Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > iMac

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Sep 2, 2013, 09:33 AM   #26
Serban
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
maybe who knows and for the 27" will have 780MX model
Serban is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2013, 12:44 PM   #27
Tjosansa
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serban View Post
maybe who knows and for the 27" will have 780MX model
Then i buy that one for sure. But doesnt it seem unlikely with 780mx?
780m maybe.
__________________
 Alot of Apple stuff 
Tjosansa is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2013, 12:48 PM   #28
Bear
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sol III - Terra
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tjosansa View Post
Then i buy that one for sure. But doesnt it seem unlikely with 780mx?
780m maybe.
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.
__________________
-----Bear
Bear is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2013, 01:49 PM   #29
sublunar
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by wmy5 View Post
I don't expect Iris 5200 will be used in iMac because they are too much expensive. i5-4570R costs near $300, maybe more expensive than i5+dGPU.
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?
sublunar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2013, 02:02 PM   #30
kaellar
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by sublunar View Post
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.
__________________
21.5 iMac 2012 Custom: i7, 16GB RAM, 256GB SSD, 1TB HDD | iPhone 5 16gb
kaellar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2013, 02:36 PM   #31
Tjosansa
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear View Post
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.
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.
__________________
 Alot of Apple stuff 
Tjosansa is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2013, 02:42 PM   #32
ioannis2005gr
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Europe
Quote:
Originally Posted by sublunar View Post
I don't think the Fusion drive will be included but the price points will remain the same in my opinion. The 21.5" iMac is fairly easy to predict.

They'll use an embedded CPU on the motherboard that will come with Iris Pro 5200 graphics, all models of the 21.5" will lose the discrete graphics.

2.7 GHz quad core i5 for the 'good' spec.
3GHz i5 quad core for the 'better' spec.
3.2GHz i7 quad core with hyperthreading for the 'best' spec - a BTO upgrade from the 'better' spec.

You can expect them to retain the same case shell - the cpu has the same thermal profile - and the graphics will be a rough match for the discrete versions offered on the Ivy Bridge models GT640M and GT650M while actually producing less heat because there will be no discrete GPU.

Effectively, I'm saying the prices will stay the same and the iMac 21.5" models will run cooler.

If you want to continue to speculate on the 27" models, we could see an overclocked version of all of the above to improve the graphics on the base models, with discrete NVidia parts for the 'better' and 'best' but that's very much speculation on my part.
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.
ioannis2005gr is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2013, 03:33 PM   #33
kaellar
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by ioannis2005gr View Post
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?
kaellar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2013, 03:47 PM   #34
ioannis2005gr
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Europe
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaellar View Post
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).
ioannis2005gr is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2013, 03:48 PM   #35
Bear
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sol III - Terra
Quote:
Originally Posted by ioannis2005gr View Post
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).
This is what I think is likely to happen also.
__________________
-----Bear
Bear is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2013, 10:14 PM   #36
kaellar
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
That is identical to what they currently offer, so yeah, it's sort of safe bet here

Last edited by kaellar; Sep 3, 2013 at 02:29 PM.
kaellar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2013, 02:12 AM   #37
wmy5
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Limbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by sublunar View Post
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?
I found the price at the website as below, but I could be wrong.
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Core_i...0i5-4570R.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.
wmy5 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2013, 02:49 AM   #38
Serban
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
i think they can do Iris Pro only in the base model 21.5", instead of the Geforce 740M. Because from 750M is less powerfull. I dont think the 27" imac will sell well with Iris Pro and eliminate 770M or 780M
Serban is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2013, 03:56 AM   #39
kaellar
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serban View Post
i think they can do Iris Pro only in the base model 21.5", instead of the Geforce 740M. Because from 750M is less powerfull. I dont think the 27" imac will sell well with Iris Pro and eliminate 770M or 780M
putting a 300$ CPU into the lowest-price model instead of $175 + ~$50 CPU+dGPU combo looks like.. unbelievably stupid idea, no?
__________________
21.5 iMac 2012 Custom: i7, 16GB RAM, 256GB SSD, 1TB HDD | iPhone 5 16gb
kaellar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2013, 04:27 AM   #40
Serban
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Yea nice. So like i said no IGPU for the iMac, now we all believe that
Serban is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2013, 07:11 PM   #41
sublunar
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by wmy5 View Post
I found the price at the website as below, but I could be wrong.
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Core_i...0i5-4570R.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.
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.
sublunar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2013, 09:03 PM   #42
kaellar
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by sublunar View Post
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.
__________________
21.5 iMac 2012 Custom: i7, 16GB RAM, 256GB SSD, 1TB HDD | iPhone 5 16gb

Last edited by kaellar; Sep 3, 2013 at 10:36 PM.
kaellar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 4, 2013, 06:35 PM   #43
sublunar
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaellar View Post
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/i...74950hq-tested
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/i...50hq-tested/17
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/i...50hq-tested/20
sublunar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 2013, 01:39 PM   #44
ioannis2005gr
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Europe
Quote:
Originally Posted by wmy5 View Post
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.
I agree!
ioannis2005gr is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 2013, 05:01 PM   #45
d0nK
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: UK
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.
d0nK is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 2013, 05:42 PM   #46
rabidz7
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Isla De Juventud, south Havana provence, Cincinnati Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tjosansa View Post
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.
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.
rabidz7 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 2013, 08:00 PM   #47
xVeinx
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: California
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.
__________________
2011 Mac Mini; 2011 iMac 21"
xVeinx is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 2013, 08:30 PM   #48
crzdcolombian
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
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 !!!
crzdcolombian is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 2013, 08:50 PM   #49
malvicus
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by jav6454 View Post
Doesn't mean Apple can't just substitute completely for an SSD. Remember, an SSD may consume only 2W of power, where as a conventional HDD can go up to 7W... those 5W make a huge difference in the thermal scope of the iMac.
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.
malvicus is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 2013, 11:03 PM   #50
jav6454
macrumors G5
 
jav6454's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
Quote:
Originally Posted by malvicus View Post
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.
__________________
Al MacBook 2.4GHz Late '08 | 5 S⃣ | Macross Click Me
jav6454 is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > iMac

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anyone Purchasing the New iMac 2013 as a base model? jaybar iMac 10 Oct 5, 2013 08:09 AM
Maybe I should go for the base model iMac (help) ventuss iMac 3 Oct 2, 2013 06:34 AM
Base Model 2012 iMac? tears2040 iMac 8 Jan 16, 2013 10:50 PM
Base 27 Inch 2012 Imac Model beeinformed iMac 6 Jan 10, 2013 08:53 AM
Base model iPhone + base model iPad mini = conditionally, very smart cperry2 iPad 0 Oct 25, 2012 06:33 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:48 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC