Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Desktop Ivy Bridge not worth waiting for?

S

salmoally

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jan 26, 2012
192
0
Seems like from the various hardware sites that ivy bridge for desktop seems to provide maybe 2-5% improvement. Obviously the improved integrated graphics don't really apply to desktops.

For laptops it seems like a good upgrade, around 15% better than SB, 50% better graphics and lower power consumption so battery life is improved.

Going by just the increase in processing power waiting for the ivy bridge imac would have been a waste of time. Lets hope they do a redesign and include some nice graphics card options instead!
 
A

Apple2000

macrumors member
Jul 19, 2011
76
0
salmoally said:
Seems like from the various hardware sites that ivy bridge for desktop seems to provide maybe 2-5% improvement. Obviously the improved integrated graphics don't really apply to desktops.

For laptops it seems like a good upgrade, around 15% better than SB, 50% better graphics and lower power consumption so battery life is improved.

Going by just the increase in processing power waiting for the ivy bridge imac would have been a waste of time. Lets hope they do a redesign and include some nice graphics card options instead!
Click to expand...

Well, the 7970m (which the iMac 27" will likely have) is a bit faster than the 560 Ti. This is a huge upgrade from the 6970m which was more on the level of a 6850. +40% increase in graphics is nothing to scoff at.
 
S

salmoally

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jan 26, 2012
192
0
Apple2000 said:
Well, the 7970m (which the iMac 27" will likely have) is a bit faster than the 560 Ti. This is a huge upgrade from the 6970m which was more on the level of a 6850. +40% increase in graphics is nothing to scoff at.
Click to expand...

I agree the graphics would be a good upgrade hence why in my OP i said I hope they include some good ones in the new iMacs.
 
L

Logos327

macrumors 6502
Sep 15, 2008
359
0
If you have a 2nd gen Sandy Bridge, and processors are the only things we are comparing, then no, IB is probably not worth waiting for (though I expect an iMac release within the next 2-4 weeks which is really no time at all).

However, IB processors are only a minor part of the iMac refresh. There are many other factors to consider. I'll list two of the most important:

1) It is financially dumb to pay May 2011 prices for May 2011 (and older, i.e. SSD speeds) hardware in May 2012.

2) The 2011 iMac will theoretically lose support one year earlier than the 2012 iMac. Thus, if you wait ~ a month, you will gain a year worth of support for no extra cost.
 
theSeb

theSeb

macrumors 604
Aug 10, 2010
7,466
1,893
none
Battlefield Fan said:
Initial test show they run about 10 degrees c hotter. The smaller die size is the blame.
Click to expand...

That's only when overclocked. Ivy Bridge runs cooler at stock frequencies. Check out the reviews on anandtech and tomshardware.

3770k%20vs%202700k.png


According to all of the benchmarks that tomshardware ran, ivy bridge 3770K is, on average, 3.7% faster than the 2700K.

Although Core i7-3770K, as one model in Intel’s line-up, is fairly easy for enthusiasts with modern machines to dismiss, don’t take our judgment as a cloud over the Ivy Bridge architecture.

An emphasis on integrated graphics performance and lower thermal design power points makes it clear that Intel is out to conquer smaller form factors like all-in-one desktops and thin/light notebooks.
Click to expand...

Faster and uses less power

average%20power.png


energy%20used.png


Anandtech echo this

anandtech.com said:
In turn you get a cooler running CPU than Sandy Bridge (on the order of 20—30W under load), but you do give up a couple hundred MHz on the overclocking side. While I had no issues getting my 3770K up to 4.6GHz on the stock cooler, Sandy Bridge will likely be the better overclocker for most.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
B

Bear

macrumors G3
Jul 23, 2002
8,088
5
Sol III - Terra
salmoally said:
Seems like from the various hardware sites that ivy bridge for desktop seems to provide maybe 2-5% improvement. Obviously the improved integrated graphics don't really apply to desktops.

For laptops it seems like a good upgrade, around 15% better than SB, 50% better graphics and lower power consumption so battery life is improved.

Going by just the increase in processing power waiting for the ivy bridge imac would have been a waste of time. Lets hope they do a redesign and include some nice graphics card options instead!
Click to expand...
We should see an upgrade in the graphics cards. USB 3.0 is also likely to make an appearance.

As for the processing power difference, that is making a presumption on which clock speed chips Apple decides to use in the upcoming iMacs.

And who knows what other improvements will be in the iMacs that we didn't even think about.
 
Last edited:
theSeb

theSeb

macrumors 604
Aug 10, 2010
7,466
1,893
none
There is another thing to remember here. The top iMac only had a 2600 CPU. The TDP of the 3770 is low enough for the iMac. Don't forget that the comparisons are against the sandy bridge 2700 CPU, which was not in the iMac range.
 
thekev

thekev

macrumors 604
Aug 5, 2010
7,005
3,343
salmoally said:
For laptops it seems like a good upgrade, around 15% better than SB, 50% better graphics and lower power consumption so battery life is improved.
Click to expand...

I'd wait to see results from real machines. That would put the top 15" macbook pro around the current top imac.
 
chrisrosemusic1

chrisrosemusic1

macrumors 6502a
Jan 31, 2012
696
21
Northamptonshire, England
BlazednSleepy said:
I'm looking forward to the better GPU. That's what's going to mostly suit my needs.
Click to expand...

Yeah I think this is why I have an interest.

I upgraded from an i5 MBP 13" to the i7 in January but I am curious with the re design whether I'll be pulled back to upgrade again.. The CPU won't be noticeably different but I would definitely like the better graphics boost - I play a bit of EVE online and other games but they do run like crap at times even on lower settings. The bump from 384mb to even 512mb would be fantastic.

Time will tell (and the wallet).
 
R

RobinHood5

macrumors regular
Apr 23, 2012
157
0
My opine

In my opinion and from what I've seen and heard on this sight I've made a conclusion.

1. If the iMac is going to have a silent refresh it's most likely going to be in the next week or two and just POP up on the store.

2. If its not just a refresh, something bigger like retina display or a complete overhaul it will most likely be announced at WWDC in June. Which in this case it's old be worth the wait in my opinion.

I'm waiting, cause if it's just a refresh it'll be soon. Very soon. If its something huge it will mist defiantly be announced at WWDC and in that case it will definantly be worth the extra month
 
S

salmoally

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jan 26, 2012
192
0
thekev said:
I'd wait to see results from real machines. That would put the top 15" macbook pro around the current top imac.
Click to expand...

The results are from a real machine. I'm struggling to find the review now but cinebench scores (multicore) were 6.9 for the i7 quad mobile and 7.5 for the desktop version.

Then again we can already see top end macbook pros with similar performance to top end imacs in various benchmarks and real life scenarios including rendering.

see here: http://www.barefeats.com/imac11d.html

There is only what 10% difference, sometimes less.
 
G

Geolink

macrumors member
Apr 28, 2012
65
0
New York
Logos327 said:
If you have a 2nd gen Sandy Bridge, and processors are the only things we are comparing, then no, IB is probably not worth waiting for (though I expect an iMac release within the next 2-4 weeks which is really no time at all).

However, IB processors are only a minor part of the iMac refresh. There are many other factors to consider. I'll list two of the most important:

1) It is financially dumb to pay May 2011 prices for May 2011 (and older, i.e. SSD speeds) hardware in May 2012.

2) The 2011 iMac will theoretically lose support one year earlier than the 2012 iMac. Thus, if you wait ~ a month, you will gain a year worth of support for no extra cost.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that sounds like the right thing to do. Guess waiting another month or two won't hurt.
 
M

monkeybagel

macrumors 65816
Jul 24, 2011
1,141
61
United States
I have learned over the years that on refreshes they sometimes come with something that doesn't appeal to me, and I wish I had not have waited. For example, if I were going to get a MacBook Pro, I would get it now because Apple is expected to drop the ODD in the next one. The also did so in the Mac mini. Would not surprise me if they did so in the iMac. Would not buy one if they did.

