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

Apple Releases New iMacs

Anaxarxes said:
Read my previous post.

Currently, Macbook's and Apple Mini's graphics units do not fully decode/encode HD content. X4500 will change that.

iMac, Macbook Pro and Mac Pro, on the other hand, have been capable of doing this for ages.
Click to expand...

So those machines do use the hardware acceleration for 264 playback? Is that info documented anywhere? Or an example of (low) cpu use during HD playback?

Anaxarxes said:
Lets have a look:

Dell XPS One...
Click to expand...

Sure, the iMac compares well to other all-in-one models, but there aren't many to compare with. The problem is that many users don't care much about having an all-in-one and would be perfectly happy with a computer plus monitor. People will inevitably compare iMac to headless PCs simply because apple doesn't make a headless model in the same range.
 
BRLawyer said:
Mine is awesome and works great...if you have gunk, just clean it...this month's Macworld tells you how. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I had an early wired Mighty Mouse that was always getting clogged even when I cleaned it.

However last year a friend bought me a bluetooth Mighty, and it has been much better. I'm not sure if my hands are just cleaner or what, but part of me wonders if they've improved the mouse internal design in some way.

Didn't I read something somewhere about optical scrollwheels? That would be much better. It is silly to still have mechanical parts inside a mouse.
 
milo said:
Sure, the iMac compares well to other all-in-one models, but there aren't many to compare with. The problem is that many users don't care much about having an all-in-one and would be perfectly happy with a computer plus monitor. People will inevitably compare iMac to headless PCs simply because apple doesn't make a headless model in the same range.
Click to expand...

You are right that people will make the comparison because apple don't make a mid-range tower. However the imacs are absolutly not over priced if you compare like with like. Towers and all in ones are not like with like.
 
skellener said:
Suggested retail price of $1149. I don't believe you can watch BD movies with this though. It's for reading and burning data.
Click to expand...

The manufacturer's page says it's $729.99 and to play HD movies it says, "To play a protected BD movie in HD through a digital DVI or HDMI interface: HDCP GPU + HDCP ready display."
 
ditzy said:
You are right that people will make the comparison because apple don't make a mid-range tower. However the imacs are absolutly not over priced if you compare like with like. Towers and all in ones are not like with like.
Click to expand...

But if apple doesn't make a midtower, there's no way to compare like with like. I know that doesn't make some people happy, but those comparisons will be made because there's no way to make the "fair" comparison.
 
bluedoggiant said:
I am sick of this question


its part of the design, it requires glossy, if you want, you can lay anti glare coating over the glass, if thats possible.
Click to expand...

If you are sick of this question it just might be that it is asked alot and many of us do wish there was an option for a Matte Screen. I see all the crap reflected out the windows of the side of my office!!!
 
So if I understand this update correctly, it's just a speed increase, memory, and graphics improvement?

I found a chart comparing the new iMacs with the old versions:
Guide for iMac

I'm thinking about buying my first Mac so I'd appreciate the input.

Thanks
 
is it just me
or do i feel uncomfortable spending 1500 on a computer thats not even a quad core?
i know its not capable but now you can by dell q6600 8mb cache and 1000fsb (i think) for 500...

i know theyre completely different.. tower vs all in one but i mean.. were talking nearly a thousand dollar difference -_-
 
Best new Mac deal ever? On UK education site...

What about this for a deal? Pay over 36 months and the basic machine will cost you less than if you pay for it upfront! (£738.36 if you can't be bothered to do the math.)

I'll take three!
 

Attachments

  • Picture 1.png
    Picture 1.png
    74.4 KB · Views: 164
Hi All,

I have Vista 32 bit installed now (windows still updating patches though, doh!). I went to intel.com and grabbed the Processor Identification Utility and ran it on my new iMac. Heres what it came back with.

NOTE: it is possible that it is reading incorrectly, but I thought I would share this anyways.

Intel Core 2 Duo CPU E8435 @ 3.06 Ghz
Speed: 3.06 Ghz
System Bus: 1066 MHz
L2 Cache 6 Mb

Processor Classification
CPU Type: 0
CPU Family: 6
CPU Model: 17
CPU Stepping: 6
CPU Revision: 60C

What I thought was interesting was the proc id of E8435... any thoughts there? If it is a brand new proc, maybe the utility is just reading the ID wrong? Food for thought. I am going to get 3dMark installed as well as GPU-Z and see what those read as well. Let me know if theres any other benchmarks I should run, since I really dont know which ones to try :)


EDIT:

I ran GPU-Z as well, heres a link to the results. Would someone please explain what they mean? haha! :)

http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/43pxg/
 
milo said:
But if apple doesn't make a midtower, there's no way to compare like with like. I know that doesn't make some people happy, but those comparisons will be made because there's no way to make the "fair" comparison.
Click to expand...

You're right, and by that I mean if someone actually wanted a mid-range tower they would compare a mid-range tower to the two closest products available, which are the imac and the Mac Pro. Both aren't direct comparisons, and end up looking expensive even though they are not. I guess this is were the serenity prayer becomes the best advise.
 
swagi said:
These things will fly off the shelfs in Europe. 999€ for the base model is a real good price.

Finally Apple starts to acknowledge the weak dollar! Oh, I'm so tempted to buy one ;)
Click to expand...

Still looking at UK pricings v € (been waiting so long on what the upgrade was), but spotted that the UK refurb store is no more for iMac - (one Pro, but there was an iMac [2.8, 24in] seconds before I got a screengrab. But then it was gone).

Has the US store refurb done the same... If so, where have the iMacs gone that were online so recently. I cannot believe A has old them all.

This is what the UK refurb store was offering: Refurbished iMac 24-inch 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Limited Time Special Price
24 inch (viewable) (1920 by 1200 pixels) Glossy widescreen
1GB (one SO-Dimm) 667Mhz DDR2 SDRAM
320GB 7200 Serial ATA hard drive
8x SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro with 256MB of GDDR3 Memory
Built-in Airport Extreme (802.11n) Built in Bluetooth 2.0+EDR

Learn More
• Save 18% off the original price
Original price: £1,149.00
Your price: £949.00
(£807.66 ex VAT)

Will (once I've looked at the new detail) either get one (still got to read all MR updates, eg re memory sticks) next week when paid, or should we all wait for a 'super update' in June...

I know about the arguement of having and enjoying what you have now (until next update, which may or may not be good), and 100% agree with it... but with June (announcement, not delivery) so near...

Here's the current UK spec... NOT really comparable due to step up and...

Same but 2.8 and 2G memory. Same retail price (as expected). £1,149. I know we can't anymore, but what are the thoughts on should we have (updated before). £200 not worth the difference?

Just spotted G card change.. Think it may be worth it... thoughts (can hang on a few months but would like a new one).
 
molintorch said:
Hi All,

I have Vista 32 bit installed now (windows still updating patches though, doh!). I went to intel.com and grabbed the Processor Identification Utility and ran it on my new iMac. Heres what it came back with.

NOTE: it is possible that it is reading incorrectly, but I thought I would share this anyways.

Intel Core 2 Duo CPU E8435 @ 3.06 Ghz
Speed: 3.06 Ghz
System Bus: 1066 MHz
L2 Cache 6 Mb

Processor Classification
CPU Type: 0
CPU Family: 6
CPU Model: 17
CPU Stepping: 6
CPU Revision: 60C

What I thought was interesting was the proc id of E8435... any thoughts there? If it is a brand new proc, maybe the utility is just reading the ID wrong? Food for thought. I am going to get 3dMark installed as well as GPU-Z and see what those read as well. Let me know if theres any other benchmarks I should run, since I really dont know which ones to try :)
Click to expand...

It could be a misread.

Try to download CPU-Z.
http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php

Montevina is officially not out yet, so even CPU-Z can read this wrong.

And how did you get the new 3.06 iMac? There were none in the stores here in Orange County, California.
 
milo said:
So those machines do use the hardware acceleration for 264 playback? Is that info documented anywhere? Or an example of (low) cpu use during HD playback?
Click to expand...

H.264 decode is here, at least hardware based.

Quicktime does not use GPU capabilities to decode HD content, but it uses for DVD playback.

I belive, once all Mac line is hardware-wise ready for HD, iTunes+Quicktime will get a new version with GPU co-processor enabled.
 
Anaxarxes said:
It could be a misread.

Try to download CPU-Z.
http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php

Montevina is officially not out yet, so even CPU-Z can read this wrong.

And how did you get the new 3.06 iMac? There were none in the stores here in Orange County, California.
Click to expand...
It really depends on how the CPU Id is stored. It should return that info even if it doesn't know what the name is.

molintorch said:
Hi All,

I have Vista 32 bit installed now (windows still updating patches though, doh!). I went to intel.com and grabbed the Processor Identification Utility and ran it on my new iMac. Heres what it came back with.

NOTE: it is possible that it is reading incorrectly, but I thought I would share this anyways.

Intel Core 2 Duo CPU E8435 @ 3.06 Ghz
Speed: 3.06 Ghz
System Bus: 1066 MHz
L2 Cache 6 Mb

Processor Classification
CPU Type: 0
CPU Family: 6
CPU Model: 17
CPU Stepping: 6
CPU Revision: 60C

What I thought was interesting was the proc id of E8435... any thoughts there? If it is a brand new proc, maybe the utility is just reading the ID wrong? Food for thought. I am going to get 3dMark installed as well as GPU-Z and see what those read as well. Let me know if theres any other benchmarks I should run, since I really dont know which ones to try :)


EDIT:

I ran GPU-Z as well, heres a link to the results. Would someone please explain what they mean? haha! :)

http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/43pxg/
Click to expand...
Yeah, It isn't reading right... What does it say for the multiplier?


It looks like the 8800GS is a underclocked GT though.
 
It could be a misread.

Try to download CPU-Z.
http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php

Montevina is officially not out yet, so even CPU-Z can read this wrong.

And how did you get the new 3.06 iMac? There were none in the stores here in Orange County, California.
Click to expand...

I live in oregon, called the closest apple store to my house, and they had a few in stock but had not even taken them out of the shipping boxes yet. Ran up at lunch and grabbed one. Heres a link to the CPU-Z as well, more info on this one than that original utility had. Again, I dont know how to translate all this, but the data appears to match up correctly?

http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=353588
 
Let me drop some knowledge bombs for ya all...

Went through like the first few pages of replies and all the same questions were asked..dunno if they were all answered but here is what I know..


1) Intel has and can make custom chips (CPUs) but they dont make custom chipsets. Apple got 3ghz Xeons before they were out, Apple got a custom Merom and Apple (originally) was supposed to get mobile penryns first (ended up being delayed a little cause of Intel). I wouldnt put it past them that this is indeed Montevina ...It's definitely a Penryn chip (.45nm 6mb l2 cache 1066 fsb). The only other possible answer is that its a tweaked santa rosa board that is able to support the newer 1066 FSB based penryns and DDR2800 SO-DIMMs..All the other stuff that Monte brings are only important for laptops so maybe this is why we dont see them touting any of those new features...I'm pretty sure its just a x9100 in a tweaked santa rosa board or new monte board...I'm leaning toward the former..

Edit: Update After looking at the CPU-Z screenies its settled. It's a tweaked Santa Rosa chipset with a x9100 penryn (probably renamed just for Apple).

from molin's link http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=353588

"NB : Intel GM965 rev C0
SB : Intel 82801HBM (ICH8-ME)"

Northbridge = GM965
Southbrige = ICH8-ME

GM965+ICH8 = Santa Rosa DING DING!


2) Laptops traditionally have always been bandwidth starved because one it's not necessary on a mobile platform and the chips have to fit in a smaller thermal envelope then their desktop cousins. So to help get these TDP levels down memory is usually one of the main things effected which is why you never see matched FSB/memory timings on laptops....also hopefully this sheds some light on how it works/makes sense..

You don't match raw mhz speeds when matching FSB and RAM. It doesn't work that way. You match (for synchronous performance > ) the bandwidth. Which is why you see memory labeled say PC2-6400 or whatever..That # is its peak bandwidth it can achieve...

Intel's FSB is 64-bit which means it can do 8 bytes in 1 cycle (8 bytes in 1 bit 64/8 = 8) for a total bandwidth of 8.5 gb/s for a CPU that has a 1066 fsb (1066x8). DDR2-800 provides 6.4 gb/s (800x8) of total bandwidth but when run in dual channel you get 12.8 gb/s of bandwidth which is more then enough for the mobile platforms. You ask why even bother with 800 if its more then enough? Well you can run your memory dividers at 3:2 or 5:4 ratio instead of 1:1 and you can still squeeze out some extra performance. Also if you have integrated graphics most new chipsets let you use the extra memory bandwidth from your system ram on the graphics....I hope this clears some stuff up...

And no you cant buy DDR2-800 and stick them into your MBPs or MBs. If you can, the santa rosa chipset will downclock them to 667, which defeats the point of even doing it...
 
Anaxarxes said:
H.264 decode is here, at least hardware based.

Quicktime does not use GPU capabilities to decode HD content, but it uses for DVD playback.

I belive, once all Mac line is hardware-wise ready for HD, iTunes+Quicktime will get a new version with GPU co-processor enabled.
Click to expand...

DVD is Mpeg2. Currently there is no HD decoding capability on the Macs. I tried it and it just won't work. Even under boot camp not. Find a rendered movie like Meet the robinsons and you can clearly see that there is no acceleration. Under Windows the acceleration can not be enabled because the iMac has a specially configured graphic card and thus needs a driver from Apple. Thus pureHD or the ATI counterpart do not work yet. While other computer with those acceleration technologies and a worse score can play them fine :(

I can really only hope that h.264 acceleration is coming soon. It is a pity to not have it on such a beautiful OS.
 
sukanas said:
is it just me
or do i feel uncomfortable spending 1500 on a computer thats not even a quad core?
i know its not capable but now you can by dell q6600 8mb cache and 1000fsb (i think) for 500...

i know theyre completely different.. tower vs all in one but i mean.. were talking nearly a thousand dollar difference -_-
Click to expand...

I agree i just recently got a quad 2.6 with 4gb memory (ENCODED A 1080P VIDEO TO PS3 FORMAT IN ABOUT 1HR AND 30 MINUTES) MAIN REASON I GOT IT FOR
and 500GB of space for 899.99 with a nvidia 8800gt & 24" dell lcd (dell xps 420)
I know people will start saying "but can you run ilife or mac on it" YES I CAN
as matter of fact it runs perfect but my main point is while it finally hit the 3.00ghz mark...my quad will stomp it to a coma and i paid roughly about 1200 less then the fastest imac.

Now wht to do with the extra 1200 i managed to save hmmmmm.....Ill just save it for the next revision macbook pro....anybody interested in a penryn 2.4 320gbhdd MBP?
 
Is it worth it?

I have a 24" iMac 2.8GHz with 500GB HD and 4GB RAM. I have the ATI Radeon 2600 card too.

Could someone tell me is it worth me buying the new iMac for the processor and video card benefits??? I'll be listing the current one on ebay.
 
I don't have an iMac, so please excuse the noobishness of this question, but I was wondering about the mini-DVI output... does it simply mirror the display or can it be used to extend the desktop to another monitor?
 
phakebrill said:
I have a 24" iMac 2.8GHz with 500GB HD and 4GB RAM. I have the ATI Radeon 2600 card too.

Could someone tell me is it worth me buying the new iMac for the processor and video card benefits??? I'll be listing the current one on ebay.
Click to expand...


dude... you have the previous top of the line machine then right? don't worry about it... you're fine... enjoy your computer for a yr or 2. New stuff will always be coming out.
 
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
Back