feedback CAN. Remember that their last iMac lineup later received a new CTO option for the nVidia 7600 GT.

[totally_fly_]

Give Apple your feedback!

http://www.apple.com/feedback/imac.html

They need to hear from ALL OF US who are looking at these new iMacs and those who *WOULD BUY ONE AND PAY EXTRA* to have a more powerful video card.

Voicing our concerns in forums will hardly get their attention, but giving them direct feedback CAN. Remember that their last iMac lineup later received a new CTO option for the nVidia 7600 GT.


Great Idea! I've already sent my feedback about that! Others need to follow.. if they get an inbox full of complaints about the graphics card, they can't really ignore that!

[VortexOfPain]

I have made it even easier for EVERYONE to submit feedback. Just copy and paste into the proper fields:

Subject:

iMac (Mid 2007) Poor Video Card

Feedback Type:

Enhancement Request

Comments:

Another would-be iMac buyer if only you offered a higher end video card as a Configure To Order option. The existing video card which comes stock will not fit my needs.

I wanted to submit this so that you consider offering a CTO option for a faster, more powerful graphics card like what was offered in the previous generation of iMacs (the GeForce 7600GT CTO option). As soon as you offer this, you will gain my business.

Thank you for listening to feedback to build an even better product!

[wshld]

It's done, for sure.

[ventro]

It's probably a heat issue.

[JPT]

Sent :)

Where can I send feedback about the BT Keyboard? lol

[davekarn]

Done and done

[synth3tik]

why the screen is still going to be glossy

[KJmoon117]

Sent.. I say my letter was pretty exaggerated...

"I have been a Apple fan for a while waiting for the new iMac updates to arrive so I can purchase my second Mac since my G4 PowerMac...

However the new and updated iMacs are great however the GFX card is very disappointing for Apple's high standard in delivering a high end product.

I hope Apple gives us an option or up the GFX card to something more along Apple's standard.

P.S. I think you guys also forgot the right side magnet for the Apple Remote.

Thank you,
Soon to be and hopefully an iMac buyer."

Even though the video card is disappointing I need to get my refund for this Dell E520 (hope it's not too late) and get me some Apple in my life again..

[Aggamemnon]

Done

[Wild-Bill]

Wow.

I wonder where he got that idea from.............


I wonder....

[Dont Hurt Me]

I did one im sure it went straight to Jobs...........trash can. Never the less I feel better voicing my view of the ati 2400/2600.

[Paulsan]

Done.

And I squawked about the glossy screen.

[Grenadier]

I have sent a message too.
I dont know what the hell Apple was thinking when they came up with the notion of using NOTORIOUSLY poor GPUs.
The ATi HD 2000 series is viewed as one of the largest flops in GPU history.

A 8600GTS provides more than double the power of a 2600 Pro.

My message begs them for the inclusion of a 8600 :)

[zign]

I think we should wait and see what the benchmarks are first.

Most of the reviews people linked to from this forum is to ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB DDR2. The iMac card is 256MB GDDR3. I have found some reviews of the card and they seem to be quite good but the drivers are still beta (reviews were in russian). Those who updated to the newer but still beta drivers noticed improvements.

[Grenadier]

I think we should wait and see what the benchmarks are first.

Most of the reviews people linked to from this forum is to ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB DDR2. The iMac card is 256MB GDDR3. I have found some reviews of the card and they seem to be quite good but the drivers are still beta (reviews were in russian). Those who updated to the newer but still beta drivers noticed improvements.

Hmm, you have a point. Im still very dubious, but perhaps I will wait for the benchmarks on BareFeats before I decide whether I should totally trash this update.

[wattso]

Sent my feedback. C'mon guy's please do the same. Apple need to know that this was a stupid idea.

[roland.g]

I going to start a feedback chain telling Apple how great the new iMacs are, especially the graphics cards.

[DoFoT9]

me accidentally sent 2 hahaha.

ahwell, now they have my email twice!

[Wild-Bill]

me accidentally sent 2 hahaha.

ahwell, now they have my email twice!

Make it three then. ;) Click the link in my signature & tell Apple to put an 8800GTX in the Mac Pro. :D

[bonafide]

I going to start a feedback chain telling Apple how great the new iMacs are, especially the graphics cards.

Ya do it !! :)

[Queso]

I going to start a feedback chain telling Apple how great the new iMacs are, especially the graphics cards.
Ha ha. I'm going to start one telling them how much I love the chin :D

[jkaz]

here's the feedback i sent them:

"I'm disappointed in the release of the iMac yesterday. First of all, the color scheme makes it look identical to the Samsung television i purchased 18 months ago.

