New Skylake annoucement tonight

[mindquest]

just saw this Skylake announcement and was wondering which of these processors would be used in the iMac?
http://download.intel.com/newsroom/kits/core/6thgen/pdfs/6th_Gen_Intel_Core-Intel_Xeon_Factsheet.pdf

 

[Samuelsan2001]

From price alone I would say it won't be the Xeons everyone wants.

 

[Stacc]

If Apple sticks to the CPU and discrete GPU configuration they have been using in the iMacs, then the quad core S and K series makes the most sense (i.e., i7 6700, i5 6600, i5 6500, etc). There is a chance Apple wants to use the iris graphics in the low end iMacs and it wouldn't surprise me to see broadwell processors with iris pro graphics in the 21" iMac. I mention broadwell here because the skylake quad core processors with iris pro graphics were not announced and are likely not coming until some time in 2016.

 

[Serban]

i really hope for 27" imac with skylake and that 990M just released...

 

[EnesM]

i really hope for 27" imac with skylake and that 990M just released...

Me too...with a 2TB SSD this time!

 

[steve62388]

Me too...with a 2TB SSD this time!

I reckon you have about as much chance of all your wishes coming true as the odds of Steve raising from the dead to become CEO of Apple again and leading staff in a zombie apocalypse.

Too soon?

 

[EnesM]

Why is that? Samsung EVO 2TB SSD retails for 850$ now, it's not unreasonable to wish it be offered in new iMacs.

 

[TechZeke]

Why is that? Samsung EVO 2TB SSD retails for 850$ now, it's not unreasonable to wish it be offered in new iMacs.

I wish Apple would give you the option to use a standard SATA SSD instead of having to pay the high premium for PCI-e.

A SATA SSD would be much cheaper and still be light years ahead above a HDD.

 

[Samuelsan2001]

I wish Apple would give you the option to use a standard SATA SSD instead of having to pay the high premium for PCI-e.

A SATA SSD would be much cheaper and still be light years ahead above a HDD.

And I am more than happy that they have moved to PCIe and are pushing things in that direction the speeds and bandwidth are worth it and if they are used in more computers the price will come down.

 

[TechZeke]

And I am more than happy that they have moved to PCIe and are pushing things in that direction the speeds and bandwidth are worth it and if they are used in more computers the price will come down.

I didn't state it clearly. I wish Apple offered both. That's why I said option. To those that have the cash or credit to spend on PCIe, let them. However, I don't see any point in restricting those that can't to a HDD or Fusion drive. Especially as a company that's made such a push for flash, you'd think they would at least give the option for a standard SATA SSD.

 

[Samuelsan2001]

I didn't state it clearly. I wish Apple offered both. That's why I said option. To those that have the cash or credit to spend on PCIe, let them. However, I don't see any point in restricting those that can't to a HDD or Fusion drive. Especially as a company that's made such a push for flash, you'd think they would at least give the option for a standard SATA SSD.

I see it more from a buisness point of view myself, if I was working for apple I'd do the same thing use all the same parts and connectors wherever possible in order to keep manufacturing costs down (fabrication lines, personnel training, bulk buying, SOP writing, administration, delivery charges the list goes on and on).

I understand this is not what the consumer wants to hear and doesn't care about either but it's sound business model and way of doing things has allowed it to produce (IMO) the best consumer tech available right now and these decisions are all part of it.

 

[EnesM]

Can someone clarify something for me: Now there are consumer 2TB SSD which are SATA. If Apple approaches let's say Samsung to offer them the same SSD but with PCI-E interface for iMacs, how does it become more expensive? And why isn't samsung offering PCI-E in the first place? Are PCI-E and SATA identical SSDs only with different interfaces or is there something more to it? I'm really confused

 

[MandiMac]

Can someone clarify something for me: Now there are consumer 2TB SSD which are SATA. If Apple approaches let's say Samsung to offer them the same SSD but with PCI-E interface for iMacs, how does it become more expensive? And why isn't samsung offering PCI-E in the first place? Are PCI-E and SATA identical SSDs only with different interfaces or is there something more to it? I'm really confused

SATA is the communication way that's been around for a long time.
PCI-E was being used for graphics cards because they needed the speed.

So when you're comparing a SATA drive to a PCI-E drive, you're comparing two different beasts. That's why PCI-E is much faster (and more expensive), and that's exactly why Samsung offers only SATA drives: Known standard, not as expensive to manufacture, still more penetration in the market out there.