what do you think stats on imac g5 will be?

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by NusuniAdmin, Jul 15, 2004.

  1. NusuniAdmin macrumors 6502a

    NusuniAdmin

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    #1
    What do you think iMac g5 stats will be. I am guessing it will still be ata 100 or wutever it currently has...maybe bigger hd choices. The biggest thing i hope for is that all models come with 512 megs of ram! THAT IS ALL I ASK OF YOU APPLE! I am guessing a single 1.6 in low en model and 1.8 in the rest. 8x superdrive (of course). And a redesigned case :) Perhaps sell it in colors again? It would be nice to see lower prices but i really doubt that ...hoping they remain the same!
     
  2. hotwire132002 macrumors 65816

    hotwire132002

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2004
    Location:
    Cadillac, MI
    #2
    My bet is they follow the aluminum trend. I'll post my vision of what they'll look like in a bit. (Unfortunately, My iMac is at my vacation home right now, so I'll have to doodle instead of use 3D, because my 366 iBook won't handle the 3D software :( ).

    Anyway, I doubt 512 standard in all models. With 512 standard in the top of the line and midrange Power Mac G5 (and 256 on the other model), I doubt 512 will be standard in all iMacs. More like 256 on low-end and midrange, 512 on high-end if we're lucky. , knowing Apple. I agree on the 8x SuperDrive.
     
  3. Grimace macrumors 68040

    Grimace

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Location:
    with Hamburglar.
    #3
    No Aluminum casing. Something....different :p

    I think there will be a consumer line of separate monitors in 15, 17, and 20 to match the iMac. Apple will not let 20" be the smallest display.

    1.50Ghz G5 Processor
    NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
    64MB DDR video memory
    256MB DDR333 SDRAM
    60GB Hard Drive
    Combo Drive
    Apple Pro Speakers
    56K internal modem
    10/100 Ethernet
    AirPort Extreme Ready
    Bluetooth Option

    1.60Ghz G5 Processor
    NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
    64MB DDR video memory
    256MB DDR333 SDRAM
    80GB Hard Drive
    8x SuperDrive
    Apple Pro Speakers
    56K internal modem
    10/100 Ethernet
    AirPort Extreme Ready
    Bluetooth Option

    1.75Ghz G5 Processor
    NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
    128MB DDR video memory
    256MB DDR333 SDRAM
    80GB Hard Drive
    8x SuperDrive
    Apple Pro Speakers
    56K internal modem
    10/100 Ethernet
    AirPort Extreme Ready
    Bluetooth Built in
     
  4. wrldwzrd89 macrumors G5

    wrldwzrd89

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    Solon, OH
    #4
    I like those specs - the only thing I'd change is put 512 MB of RAM pre-installed in the 1.75 GHz machine. Other than that, I'd buy an iMac with those specs (if I wanted/needed a new computer).
     
  5. poopyhead macrumors 6502a

    poopyhead

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Location:
    in the toe-jam of greatness (Fort Worth)
    #5
    not really stats
    but i'm guessing they will come out with a g5 headless set top box which will allow full integration of ilife into the home enviroment
    maybe media storage tivo like qualities and the ability to use as a game console
    blue tooth mouse and keyboard standard
     
  6. Sabbath macrumors 6502a

    Sabbath

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Location:
    London
    #6

    I would expect there to be a 1.8 and possible a 2.0 due to the comments made in the conference call about delayed shipping of the PMs and stockpiling for iMac release. I would have thought 1.8 would be the top end model prior to the conference call however. Hopefully better or BTO-able video chip than an nvidea 5200, but if the base model for the PM is 5200 I doubt we will get better as standard in the iMac.


    One thing I really do wonder about though is the speakers, will we see new speakers or ones built in to the display?
     
  7. NusuniAdmin thread starter macrumors 6502a

    NusuniAdmin

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    #7
    maybe dvi output (or does it have that already?) and maybe the optical video sound junk like the powermac g5 has...a tv card tuner thingy would be cool as well.?

    Ya apple is too cheap to put 512 megs of ram in the full lineup...just makes me angry! oh well ram is cheap enough anyways.

    A headless imac would be so farggin awsome.
     
  8. ChrisFromCanada macrumors 65816

    ChrisFromCanada

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario (CANADA)
    #8
    definitely more than 32Mb Video Card! PLEASE!

    EDIT: oops, forgot the 17" and 20" have 64 but still more Video Memory!
     
  9. stevehaslip macrumors 6502a

    stevehaslip

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Location:
    The Ocean Floor
    #9
    i cant see the imac g5 having 512mb RAM standard, no way apple doesn't even put that in the lower end powermac, a PRO computer, i would be very suprised if the bottom imac had 512mb. maybe 256mb in bottom and middle and 512mb on the top spec model. i agree that it should have more but if apple thinks that a pro machine isnt worthy of 256mb then why would they think that the imac is? :(
     
  10. hotwire132002 macrumors 65816

    hotwire132002

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2004
    Location:
    Cadillac, MI
    #10
    I managed to get Amorphium running on my iBook--so here's my quickie of my vision of the G5 iMac. (Keep in mind that I'm not much good at 3D, and this was done quickly.)

    Imagine it in a less boxy shape, maybe a bit rounded at the edges and have more of a rounded transition between the LCD and the base. (I just haven't quite figured out how to do that in Amorphium yet)
     

    Attached Files:

  11. NusuniAdmin thread starter macrumors 6502a

    NusuniAdmin

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    #11
    thats kind of a thick cd/dvd there :p

    anyways better than i could do

    ya your idea seems to be like many other ideas that were floating around.
     
  12. aswitcher macrumors 603

    aswitcher

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2003
    Location:
    Canberra OZ
    #12
    I think 17 and 20, 15 dropped. I even wonder about a 23" given a new form factor for a real prosumer small footprint machine...

    1.6 and 1.8 as they have those chips already... maybe a 2 at the top end...

    I think 64 standard with 128 option...hopefully 128 standard on highend...

    Hopefully 512 as standard in hi end. Surely the days of the 256 are gone with the G5 soon...

    160 and 250 options.

    I hope for entirely new speakers...maybe attaching to screen to minimise footprint...

    Maybe gigabit

    AE and BT as standard would be nice now we have BT keyboards etc and now we have iTunes express...
     
  13. Ensoniq macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Bronx, NY
    #13
    Here are the specs for the low-end PowerMac G5. See my comments next to each item:

    Dual 1.8GHz PowerPC G5 (Change from Dual to Single)
    900MHz frontside bus/processor
    512K L2 cache/processor
    256MB DDR400 SDRAM (Change to DDR333 SDRAM)
    Expandable to 4GB SDRAM (Change to 2GB SDRAM Max.)
    80GB Serial ATA (Change to ATA/133)
    8x SuperDrive
    Three PCI Slots (Remove the Slots)
    NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
    64MB DDR video memory
    56K internal modem

    Guess what? The specs above with my changes are most likely what the TOP of the line new iMac is going to be. I'm not saying I don't wish Apple would do more...I'm just being realistic. Apple is not going to sell ANY iMac that has better features than it's low-end PowerMac G5.

    So again, the top of the line iMac G5 is basically going to be the low-end 1.8 GHz PowerMac G5 with a single processor, no slots, and two less memory sockets. That is the BEST we can hope for. Most likely, a 20" screen will be attached to it.

    There will definitely be a 17" model that will probably be exactly the same as above with the smaller screen. (Screen size is the only difference between the current 17" and 20" iMac models.)

    A 3rd low-end model MIGHT have the 15.2" wide-screen used in PowerBooks, which would allow for resolutions higher than 1024x768, up to 1280x854. (39% more screen real estate.) Otherwise, I'd expect the specs to remain the same as both of the above except a combo drive instead of SuperDrive and possibly a slower 1.6 GHz chip.

    Personally, I'd prefer that all models have the same video and include SuperDrive as standard, with ONLY the screen size differentiating the models. But that doesn't sound very Apple to me. :)
     
  14. sorryiwasdreami macrumors 6502a

    sorryiwasdreami

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Location:
    way out in the sticks
    #14
    Look what they did when Apple updated the eMac. It was a technically superior machine to the current iMac (from a stats-to-price standpoint). Although your predictions for the new iMac stats seem viable, you never know what might happen.

    If the new iMac would out-spec the low end PM on everything except the dual processor aspect, it would certainly put some weight into iMac sales, wouldn't it?

    I am hoping you're wrong.
     
  15. Aciddan macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Location:
    Australia
    #15
    Hmm, all these specs look seriously crippled.

    The only distinction between their consumer-level product (that you pay pro prices for) and their pro products (they might call them a desktop, but they're a workstation) should be:
    the processor (single vs dual)
    Form factor

    All in one is nice, but if I'm going to shell out for a display that would typically last far longer than the machine underneath it, I'd have some way of being able to disconnect the panel from the rest of the machine.

    ... And why are we even talking about DDR333!? Every man and his dog is talking DDR400 and upwards (and intel is moving to DDR2, and GFX to DDR3).

    ... as for a GeForce 5200? with the 6800s and the X800s out now, the machine should at least make an effort to use something that's not an outdated tech (I'd even go so far as to say that the new iMacs could be a testbed for Apple PCI-express for graphics): Say a 5750 or an X600 with a high end option.

    -- Dan
     
  16. Grimace macrumors 68040

    Grimace

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Location:
    with Hamburglar.
    #16
    You are talking about high level guts in a consumer level machine. ATI 9800 etc will not be available in an iMac.
     
  17. wrldwzrd89 macrumors G5

    wrldwzrd89

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    Solon, OH
    #17
    Well, as long as the 5750 and X600 don't have Mac versions, this isn't going to happen. In fact, the Nvidia 6800 Ultra DDL (which isn't even shipping yet) is THE most powerful Mac-compatible graphics card out there right now.
     
  18. DGFan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2003
    #18
    The 5200 isn't outdated. It may be slower than some older cards out there but it has more advanced features. As I understand it parts of Tiger will work on a 5200 but won't work on a GeF4Ti 4600, despite the 5200 being significantly slower for gaming. And that's the point, the 5200 is not a gaming card. But for everything other than gaming and other rendering it's not even close to being outdated. But the iMac is and never was a gaming rig. So try not to be disappointed when you see a 5200 in there.

    And I can't believe you seriously think that with all the problems Apple is probably having dealing with the heat of a G5 in the iMac that they would even consider a card like the X600 which is probably quite a bit hotter than the 5200.
     
  19. mpopkin macrumors 6502

    mpopkin

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Chapel Hill, NC
    #19
    well you are right on that one, the casing will not be aluminum, but will be aluminum look alike, according to a friend, and technology, apple has been working on making a heavy duty plastic like the current imac, look entirely aluminum, not through paint, but in the actual material, remember the multiple color/weird imac g3's back in the day, like that but totally aluminum looking, the specs you read below are probably accurate, but look more for apple to use an updated version of the geforce fxs, maybe based on the 6000 series or the radeon 9600(not xt), but the 5200 has been used way to often and is an outdated chip. LOL, of course apple would allow the 20" to be the smallest display, do you think they care about the average consumer, they should and do only in the music world(aka ipod) but they know their customer base is power users who buy because of the video capabilities and are given multi thousand dollar contracts etc to do consulting/video work and can afford to shell out mulitple thousands of dollars on top notch displays and while i would love for apple to make a more affordable monitor combo, recent reports are that the imac is still an ALL IN ONE, that means No needs for new monitors and anybody that can afford a dual g5 can afford a beautiful 20 cinema display, pity the 20 inch is a cinema hd on that count, youd expect for that kind of money they could at least give you HD capabilities, but dont look for a consumer line of monitors and definetely dont bet on a 15 inch consumer monitor, if you are right and i would definetely like a cheaper monitor, apple would not release a 15 inch because of implications/size restrictions/limited marketability