A few years ago, they dropped the numerical keypad. Now you have to buy one separate or order from the online store. Not a fan of that.
 
L

Logos327

macrumors 6502
Sep 15, 2008
359
0
monkeybagel said:
A few years ago, they dropped the numerical keypad. Now you have to buy one separate or order from the online store. Not a fan of that.
Click to expand...

They didn't drop the numerical keypad. They gave you an option for wired with a numerical keypad or wireless without. If I remember correctly, they only recently (2011, 2010?) made the wireless option standard.

You seem to insinuate that there is no way to get a wired keyboard in the store. Ignoring the question "what's so bad about ordering online," I find it hard to believe Apple stores 1) do not carry wired keyboards and 2) are unwilling to swap the wireless keyboard with a wired one. After all, they are willing to swap the magic mouse with the trackpad.
 
Battlefield Fan

Battlefield Fan

macrumors 65816
Mar 9, 2008
1,063
0
monkeybagel said:
A few years ago, they dropped the numerical keypad. Now you have to buy one separate or order from the online store. Not a fan of that.
Click to expand...

This is wrong information. When you BTO your machine you can select the other keyboard at no additional cost...
 
Fishrrman

Fishrrman

macrumors Penryn
Feb 20, 2009
28,343
12,458
Yes, the Ivy Bridge models are worth waiting for, but not for the reason of increased speed (even though the new CPU chips will run a bit faster).

Rather, the reason the wait will be worth it is because the Ivy Bridge chips carry native support for USB3 -- and hence, the new iMacs will come with USB3 (as will all Macs by the close of 2012).

USB3 will become the most significant technological improvement on Macs in 2012. It will hasten the eclipse of firewire, and render Thunderbolt all-but irrelevant....
 
N

NextGenApple

macrumors regular
Oct 10, 2011
159
0
Fishrrman said:
Yes, the Ivy Bridge models are worth waiting for, but not for the reason of increased speed (even though the new CPU chips will run a bit faster).

Rather, the reason the wait will be worth it is because the Ivy Bridge chips carry native support for USB3 -- and hence, the new iMacs will come with USB3 (as will all Macs by the close of 2012).

USB3 will become the most significant technological improvement on Macs in 2012. It will hasten the eclipse of firewire, and render Thunderbolt all-but irrelevant....
Click to expand...

So you think Apple will render Thunderbolt useless by implementing USB 3. You clearly don't know Apple this is even more reason not to use USB 3.
 
L

Logos327

macrumors 6502
Sep 15, 2008
359
0
NextGenApple said:
So you think Apple will render Thunderbolt useless by implementing USB 3. You clearly don't know Apple this is even more reason not to use USB 3.
Click to expand...

"You clearly don't know" how USB 3 and Thunderbolt are meant to exist as complimentary protocols. There is no way Thunderbolt is "render[ed] useless" by the inclusion of USB 3.0. Sure, when talking about certain things such as external storage, (right now) the slight performance gains of TB are not worth the price difference when compared to USB 3.0. However, I'd like to see you daisy-chain a combination of PCI express enclosures, 2560x1600 monitors, and external storage through a given USB 3.0 port.
 
N

NextGenApple

macrumors regular
Oct 10, 2011
159
0
Logos327 said:
"You clearly don't know" how USB 3 and Thunderbolt are meant to exist as complimentary protocols. There is no way Thunderbolt is "render[ed] useless" by the inclusion of USB 3.0. Sure, when talking about certain things such as external storage, (right now) the slight performance gains of TB are not worth the price difference when compared to USB 3.0. However, I'd like to see you daisy-chain a combination of PCI express enclosures, 2560x1600 monitors, and external storage through a given USB 3.0 port.
Click to expand...

Point is you said hasten the eclipse of firewire, and render Thunderbolt all-but irrelevant My point is if Apple introduced/adopted light peak Aka thunderbolt why would they adopt something that could kill it? They could look at it like the iMacs are for high end users so keep USB to so if you want faster transfers you will need thunderbolt.

Don't be surprised if you see intel HD graphics on the base model also. No need to down vote me cos you don't agree. Cos I know it was you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom