Yea, I'd say 3 months at the very top end, personally I think it will be around 6 weeks or so, but only time will tell really. I think the upgrade should be big enough that waiting 6 weeks would 100% be worth it!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
2011 iMac speculation
- Thread starter Opspin
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
your right, i really wouldnt be able to live with that, im returning it haha thanks
I'd say don't expect to see the new iMacs until April or May. Basically, just a spec bump, TB thrown in, and cheaper SSD options. No design changes.
As cool as a major upgrade would be, I won't hold my breath. I'm just excited to finish grad school in a couple months (debt free 😛 ) and finally buy some cool gadgets with that "disposable income" I've forgotten about ever since I decided to consider grad school a likely possibility.
It's time to say good-bye to this puttering old early 2006 CD Macbook with its worn out keys, yellowing screen, and perpetually cracking wrist rest and pick up a top-of-the-line iMac that can cut through my Canon T2i's photos and video like butter. Plus, getting the computer as an Apple Back-to-School deal will make the experience extra sweet.
As cool as a major upgrade would be, I won't hold my breath. I'm just excited to finish grad school in a couple months (debt free 😛 ) and finally buy some cool gadgets with that "disposable income" I've forgotten about ever since I decided to consider grad school a likely possibility.
It's time to say good-bye to this puttering old early 2006 CD Macbook with its worn out keys, yellowing screen, and perpetually cracking wrist rest and pick up a top-of-the-line iMac that can cut through my Canon T2i's photos and video like butter. Plus, getting the computer as an Apple Back-to-School deal will make the experience extra sweet.
yea im not expecting a big major update, but id rather have the latest and greatest, and wouldnt mind waiting a little for it
idk i doubt it. apple really likes going smaller and thinner every year, maybe it can be an option though,
MoreAwesomeDanU
macrumors 6502
Actually Sandy Bridge would be a pretty big spec bump, one that you wouldn't want to miss. As seen in the macbook pros, the sb mobile chips are now the speed of the current imacs. According to anandtech, the new desktop i7 chip with sb is about 30-50% faster than the current i7.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BnLbv6QYcA
Apple is just moving toward the point where they release cheap stuff for an insanely high price just because there's people out there who will buy it.🙁
Thunderbird
macrumors 6502a
iMacs tend to get redesigns in the same year as OS X releases. So I would expect a redesign this year, perhaps not in the Spring, but in the Fall.
the next devices in line are the iMacs. After the iPad orgasmotron the next couple of days, the iMac rumors will come in. Somewhat in the next 3 months
Looking at MBP's it's certain we can expect iMacs with SSD's. If not in base models, then definitely with custom builds. And as to them being thinner, well it's a speculation of course, but we've seen that with every update of Apple products.
You didn't answer this one. What do you mean by major changes that might come to 2012 iMacs except for a redesign, if you don't think that Sandy bridge, Thunderbolt, SSD's and Lion are big enough?
To rephrase it, I think 2011 iMacs are the big change in the line, because 2012 might only have a design change and a slight spec bump compared to this years new iMacs.
i would expect them to out perform the new mbps.
apple would never let a mbp be a true "desktop replacement".
apple would never let a mbp be a true "desktop replacement".
With the 2011 MBP out my attention now goes to this year's iMac. Based on the Intel GPU used by Apple in the MBP I am thinking their high-end model will sport a $317 4-core 3.4GHz Core i7-2600K ("Sandy Bridge" (32 nm)) chip with built-in HD Graphics 3000 GPU. Would be nice to max it out at 32GB if Apple allowed for 8 SODIMM slots. This part shares the same 95w TDP as the BTO'd Core i7-870.
Though there is the possibility that Apple could use a 6-core 3.46GHz Core i7-990X ("Gulftown" (32 nm))with no built-in GPU but it's $1000. It is limited to 24GB though.
This chip's TDP is 130w.
Two 4GB SO-DIMMs are going for under $100 on NewEgg.com.
Expect the update between today and August
Though there is the possibility that Apple could use a 6-core 3.46GHz Core i7-990X ("Gulftown" (32 nm))with no built-in GPU but it's $1000. It is limited to 24GB though.
Two 4GB SO-DIMMs are going for under $100 on NewEgg.com.
Expect the update between today and August
Last edited:
Hellhammer
Moderator emeritus
It was bigger thing for MBPs as 13" came from C2Ds and 15" and 17" used dual cores while they now use quad cores. It will still be a nice bump for iMacs as more models should go quad core but the CPU isn't the bottleneck nowadays so if you're looking for a web browsing machine, current gen is fine.
What makes you think that we will see SSDs because of MBPs? MBPs DID NOT get SSDs. It's just like before, they are BTOs. BTO prices might have gone down a bit but that is normal and will likely happen for iMacs as well. If something, MBPs point that iMacs won't get SSDs as standard anytime soon.
It's much easier for Apple to use the same external design and case than make it 1mm thinner. iMacs are tightly packed machines already so I can't see where could Apple squeeze the extra space without sacrificing the performance. MBPs have been as thick since late 2008. Just because iPhones and iPads get thinner all the time, it doesn't mean that all products will with every update. When we will see a redesign, then maybe.
I didn't say there will be major changes in 2012. There are new CPUs coming every year so with your logic, every update would be a major one. New CPUs and GPUs are just spec bumps, nothing more. If iMac got higher TDP CPUs and GPUs (maybe desktop GPUs), then I would say we are talking about a bigger update.
Thunderbolt is the only big thing unless iMacs get SSDs (I already explained why I don't see this happening). You can get Lion for any Core 2 Duo Mac so I don't see how you see it being a big deal. It most likely won't even be included in the new iMacs.
2012 will bring Ivy Bridge (probably 6-core CPUs) and AMD 7000-series graphics so I don't see it being much different from this years update. SSDs are getting more likely by that time. A redesign would make it a major update though.
Makes no sense to use i7-2600K. i7-2600 offers the same things (sans the better IGP) and it costs less. Unlocked CPU multiplier is useless as you cannot overclock the CPU in OS X anyway, and Apple does not care about OCIng at all.
Though there is the possibility that Apple could use a 6-core 3.46GHz Core i7-990X ("Gulftown" (32 nm))with no built-in GPU but it's $1000. It is limited to 24GB though.This chip's TDP is 130w.
Too hot and expensive. That is Mac Pro stuff. i7-2600 is much better value too.
I considered the i7-2600 as well but I differed to the i7-2600K because it shared the same IGP as the 2011 MBP. In my mind same IGP means less R&D cost at Apple's end.
I wonder how Apple will use the built-in IGP & discrete GPU for their desktops.
I have the late 2008 MBP right now and I am looking forward to just make this into a mobile & presentation device while the 2011 iMac will handle the processing heavy lifting.
Anyone have news on 4GB SODIMM modules? I am not talking about 2x2GB but 1x4GB so we can max out the 32GB limit of this year's Core i7s?
Hellhammer
Moderator emeritus
There is Intel IGP in current dual core iMacs but take a look at the technical specs, Apple does not say a word about it as it is not being used. It makes sense in a laptop where battery life is a concern but that is not the case with iMac. I doubt Apple will use the Intel IGP in next gen, it makes more sense to use the discrete GPU all the time.
I guess you meant 8GB modules as 4GB modules have been out for years and are pretty cheap. I've seen few 8GB modules but right now, they still cost a lot (+1000$ each).
Yeah, that's what I meant single 8GB SODIMMs. I hope Apple does ship with 2x4GB SODIMMs and 2TB or even 3TB HDDs.
With you on the ditching optical drive, I used to be adamantly against the idea but with the external superdrive available for the macbook air for £80, then why not use it if needed for the iMac plus. I'd rather the space given up for something more useful. It would also mean when red drives or super high capacity disks/drives (500GB+) become available then an upgrade will be simple plug and play. (of course i assume apple will do it's best to impede the use of these disks but an external component will at least be open for hackintoshing.
Certainly where i live cloud storage and computing is along way off. The speeds just aren't capable so residents will still be reliant upon DVD's, BD's and external storage devices for years to come. Even with that, it'd be better to see the integrated optical drive gone...... Bring on Thunderbolt.
For anyone wanting more of an idea on cloud and grid computing check out www.gridcafe.org
iSayuSay
macrumors 68040
I think it's because MBP has similar market with MBA .. On 13"display class, MBP and MBA has similar price too .. if MBP include SSD as standard, Apple will have self-competition between MBA and MBP. Worse thing is MBA will be put out of competition since it has no unique thing beside SSD, which improve load time so much
Now with iMac .. it created for different market. iMac supposed to replace desktop PCs, while iMac considered as second grade product from Apple (MacPro is their flagship) .. i think it's reasonable for them to add SSD as a standard. To cut the cost maybe they should just put it on logicboard, and we don't need to have large capacity SSD
64Gb SSD onboard iMac should be adequate to put OSX and apps into awesome load time and performance 🙂 while other stuff stored on massive traditional HDD
Apple could wait until the next-gen of gpus in the fall. Nvidia is focused on much better performance per watt. Making them good candidates for laptops. And ...iMacs since they use laptop gpus....
BUt probably more likely Apple puts a quad core sandy bridge i5 2500k cpu in the entry level iMac and be content with a HD3000 igpu.
Ok maybe that's too big a dip in gpu power even for Apple.
STay with i3 sandy bridge and move 5670 to entry level along with 1TB hard drive? Maybe $1500 and $1700 imac gets quad core i5 2500k.
BUt probably more likely Apple puts a quad core sandy bridge i5 2500k cpu in the entry level iMac and be content with a HD3000 igpu.
Ok maybe that's too big a dip in gpu power even for Apple.
STay with i3 sandy bridge and move 5670 to entry level along with 1TB hard drive? Maybe $1500 and $1700 imac gets quad core i5 2500k.
Last edited:
MythicFrost
macrumors 68040
I thought it was AMD that offered much better performance per watt?
Also, they'll use the i5 2500 not the 2500k (k is overclockable).
The Z68 chipset will be released in May.
Maybe that's when the new iMacs will be out, hopefully with an SSD cache, which would obviate the need for an expensive large SSD, because it's almost as fast, yet so inexpensive that it can be included as default.
Like others, I also hope for 24" displays in the lower end models, and really hope for quad core hyper threaded (8 threads) for all or almost all models.
Also, 8 GB RAM standard would be cool, but even if it isn't, $200 to upgrade isn't too much and I'd probably do it.
Maybe that's when the new iMacs will be out, hopefully with an SSD cache, which would obviate the need for an expensive large SSD, because it's almost as fast, yet so inexpensive that it can be included as default.
Like others, I also hope for 24" displays in the lower end models, and really hope for quad core hyper threaded (8 threads) for all or almost all models.
Also, 8 GB RAM standard would be cool, but even if it isn't, $200 to upgrade isn't too much and I'd probably do it.
I don't know if this has been said, but the iMac "chin" contains the IR receiver (right? behind the 
). Although I guess they could put it behind the bezel pretty easily. Personally, I like the chin, but probably won't miss it.
I also hope 1080p Target Display Mode is supported, instead of just 720p.
What the heck, I won't be buying one anyway... 😛
). Although I guess they could put it behind the bezel pretty easily. Personally, I like the chin, but probably won't miss it.I also hope 1080p Target Display Mode is supported, instead of just 720p.
What the heck, I won't be buying one anyway... 😛
MacHamster68
macrumors 68040
why not just improve the old one ... a bit better QC a bit more carefully sourced parts inside and such little things of no interest to most
why not just a iMac with a under 10 percent failing rate, a zero dead pixel policy , might not be achievable with that display ,but it would be worth a try
why not just a iMac with a under 10 percent failing rate, a zero dead pixel policy , might not be achievable with that display ,but it would be worth a try