Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What do you think the specs will be for the new 21.5 iMac base model?
- Thread starter GiantsFan01
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Currently, there is no 780MX, just a 780M.
A 780M is only a couple of percent faster than a 680MX. No one knew about a 680MX until it showed up in the iMac. Based on both of these facts, the high end 27" iMac could have a 780MX option.
I haven't seen any individual price guidance for the embedded 'R' chips, perhaps you can link the page? From my own searches, it appears that Iris Pro 5200 means a slight drop in MHz in exchange for superior graphics performance and L4 cache.
But given that the alternative in a 21.5" iMac is a 2.9GHz i5-4570S (65W) for a list price of $192 plus a mobile GPU such as a GT750M with its own power consumption of 35-40W then why wouldn't you choose something that runs far cooler and is has room for overclocking to match the GT750m on a more level playing field?
iMacs are consumer machines. And Iris Pro beats nvidia GPUs only on the GPGPU computing field, while loosing up to 1.5x times in gaming performace. Could you combine those two statements together and make a conclusion?
Not to mention, that iMacs are not MBPs and don't depend on thermals that much. In addition, iMacs cooling system actually does extremely well and has a great handicap for not just keeping the thermal package at the same level (or lowering it for that mythical "runs far cooler"), but for increasing it for 15-20w to put more powerful dGPU into it.
Wohoo! Thats the kind of fact o wanna hear about. Thanks alot.. Now there IS a tiny hope for a 780mx. That would be so awesome.
So nice to hear noone knew about the 680mx earlier.
Let's stay on subject (21.5'' iMac). I agree with your opinion. Also, I have to add the possibility to find PCIe SSD in all new 21.5'' iMacs along with a cheaper Fusion drive option.
FD is an SSD plus HDD combination. Why the hell would Apple offer pcie SSDs separately while keeping FD based on sata SSDs? Why won't they simply offer the pcie-based FD next?
Did I say anything else?....my opinion is:
a. PCIe SSD (SSD option) or
b. PCIe SSD + Sata III HDD (Fusion Drive option)
c. Sata III HDD (base model).
I found the price at the website as below, but I could be wrong.
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Core_i5/Intel-Core i5-4570R.html
i5 with Iris is cooler than i5 + dGPU, but it doesn't seem heat & power are major concerns for desktops. I think the "thin" iMac's cooling system is much more capable than rMBP's. My current generation iMac runs cool and quietly.
putting a 300$ CPU into the lowest-price model instead of $175 + ~$50 CPU+dGPU combo looks like.. unbelievably stupid idea, no?
Interesting price there, it's not on the official Intel Ark pages though, and people have forgotten that Tim Cook may want to remove discrete GPUs to simplify the supply chain as well as look for price efficiency plus Apple are capable of getting Intel to produce a custom version of the cpu that has overlocked GPU if they need something that is more competitive than a GT650m.
There's also no price guide on the mobile graphics parts being used here throughout the existing iMac range - they are not necessarily the $50 parts being assumed elsewhere in this thread.
Running cool and quiet is something that Apple seem to value a lot, and I would tend to agree over a more capable but noisier desktop Windows-based system for example.
1. iMacs are already running cool and quiet, and additional TDP reduction won't do any improvement here.
2. Even if they'll make Intel to produce CPU versions with overclocked GPUs, it won't let those iGPUs compete with 650m, not to say about 750m model with even higher clocks.
3. To simplify the chain, they have to completely move to iGPUs, or there would be no simplification at all. Any idea of what they could do to match a 680mx/780m performance level in that case? Yet another one even more powerful custom iGPU version from Intel?
4. Margin is the most important thing for Apple, regardless of what they or anyone else say. I looked for an info about i5-4570r oem price, and it's $288 afaik. No reason not to believe that, since IrisPro parts pricing is ridiculous for mobile SKUs. i5-4430s (the same clocks and tdp) is $182. GeForce 750m oem pricing is somewhere between $78 and $90, it's a guess made by calculation of the components prices for laptops that use Clevo barebones. So if I'm right, dGPU usage is not only more performant, but is also cheaper. I really see zero reasons for Apple to go with iGPU for desktop computers in that case.
Once again, what would be good for rMBPs (meaning the moving from dGPU to IrisPro and thus getting better GPGPU performance, lower heat and better battery life), won't be good at all for potential iMac consumers.
Last edited:
1. iMacs are already running cool and quiet, and additional TDP reduction won't do any improvement here.
2. Even if they'll make Intel to produce CPU versions with overclocked GPUs, it won't let those iGPUs compete with 650m, not to say about 750m model with even higher clocks.
3. To simplify the chain, they have to completely move to iGPUs, or there would be no simplification at all. Any idea of what they could do to match a 680mx/780m performance level in that case? Yet another one even more powerful custom iGPU version from Intel?
4. Margin is the most important thing for Apple, regardless of what they or anyone else say. I looked for an info about i5-4570r oem price, and it's $288 afaik. No reason not to believe that, since IrisPro parts pricing is ridiculous for mobile SKUs. i5-4430s (the same clocks and tdp) is $182. GeForce 750m oem pricing is somewhere between $78 and $90, it's a guess made by calculation of the components prices for laptops that use Clevo barebones. So if I'm right, dGPU usage is not only more performant, but is also cheaper. I really see zero reasons for Apple to go with iGPU for desktop computers in that case.
Once again, what would be good for rMBPs (meaning the moving from dGPU to IrisPro and thus getting better GPGPU performance, lower heat and better battery life), won't be good at all for potential iMac consumers.
1. 20-30W off is quite significant savings, and some might say that some iMac screen issues are caused by hotspots created by discrete GPUs overheating.
2. The cpu in the 21.5" Ivy Bridge iMac is not the cpu used in the 27" iMac - graphics or not.
It's an i7-3770S vs i7-3770. Therefore they can simplify the 21.5" variant of the Haswell iMacs by ordering in the i7-4770R which has the same TDP as the i7-4770S (65w) and overclock the GPU to produce performance broadly similar to the 640LE and 650M offered within the same thermal profile. The compute performance of the CPU could increase thanks partly to the eDRAM from the Iris Pro. This helps those people who are not gamers. Obviously the downside is that Intel might make a balls-up of their drivers while NVidia or AMD will probably make more of an effort for their drivers - time will tell.
3. The result is a reduced supply chain in the 21.5" models - fewer parts to buy. The 27" models are a different proposition which I will grant might need more powerful discrete GPUs but then they are using a different line of i7 cpus (84W over 65W). Don't forget that Intel were asked by Apple to create what became Iris Pro for launch during Ivy Bridge. They declined. They've now done so for Haswell, and you wouldn't dispute the power savings for laptop variants. There's more of a question mark over desktop variants but the iMac makes sense as an all-in-one.
4. There's a mention in an Anandtech article about Apple getting an exclusive on at least one line of Iris Pro enabled cpus. They are a major influence behind the technology and while price may be an issue it might be more of a priority for Apple to go down the Iris Pro line and they might just have negotiated an acceptable deal. Remember that while Iris Pro may appear to be a mediocre overpriced solution for games, it's also a high power solution for compute and OpenCL - our video editing will be improved with the right software (ie Final Cut Pro X).
I don't think Apple are that bothered about how many FPS we get on our favourite games. They are bothered about how fast we can edit and export music and video though.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graphics-review-core-i74950hq-tested
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graphics-review-core-i74950hq-tested/17
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graphics-review-core-i74950hq-tested/20
Hopefully Fusion Drive as standard at 7200 rpm and updated gfx cards with at least 1 gig ram.
Apple always seems to disappoint though so I won't be surprised if they don't deliver.
Thinness in a desktop at the expense of function and performance sucks big time. Absolutely ridiculous.
Apple always seems to disappoint though so I won't be surprised if they don't deliver.
Thinness in a desktop at the expense of function and performance sucks big time. Absolutely ridiculous.
A 680MX is an unlocked 675MX, that is an easy thing to do. You cannot build better GPU without going to the GK110 architecture. A 780MX GK110 GPU would be much harder to build than a 680MX. But a GK110 GPU could have 2880 cuda cores in each GPU.
Apple won't use the notebook parts in the iMac since they will want them for the MacBooks and mini. The notebook parts are more expensive and they are unlikely to get the amount that they need to supply all of their lines. The other key factor is the loss of performance. The 21.5 in iMac would drop in performance by up to 20-30% if they try to use a lower end notebook processor. They will for sure use a desktop processor.
I want a new box and it to come out tomorrow. HURRY UP APPLE AND TAKE MY MONEY !!!
I have money for a base iMac, 32gb iphone 5s, and an new iPad mini or iPhone 5 if the mini 2 isn't retina !!!
I have money for a base iMac, 32gb iphone 5s, and an new iPad mini or iPhone 5 if the mini 2 isn't retina !!!
Take a look at how much the price jumps when changing from a 500 GB standard HD on a macbook pro to 512 SSD. It's 700 Bucks! To go from 1 TB standard to 768 GB SSD, it's 900 bucks. To make fusion standard is more likely than all out SSD as it is not as pricey.
You should realize, high capacity SSDs are still expensive since NAND technology isn't there yet for high capacities, so yields are low.