Second, the video card offerings are, please excuse me, but they are pathetic.

Finally, the glossy only screens 100% guarantee that I will not be being this model."

[full0ut]

done... thx!

[xBerserker]

Done, I mentioned I didn't like the glossy screen, give use a matte screen like the past iMac.

[capran]

Here's my letter I sent them:

First, I have to say, I love the Mac OS, and I've had several over the last 13 years. But I also like to play games, mostly in Windows. I've been wanting to buy a Mac that can double as a gaming machine, that doesn't cost as much as the Mac Pro.

So it was with a great deal of waiting and anticipation that's brought me to this. At June's WWDC, Mr. Jobs brought out EA Games and ID's John Carmack to talk about the future of games on the Mac. So I figured, maybe this is a change of heart for Apple, who seem to have snubbed the gaming community for ages.

So I continued to wait. Then finally August 7th came, and I was hoping the new iMac would be what I was waiting for. But, I have to say, I'm severely disappointed in Apple's choice of GPUs for this new line of iMacs.

The ATI Radeon 2000 series is a disappointment, this is according to nearly all technical reviews. They are completely outclassed by Nvidia's Geforce 8000 series, which in most cases are actually cheaper than ATI's product.

In addition, Nvidia's Geforce 8600 GT and GTS cards are available in fanless models, using heatsinks for cooling. Such a graphics card would seem to me perfect for the iMac.

I would like Apple to at least offer, as a CTO option, the Geforce 8600 GT or GTS in the new iMacs. I for one would jump at the chance to buy one.

As it is, I simply can't justify replacing my G4 Mac Mini and Windows gaming PC with an Mac at this time. The only Mac that really meets my needs is the Mac Pro, which costs quite a bit more, and is of course a workstation using server class CPUs and RAM. I can't afford one of these, and even if I had the money, quite frankly, I'd still pass it up.

So, in conclusion, Apple, please offer someone like me a Mac that's affordable and has at least a Geforce 8600 GT.

Thank you.

[cpnotebook80]

see here
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2151679,00.asp

where were they thinking?Skimpy on the cost of the graphic card eh! 99$
mmmm..

[Grenadier]

Good job. Keep the complaints coming.
Infact, I think I will go and post a link to this thread on AppleInsider and a variety of other Apple news sites just so perhaps, with a LOT of luck, it will hit someone in Apple HQ "Wait...perhaps these GPUs do suck"

[cpnotebook80]

sent complaint too!
is it possible to upgrade the card by removing it out totally or is that impossible with the new imacs?

[FleurDuMal]

if they get an inbox full of complaints about the graphics card, they can't really ignore that!

You'd be suprised. As far as Apples concerned, the type of people who would complain about the standard of GPU in the iMac are not its target audience.

[BlackMax]

I just placed the following "iMac Feedback" on the Apple website. It is an edited comment I placed in another thread in this forum. Perhaps if enough folks write Apple with similar feedback they will offer another GPU upgrade option for the new iMac. I know it is a long shot, but if Apple doesn't hear our opinion and desires they will never know.

Hi,

I wanted to give you some feedback on the new iMac.

I like the new design. I like that it is thinner and has cleaner lines than the previous iMac. I like the bump up in processor, the lower price points and the new keyboard looks promising as well. But I am disappointed in the GPU options.

I was really hoping Apple would bump up the graphics performance of these new iMacs a little more than you did.

I have been waiting to purchase a new iMac as a replacement for an old aging PC my kids are using. Now that my kids are older and playing more games, this iMac would need to keep up with their current games, like Oblivion. These iMacs will do that (barely, at a reasonable frame rate), but they do not have a lot of "future gaming potential" in them.

It just appears Apple does not consider the gaming niche a market it is interested in going after. I'm sure there were a lot of trade-off considerations made (overall cost, heat, energy consumption, noise, etc.) when you chose the ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO as your top of the line GPU for the new iMac. I just wish Apple could have offered one more GPU upgrade option, perhaps the Nvidia GeForce 7900 GT or GTX, just to see how well it sold. Even the ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT would have been better. Perhaps only if in the 24" model?

I'm sure these new iMacs will sell just fine as they are and I believe they are great machines for everything except gaming. I just think you are missing a large and growing segment of the Mac community. Please don't forget about us Mac gamers who don't want to or can't afford to purchase a Mac Pro to meet their gaming needs.

I'll still end up purchasing a new iMac once Leopard is released, because the alternative is a PC with Vista and I'm not going that direction. I am just disappointed because of what these new iMacs "could have been"


***** Please consider another GPU upgrade option for the new iMac *****

[Grenadier]

Ok, thread up on AppleInsider:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=77517

Please, others do the same and post similar threads on other Mac forums across the internet. Perhaps we can achieve something if we try.

[jkaz]

You'd be suprised. As far as Apples concerned, the type of people who would complain about the standard of GPU in the iMac are not its target audience.

young people that are interested in technology? nope, apple has no desire to market to this group

[Mollemand]

The gfx problem is not solely related to iMac. The Mac Pro lineup is just as pitiful:

- the 7300 GT has been a joke for a while in a graphics 'Workstation'
- Adding 4 of them just quadruples the joke... no SLI to make it sensible
- the X1900 XT is a $249 upgrade 40% as fast as a 8800 Ultra (before SLI)
- And then you can get the $1649 upgrade to a Quadro FX 4500???

Where is the missing middle between an overpriced ATI has-been, and a severely overpriced Pro-3D-workstation has-been??? Quadro FX 4500 is outperformed by 8800 Ultra.

Has Apple signed a deal to clean out old stock and get rid of HW-poo from BOTH Ati and nVidia?

[VortexOfPain]

You'd be suprised. As far as Apples concerned, the type of people who would complain about the standard of GPU in the iMac are not its target audience.

Say what you may, but the last lineup was later given the option to add a much better card as a CTO option for those who wanted it. All we are asking is that have that option BACK.

[Shepherd]

Great idea guys. I'm sure I'm not the only one who was ready with their credit card to buy a new iMac until we learned what gpus were in them. I hope that Apple takes to heart all the feedback and realizes that there are a lot of people out there who will only buy a Mac but have to keep waiting for the options that ought to be available from the start.

-Shepherd

[gloss]

Am I the only one who realizes that the screens are glossy because they're glass?

To offer matte screens would kind of conflict with the entire 'glass and aluminum' message they're sending.

[speedballs]

Done.
Let's hope they listen!
I don't see why they would have id and EA releasing all these great games simultaneously if we can't even play them!
(I mentioned that in my email)

[dschiller]

This is what I wrote:

I am a huge Apple fan, and I've been saving up to buy an iMac as soon as a new model was released.

I love the looks of the new model, and I really appreciate the higher processor and storage capabilities that are optional, but unfortunately I won't be buying a new iMac, at least for now, and that's due to the GPU chosen be fitted to the iMac.

The current offer just doesn't fulfill my movie editing and gaming needs. Please consider offering a GeForce 7600GT or GTS as a CTO option.

Thank you
Daniel

BTW, I think the idea of getting as much peple as possible to complain is fantastic. Keep filling the feedback forms!:p

[Scannall]

Very polite feedback sent. So add another to your total.

[solvs]

What's wrong with the iMac's GPU? It's better than the old ones right? I have one of the newer Santa Rosa laptops, and the video card in it doesn't seem that much faster for most things. Would have been nice to offer an upgrade option, I guess, like they did before, but the ATI chip seems fine for what it was intended for.

Now the Mac Pro on the other hand...

[Mollemand]

My Steve Jobs pull-string doll is stuck on: "Let's burn a PC!"
It used to do air-quotes while saying "The megahertz-myth" too, but now all it says is "Lets burn a PC!"

Coming to think of it, it has been a while since I heard him say that in real life...

Perhaps it could be refurbished to say "offering great gaming performance"?

[holland]

Or you guys that want better graphics can buy a Mac Pro which is actually meant for graphics for professionals while the iMac is a consumer computer which don't need top of the line graphics. If the iMac puts in better graphics it will be overkill for most people and it will be like $200 more for an iMac. Again, the Mac Pro is what would want for good graphics.

[Eidorian]

Or you guys that want better graphics can buy a Mac Pro which is actually meant for graphics for professionals while the iMac is a consumer computer which don't need top of the line graphics. If the iMac puts in better graphics it will be overkill for most people and it will be like $200 more for an iMac. Again, the Mac Pro is what would want for good graphics.What are you basing this on? I can get a computer for $400 and get a much video card. Does this mean Apple's entry level is now the Mac Pro?

[holland]

What are you basing this on? I can get a computer for $400 and get a much video card. Does this mean Apple's entry level is now the Mac Pro?

I doubt a $400 computer with a good graphics card. Usually that is the price of the graphics card :P Even dell can't sell a $400 computer with a good graphic card. There graphic card is a Geforce 6150LE intergrated. That is not better than the iMac's graphic card ;)

[Eidorian]

I doubt a $400 computer with a good graphics card. Usually that is the price of the graphics card :P Even dell can't sell a $400 computer with a good graphic card. There graphic card is a Geforce 6150LE intergrated. That is not better than the iMac's graphic card ;)*face palm*

The 8600GT GDDR3 is an option on the Inspiron towers for $100.

[VortexOfPain]

If the iMac puts in better graphics it will be overkill for most people and it will be like $200 more for an iMac.

You seem to have missed the many mentions here, that we are simply asking Apple to offer a similar Configure To Order option like they used to on the previous line of iMacs. This did not affect any prices in their standard lineup, but did provide an option for customers to pay extra and choose something much more powerful - the nVideo GeForce 7600GT.

[Dalriada]

Also sent a letter. Great design which blows away the competition so such a pity to stumble on GPU limitations or at least allowing more options.

:apple:Dal

[mahonmeister]

Great idea. I sent a message along the lines of your example.

We all know that the Mac Pro is for the real 'professionals.' But all I want to do is play some modern games and do video editing and conversion, the Mac Pro is way overkill for me.

As long as the iMac exists in it's current form, we will likely never get this 'mid-tower' we all hope for.

*sigh*

[Dont Hurt Me]

*face palm*

The 8600GT GDDR3 is an option on the Inspiron towers for $100. Apple saved money im sure ........maybe $75 for those 2600 semiPro's in lots of thousands.:rolleyes:

[iW00t]

young people that are interested in technology? nope, apple has no desire to market to this group

Actually Apple has no desire to market to people who are knowledgable about technology.

If not for the other PC makers, they are probably so wishing for the day when they can remove all those ghz and GiB numbers from their tech specifications and just give models in their lineup fancy names/model numbers.

Why give consumers confusing figures that they do not understand? Do you have a PhD in computer science? How does 1Mhz on a Core 2 Duo translate to 1Mhz on a Athlon 64? A AMD Barcelona? How then is that number helpful?

[ChrisA]

Another would-be iMac buyer if only you offered a higher end video card as a Configure To Order option. The existing video card which comes stock will not fit my needs.

I'm sure Apple thought of this and decided they'd make more money if the iMac was crippled. Apple's problem is they can't let iMac sales eat into their Mac Pro and ACD sales. So they did two things to ensure that professional photographers, video editors and graphic artists would not buy the iMacs

(1) Removed the anti-glare feature from the screen
(2) used only a "mid range" graphic card with no possibility to ever upgrade.

So Apple looses a few gamer customers put they sell more Mac Pros, someone did the math and made the call.

[wongulous]

This iMac really killed the iMac's charm for prosumers or aspiring students or geeky young people. We want an iMac with more brawn but cannot afford, do not need, or do not like (as much) the Mac Pro. I like all-in-one for cramped spaces and easy relocation, I like the price, and I like the set of features.... I just don't like the graphics as a design student and geeky prosumer. :(

I sent in my feedback (the above and more).

[Eidorian]

Apple saved money im sure ........maybe $75 for those 2600 semiPro's in lots of thousands.:rolleyes:I was surprised Dell sells the 8600GT for a $100 option. :eek: I was expecting $150 for it.

They offer it for less then all the retail outlets!

[Muzzway]

Well, I made a complaint... Though if they didn't include it at first, I doubt they'll change their mind.

[holland]

I was surprised Dell sells the 8600GT for a $100 option. :eek: I was expecting $150 for it.

They offer it for less then all the retail outlets!

Are you sure? I'm looking right now it is $100 to upgrade from the 8600GS to 8600GT but it is $150 to upgrade from the integrated graphics to the 8600GT is $150

[Eidorian]

Are you sure? I'm looking right now it is $100 to upgrade from the 8600GS to 8600GT but it is $150 to upgrade from the integrated graphics to the 8600GT is $150$100 for the 8600GT on the 530 N.

[SWC]

I thought the only option previously was to up the amount of vram not change the actual card?

Also, just looked at the take apart guide from GSX and the 20 and 24 inch imac they both have a removeable video card like the previous 24" model so you can theoretically swap it out if you really were that concerned.

[Eidorian]

I thought the only option previously was to up the amount of vram not change the actual card?

Also, just looked at the take apart guide from GSX and the 20 and 24 inch imac they both have a removeable video card like the previous 24" model so you can theoretically swap it out if you really were that concerned.Links to said guide.

[SWC]

Links to said guide.

http://gsx.apple.com

You have to be an authorized service provider to get them.

[Eidorian]

http://gsx.apple.com

You have to be an authorized service provider to get them.Ah thanks for information anyways.

[SWC]

Ah thanks for information anyways.

Looking at the take apart pictures on the main page of macrumors. If you look at

http://www.kodawarisan.com/imac_2007_mid/DSC_3824.jpg

the two aluminum blocks on the left just under the blue circuit board the top one is the heat pipe/radiator for the video card

http://www.kodawarisan.com/imac_2007_mid/DSC_3847.JPG

in the top left of that pic is the video card itself you can see the heat pipe coming off of it.

edit:

http://www.kodawarisan.com/imac_2007_mid/DSC_3843.JPG

better shot of the video card top left

[150hp]

Am I the only one who realizes that the screens are glossy because they're glass?

To offer matte screens would kind of conflict with the entire 'glass and aluminum' message they're sending.

As someone coming from an art framing background, there is non-glare glass just like plastic can be. Glass doesn't have to be glossy.

[Eidorian]

Looking at the take apart pictures on the main page of macrumors. If you look at

http://www.kodawarisan.com/imac_2007_mid/DSC_3824.jpg

the two aluminum blocks on the left just under the blue circuit board are the top one is the heat pipe/sink for the video card

http://www.kodawarisan.com/imac_2007_mid/DSC_3847.JPG

in the top left of that pic is the video card itself you can see the heat pipe coming off of it.Any idea what form factor it is?

[DanB91]

i sent them feedback but it was about expandability and gaming :)

[SWC]

Any idea what form factor it is?

Not 100% sure as I haven't seen the machine myself but sadly it looks like it may be a mini pci as the connector looks a tad wide to be mini pci express.

[Eidorian]

Not 100% sure as I haven't seen the machine myself but sadly it looks like it may be a mini pci as the connector looks a tad wide to be mini pci express.Slim chance it's some kinda of MXM derivation. Then again I've seen Apple use other miniPCI-Express cards for the Airport as well.

[SWC]

Slim chance it's some kinda of MXM derivation. Then again I've seen Apple use other miniPCI-Express cards for the Airport as well.

nevrmind

[Eidorian]

MXM is basically mini pci express just rebranded by nvidia. The imac still uses pci express for the airport but its in another part of the case so an easy comparison isnt possible but I am leaning more towards mini pci for the simple fact of the placement of the notch on the card.

Anyone with a new imac already care to check system profiler?I thought MXM was still a nVidia only label as well. You're probably right that it's some sort of proprietary miniPCI-Express card then.

[SWC]

I thought MXM was still a nVidia only label as well. You're probably right that it's some sort of proprietary miniPCI-Express card then.

Yeah I was mistaken there. I deleted my misinformation.

http://test.crimsonstain.net/big_module2.jpg

mxm next to imac video card. Its hard to tell because I had to blow up the picture of the imac card but they look pretty identical.

[Eidorian]

Yeah I was mistaken there. I deleted my misinformation.

http://test.crimsonstain.net/big_module2.jpg

mxm next to imac video card. Its hard to tell because I had to blow up the picture of the imac card but they look pretty identical.Wow, thanks for these pictures.

The cards do look nearly identical. Which size is the nVidia one you posted?

[TheSilencer]

Well, the old gen 24" had kind of MxM slot, but no compatibility. Another problem here is the special Apple video BIOS, even if you can get another card, it will only work in bootcamp, maybe.

http://www.mxm-upgrade.com/notMXM.html
Scroll down to Apple entry.

[SWC]

Well, the old gen 24" had kind of MxM slot, but no compatibility. Another problem here is the special Apple video BIOS, even if you can get another card, it will only work in bootcamp, maybe.

http://www.mxm-upgrade.com/notMXM.html
Scroll down to Apple entry.


while a replacement card may or may not work.

The card bios issue should be irrelevent anymore IF you can find an EFI compatible card. This is the main reason you are limited in upgrades as the bios on the card isn't compatible with EFI but with that coming down the pipeline We will find out eventually I guess.

[iStrat]

I still think it would be nice if Apple offered a GPU upgrade in these new iMacs. However, I tested out the standard $1,499 model using Vendetta Online and it ran beautifully. Discuss here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=339355).

[I'mAMac]

Sent feedback...twice, under different names. But i think the only realistic upgrade would be a 2600XT. I would be a bit happier with that but an 8600GS as mentioned before would be great.

[Mr. MacBook]

What happened to those rumors of a 2900XT? WTF apple not everyone uses macs to show off and use photoshop, some people like to do what computers were made to do... GAME!and occasionally check email.

Meh, i personally prefer a 8600GTS as a build-to-order option, and the 2600 Pro can stay in others, but for hi-end 20" model and all 24" models they shuld have a 8600GTS build-to-order, or even better, a 2900XT.

[techlover828]

done and also said how I disliked the glossy screen like the guy above.

[DaftUnion]

Sent my feedback. Makes me feel better even if it goes in the e-mail trash bin.

[DocJ]

High-performance gaming cards with their big honkin' fans or heat sinks won't fit in the iMac. You really need a tower for those, and Windows victims aren't usually jumping ship to buy a pricey Mac Pro. Besides, I doubt that gamers are the segment of the PC market that Apple has been stealing away, or wanting to.

[Jethryn Freyman]

Although Apple doesn't advertise it, the Intel based iMacs use laptop components (rather than desktop components), and the new ones are no exception.

Firstly, I'm glad the the low end imac has finally gained a dedicated graphics card, rather than the travestry that was used in the previous low end imac (Intel GMA 950.)

ATI's most powerful laptop video card is the (Mobility) Radeon HD 2600 Pro. It's basically an X1600 (like in the older imacs) with DirectX 10, and a few technical enhancements. The old Geforce 7600 GT in the older imacs was up to twice as fast as the X1600.

The Geforce 8600M GT card is basically a DirectX 10 upgrade to the Geforce 7600 GT found in the older imacs, with a few technical enhancements.

The Geforce 8600M GT is faster than the Radeon HD 2600 Pro. And the 8700M GT certainly is.

It kind of makes sense though, Apple's keeping the graphics performance of one of their "pro" computers (Macbook Pro) above that of one of their "consumer" computers (iMac.)

[Liamf555]

I have sent my feedback

[Yateball]

Although Apple doesn't advertise it, the Intel based iMacs use laptop components (rather than desktop components), and the new ones are no exception.

Firstly, I'm glad the the low end imac has finally gained a dedicated graphics card, rather than the travestry that was used in the previous low end imac (Intel GMA 950.)

ATI's most powerful laptop video card is the (Mobility) Radeon HD 2600 Pro. It's basically an X1600 (like in the older imacs) with DirectX 10, and a few technical enhancements. The old Geforce 7600 GT in the older imacs was up to twice as fast as the X1600.

The Geforce 8600M GT card is basically a DirectX 10 upgrade to the Geforce 7600 GT found in the older imacs, with a few technical enhancements.

The Geforce 8600M GT is faster than the Radeon HD 2600 Pro. And the 8700M GT certainly is.

It kind of makes sense though, Apple's keeping the graphics performance of one of their "pro" computers (Macbook Pro) above that of one of their "consumer" computers (iMac.)

EXACTLY right! Seems like people here are wanting big honkin heat machines in their iMacs... that's not what the iMac design is all about. And like Freyman said, it's obvious they are keeping the really high end cards in their "pro" machines.

Since an iMac is always going to have laptop components in it, isn't it good that apple upgraded the card to the best ATI on the market?

Yes geforce is better, I realize that... but don't be expecting SLI Geforce 8800 cards in your iMac please.

I think the upgrade is nice, and I want one for my (now last-gen) iMac

[Rooivalk]

It's probably a heat issue.


I really dont think so. If they managed to put those faster Geforce cards inside MacBook Pros smaller casing which is a laptop running on battery power it just cannot be heat or power consumption issue.

[Mollemand]

I am a fence-sitter PC owner. I am looking at a horror-vista for my future, and obviously I don't like what I see. I do have the wallet, a 10 year job-related mac history, and my love for OSX to go on.

I really wanted a Mac - I don't anymore.

While the CPUs of both the iMac and the Mac Pro are easily matching the best on the PC side the GPUs are the big turnoff. I have a 10 year 3D-career behind me in the game industry and I like my 3D board to be up to specs. Neither iMac nor Mac Pro has a tempting GPU offering, and despite deep pockets I know when I'm getting screwed. I used to be on PC for lack of software options on the Mac. Now sadly it is for lack of a decent Mac.

My dream-Mac is a single CPU tower with a whipping GPU (possibly even SLI), and normal human non-NASA-grade RAM.

Sorry Apple - not this time either...

I'll dig in, run WinXP 64 and wait for better times. :(

[Wild-Bill]

I like my 3D board to be up to specs. Neither iMac nor Mac Pro has a tempting GPU offering, and despite deep pockets I know when I'm getting screwed.


Amen.

Click the link in my sig and tell Apple about it!

[BlackMax]

Although Apple doesn't advertise it, the Intel based iMacs use laptop components (rather than desktop components), and the new ones are no exception.

I know Apple is using a laptop CPU, RAM and DVD in the new iMac, but from what I can tell the ATI Radeon they are using is the Desktop ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO and not the "M" model.

If someone has more accurate information I'd be happy to see it.

[Mollemand]

Update from my former post: (a ray of sunshine)
Sorry Apple - not this time either...


And then again...