     
  20. Aciddan macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Location:
    Australia
    #20
    Currently, things like the 9800 and 5950 have just been superceded by models like the X800 and the 6800. the 5700 and 9600's are the generation prior to this, making them 3 generations old as of today. The 5750 and X600 are the PCI express versions of these cards and are aimed the mid-level. Sorry, but saying that these are high-level guts is just wrong. Besides, if you wre building a next-gen product, you'd want to get some longevity out of the architecture. That's why I'd even question using AGP given PCI-express will be the dominant player in less than 18 months...

    With regards to DDR400 and other "Guts". This stuff is pretty much standard now, even in dodgy budget boxes. Someone speculated on ATA100 being in the new iMac. With SATA the successor to ATA (99% of all new mobos in the PC world have this connection now). Why would you use yesterdays technology when this is in other consumer-level stuff right now.

    I'm not expecting Quadras, Gigs of Ram or Terrabytes of storage, but I would say that given the components out there right now in other platforms, how would you position a new (and potentially very lucrative product) in terms of market perception:
    - iMac (Has a G5, but uses has-been tech)
    - iMac (Darn good Mid-level machine that compares technically to anything else in its price range)

    I agree that there are no versions available for Mac (yet). These are PCI-express versions of the 5700 and 9600s. Of course, I don't expect the 6800 to be in an iMac, but given the 5700 and 9600 parts are now 3 generations old now, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect this calibre card in a mid-level product (the iMac is not a budget model)

    -- Dan
     
  21. wrldwzrd89 macrumors G5

    wrldwzrd89

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    Solon, OH
    #21
    Well. here's the problem - since Macs use Open Firmware instead of a PC BIOS, Mac graphics cards have to be designed to work with OF - a task which many engineers don't think is worth their while. That's why it takes so long for Mac versions of graphics cards to appear. BTW, I think Open Firmware is THE way to go - I'd even go so far as to say that PC makers should abandon the traditional BIOS in favor of Open Firmware for the release of Longhorn.
     
  22. DGFan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2003
    #22
    If SATA isn't any faster than ATA and an iMac can't have additional internal drives, why should Apple use SATA? Using technology just because it is "new" is foolish if it provides no advantages.

    It's not unreasonable to expect that. But it is foolish to expect that Apple would put a better card in their iMac than in the entry-level PM.
     
  23. NusuniAdmin thread starter macrumors 6502a

    NusuniAdmin

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    #23
    BY what you were saying about new technology apple should be using ata 133 in the imacs and there other comp lines while back. Ya a few pmac g4 models did but they used ata 100 also.

    As for sata....oh wow an extra 17 MB/s transfer..let alone sata drives generally, notice the word generally, are more expensive than pata.


    ...when they can get hd controllers that transfer fast enough that it does not slow down the action and hd's that feed data that faster then i might be satisfied with the data transfer part...or when they get to 2000MB/s transfer speeds :)

    Ya its alirhgt to use sata i nthe pmacs because they are PRO machines. The imac is not a real pro machine although many people like to think that. Very rarely do i see people doing extreme things on a imac, most of the time i see it on a pmac. Actually based upon those same observations i would say imac is more of an amatuers machine (they like to fool around with pro style things...but do not go all out) than a pro machine.
     
  24. wrldwzrd89 macrumors G5

    wrldwzrd89

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    Solon, OH
    #24
    You're right about SATA - it's immature, and is nowhere near its full potential for increasing data transfer rates for hard drives. However, it does have the potential to reach 2000MB/s, unlike PATA.
     

Share This Page