The reason I kept an eye on the iMac was for my sister. I would go for the Pro if any. My sisters needs lies in the 2D graphics, such as video/photo editing and the occasional web applications. She does not want to do 3D (she will ask me to do it) nor does she game. The GPU and the rest of new iMac is perfect for her needs. It is a fan-*********-tastic home computer for those needs. She is going to be soooo happy, I just know it!

She got the 2GB 2.8 Extreme with a 750GB HD upgrade. I thought the HD upgrade was silly, but she wanted it - so - heck it's her money.

It was my suggestion to go for the 2.8. I think it's good value. On a MHz per dollar basis the 2.4 and the 2.8 are almost even. All Intel 'Extreme' labeled products are normally 2-4 times more expensive per MHz than their non-Extreme siblings. I think 2.4GHz buyers are paying for the low price of the 2.8 - though that is pure speculation on my part. My sister has a cycle-time of 5 years (!!) for her computers, and I wanted to make sure that it would last.

The 24" screen has a viewing angle of 178-178, meaning it IS a good old 24bit S-PVA panel (most likely Samsung) oh goodie!

Just for good measure I compared it to the Dell XPS M2010 that she wanted to buy before I changed her mind. I souped it up to top specs (@ dell.se), which is still a far cry from the iMac specs (apart from its X1800 GPU ... grrr). The price difference - here in Sweden - was a 1.5 to 1 in the iMacs favor.

The Dell XPS M2010 can be seen here:
http://www.dell.com/content/products/results.aspx/notebooks?~ck=anav&c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&a=14~0~61570&navla=14~0~61570

Surely that is the closest PC comes to an iMac class computer - and surely the iMac wins on all accounts - save the GPU.

For all my whining about the iMac I can only capitulate and face that I am not in the iMac target group. Sadly I am not in any Mac target group...

Apple: 1
Me: 0

[Eidorian]

Update from my former post: (a ray of sunshine)


And then again...

The reason I kept an eye on the iMac was for my sister. I would go for the Pro if any. My sisters needs lies in the 2D graphics, such as video/photo editing and the occasional web applications. She does not want to do 3D (she will ask me to do it) nor does she game. The GPU and the rest of new iMac is perfect for her needs. It is a fan-*********-tastic home computer for those needs. She is going to be soooo happy, I just know it!

She got the 2GB 2.8 Extreme with a 750GB HD upgrade. I thought the HD upgrade was silly, but she wanted it - so - heck it's her money.

It was my suggestion to go for the 2.8. I think it's good value. On a MHz per dollar basis the 2.4 and the 2.8 are almost even. All Intel 'Extreme' labeled products are normally 2-4 times more expensive per MHz than their non-Extreme siblings. I think 2.4GHz buyers are paying for the low price of the 2.8 - though that is pure speculation on my part. My sister has a cycle-time of 5 years (!!) for her computers, and I wanted to make sure that it would last.

The 24" screen has a viewing angle of 178-178, meaning it IS a good old 24bit S-PVA panel (most likely Samsung) oh goodie!

Just for good measure I compared it to the Dell XPS M2010 that she wanted to buy before I changed her mind. I souped it up to top specs (@ dell.se), which is still a far cry from the iMac specs (apart from its X1800 GPU ... grrr). The price difference - here in Sweden - was a 1.5 to 1 in the iMacs favor.

The Dell XPS M2010 can be seen here:
http://www.dell.com/content/products/results.aspx/notebooks?~ck=anav&c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&a=14~0~61570&navla=14~0~61570

Surely that is the closest PC comes to an iMac class computer - and surely the iMac wins on all accounts - save the GPU.

For all my whining about the iMac I can only capitulate and face that I am not in the iMac target group. Sadly I am not in any Mac target group...

Apple: 1
Me: 0Anyone who wants to even consider the XPS M2010 has money to throw away. :eek:

[Mollemand]

Anyone who wants to even consider the XPS M2010 has money to throw away. :eek:

Sadly it sometimes seems like she does indeed have money to burn...:rolleyes:

[Eidorian]

Sadly it sometimes seems like she does indeed have money to burn...:rolleyes:Even back in the Core Duo days the iMac was a much better deal.

We made threads about it! THREADS!

[Mollemand]

Even back in the Core Duo days the iMac was a much better deal.

We made threads about it! THREADS!

I KNOW!!! That was what I was luring her with ... Then I forced her to wait for the update :D

If she had had it her way, she would have bought the iMac 24" G5 on the spot - with all the bells and whistles... Today she thanked me that she didn't - though she did complain about the new design and the glossy screen.

You win some - you loose some

[Frisco]

Done! Thanks for posting this. Let's get this up on Digg.

[SWC]

I know Apple is using a laptop CPU, RAM and DVD in the new iMac, but from what I can tell the ATI Radeon they are using is the Desktop ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO and not the "M" model.

If someone has more accurate information I'd be happy to see it.

It uses an MXM video card which is a variation on mini pci-express. This information is available in the apple service manual which if you know where to look you can find it

[Grenadier]

Done! Thanks for posting this. Let's get this up on Digg.

This is a excellent idea - let us spread the cause.
If anyone has a account there, please, put it up.

[SBeardsl]

I know Apple is using a laptop CPU, RAM and DVD in the new iMac, but from what I can tell the ATI Radeon they are using is the Desktop ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO and not the "M" model.

If someone has more accurate information I'd be happy to see it.As to why Apple might have gone with the ATI 2400/2600 chips over what they had last year. Even if they don't improve on FPS for high end games they do add BlueRay/HD DVD hardware decoding (very important even without internal drives) and DX10 support (so users can boot to Vista and get full functionality). Those features are probably important to a larger % of potential iMac buyers than frame-rates in top end PC games.

More importantly (to those of us who DO care about performance with top end PC games) lets remember its a custom card embedded in a custom system with a custom ROM running custom drivers, we really won't know how it performs until we get some actual hands on reports.

By the end of the weekend some iMac buyers will have had a chance to try out WoW and other Mac native 3D games and hopefully boot into Vista/XP using the latest Boot Camp beta and get real data for some of the current top of the line machine killer games. By the end of next week a couple of the hardware sites will have extensive and carefully controlled comparison tests to really fill us in on the actual performance and then we will know where we are.

Till then I'm not jumping in the pool but I'm not rounding up the local flash mob yet either.

[BlackMax]

The CNET review of the Apple iMac (20-inch, 2.4GHz) (http://reviews.cnet.com/desktops/apple-imac-20-inch/4505-3118_7-32564364.html?tag=bubbl_2) is up.

Here is an excerpt from that review. I just hope the folks at Apple read it.

Despite its new ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro graphics chip, the iMac still isn't very well suited to playing 3D games. On our Quake 4 test, at a forgiving 1,024x768 resolution, the iMac turned in an only marginally acceptable 39 frames per second. We were surprised by that, since Quake 4 sits on the tail end of what we consider current 3D games. Comparable Windows PCs from Dell and Velocity Micro perform much better. You should be able to play less-advanced 3D games on the iMac, but we're still disappointed that Apple doesn't want to take gaming seriously.

[aliquis-]

Why not make a similair thing asking them to balance the specs of their machines a little better and not only up the megahurts!? Or to actually make machines usable by gamers which would 1) raise the chances for more games on os x 2) sell way more macs to windows people.

Also gamers ARE the people who buy premium stuff, and Apple want to position themself as a premium seller, so why don't they make machines for gamers?

They should remove all TN-panel ****, make sure memory is enough, put in the highest end graphics cards they can which doesn't cost more than a pony or run to hot and lower cpu specs if needed to adjust the price.

Edit: Btw, I don't think the iMac is the right place for a high-end graphics card, they need to just release a consumer variant of the Mac Pro or sell OS X for commodity hardware.

Regular i965 mobo with regular c2d-cpus, regular ddr2-memorys and regular pci-express 16x-slot with whatever card and regular 3.5" hdds is what one would want anyway.

Even better if they only sell the case, motherboard and software and let the user put in whatever cpu, ram, hdd and gfx they want, but that won't happen I guess ;D

The Mac Pro is just retarded for normal people, why on earth would you want "quad core server" with super expensive fb-dimms and weird versions of expensive mac graphics cards?

[Mollemand]

They should remove all TN-panel ****

From a gaming point-of-view the TN panel makes sense.

LCD-panels has a problem called input-lag - the time it takes between what happens on the GPU is actually displayed on the screen.

On a S-PVA panel this lag is notoriously high (some 40-60 ms on a 24"). Overdrive technology to improve the response time is known to make this worse. On a S-IPS panel it is lower, but still noticeable (my 23" S-IPS has got a 27 ms lag). Coming from a CRT screen to my LCD gives you the feeling of being slightly drunk, because your mouse movement overshoot with - yes - 27 ms. TN panels are supposed to be much faster.

In a FPS game, this lag will be added to your net-lag, making the window for you to react that much narrower. A guy on an old CRT screen will always have a 40-60 ms head start on you, if you are using a S-PVA. That is NOT a game-winning feature.

I don't have the lag-timings on TN panels because I chose 24bit color over low input-lag. I do graphics - I don't game. I chose the S-IPS tech because it is a good compromise. It has less contrast than the S-PVA panels, but matches the color-reproduction. And best of all: It has less input-lag.

TN is bad on viewing angles, and color depth - but winning on input and response times.