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 Thunderbolt iMac w/ SSD Shipment Tracker
- Thread starter mrfoof82
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Like a Bumper more for free?I don't know Yes I've paid it and to get it in 4-6 weeks, now the delay appears to be longer and i've not paid for it
Anyway are are just guesses
That's completely different. The bumper was to appease people after there was an alleged issue with what they purchased, the iPhone. In fact, if Apple were to give 27" machines a better SSD for the same price, everyone who had purchased a 21" machine would be outraged and a similar iPhone bumper brouhaha would erupt putting Apple in yet another negative light.
I really don't mean to be harsh about it, but there's a difference between rumors and getting peoples' hopes up who are just waiting for their machines. I mean I can understand conjecture before the iMac was even announced, but not 3 weeks after it's been released giving people false hope that somehow there'll be added value to what they purchased. It just gets people disappointed, and I'd rather people be happy with what they already purchased.
Apple fans tend to wind themselves up with pipe dreams and then everyone has to talk them down with the same old argument, "So you're upset about not getting something that was never promised to you?" How many times have we seen that?
The machines will come eventually. Something is keeping them up. I HATE the wait as much as anyone. I've been tempted a few times now to stop my order and just buy my own SSD, but it's been so long now I'll just wait the remaining time. I'd just hate to see people buy such a great machine and then once it gets to their home and it doesn't have: Lion, SSD Caching and a Sata III SSD, they become upset and disappointed.
Anyway, that's my fifty cents. I apologize if I came off as too harsh.
This isn't mid-cycle.
If the 21" machines paid the same price for the SSD, you better believe there'd be outrage.
I too am running the dev preview of Lion and as you said, it's still buggy. And as I said, there's no gold master available nor does it seem it's around the corner. It'd be bizarre that they released a machine right now with a complete Lion yet we're still behind in dev previews.
----
I again apologize for being harsh, but we know the truth. I just think we should try not to get peoples' hopes up about what they already purchased, they're only gonna be disappointed when their delayed iMac didn't come with 8 ponies and a swimming pool.
No worries. You and I both know that common sense rarely prevails on these boards, however, so it's inevitable that folks are going to squawk when their new iMacs don't have SATA-III SSDs with SSD caching natively supported in Lion.
folks are going to squawk when their new iMacs don't have SATA-III SSDs with SSD caching natively supported in Lion.
I'd be just happy to know if I'm going to get one anytime soon
That's awesome. Thanks. Hope to hear something solid from u soon. In the meanwhile, let's not spam the poor guy. I'm sure he's a busy guy.
For the record, my delivery date (Canada) is so far unchanged.
It will be by the time it arrives
I ordered 19th May, delivery due 4 July. It was cancelled by Apple on the 23rd May for some reason and is now slated for the 8th July. Delivery to Germany.
Frustrating.
I've been following this and the other SSD threads quite closely as I'm going to order a 27" i7 iMac in the next few weeks and am convinced I need an SSD, the performance boost looks too good to miss out on.
However Apple still using a SATA 2 Toshiba HG3 has put me off buying the upgrade through them. They have been using these for quite a while now I believe and it must be due a refresh in the SSD they use soon. Afterall the Mac Air changed the SSD it was using in April, switching to faster Samsung ones (see here), if that is the case it would seem they are putting faster SSD's in the Air than the iMac - which seems a bit ridiculous.
I'm not sure I really buy the argument that they wouldn't do one thing for the 21" and another for the 27", they already do that with the i7 cpu upgrade, and the upgrade price is the same. You could argue that one is coming from an i5 2.7 and the other from an i5 3.1 but the price of those two i5's is about equal.
Personally I can only think the delay for the 27" is for a change in SSD. I do not believe they would hold it up on the basis of Lion as what would be the point? Otherwise I cannot see why the 21" has a delivery estimate of 2-4 days while 27" gets 4-6 weeks. If there is not a difference in hardware then the delivery contrast is an unintelligible farce.
Either way I'm going to wait until someone receives a 27" SSD as if I'm spending an extra £450 for it I expect a top class SSD.
However Apple still using a SATA 2 Toshiba HG3 has put me off buying the upgrade through them. They have been using these for quite a while now I believe and it must be due a refresh in the SSD they use soon. Afterall the Mac Air changed the SSD it was using in April, switching to faster Samsung ones (see here), if that is the case it would seem they are putting faster SSD's in the Air than the iMac - which seems a bit ridiculous.
I'm not sure I really buy the argument that they wouldn't do one thing for the 21" and another for the 27", they already do that with the i7 cpu upgrade, and the upgrade price is the same. You could argue that one is coming from an i5 2.7 and the other from an i5 3.1 but the price of those two i5's is about equal.
Personally I can only think the delay for the 27" is for a change in SSD. I do not believe they would hold it up on the basis of Lion as what would be the point? Otherwise I cannot see why the 21" has a delivery estimate of 2-4 days while 27" gets 4-6 weeks. If there is not a difference in hardware then the delivery contrast is an unintelligible farce.
Either way I'm going to wait until someone receives a 27" SSD as if I'm spending an extra £450 for it I expect a top class SSD.
It might be prudent for you to go ahead and place the order now so that you can get in the queue. You can always cancel your order (as long as it hasn't shipped) if you find that the 27" iMac's factory SSD isn't what you'd hoped for.
If it goes the same way as the 21.5" iMacs, they'll all ship close enough together that you wouldn't be able to cancel before the first person got theirs, because yours would have shipped already. The shipping time also dropped a lot once the 21.5" SSD models started to ship.
I'm located in the UK, my delivery date hasn't changed, still shows 27th June dispatch and 1st July deliveryJ
they already do that with the i7 cpu upgrade, and the upgrade price is the same. You could argue that one is coming from an i5 2.7 and the other from an i5 3.1 but the price of those two i5's is about equal.
The HG3 was first introduced in the Mac Book Air. Almost a year ago. So they are a little older but the most reliable since the CG is the most agressive on the market today and TRIM support doesn't hurt.
You will not see a real world difference between the Toshiba drive and a Vertex 3. I have a OWC Mercury extreme pro 6Gps in my Mac Book pro and the difference between the Toshiba in my 21.5 I cannot tell the difference between the two. Don't get caught up in all the marketing hype and the numbers.
http://www.toshiba.com/taec/news/press_releases/2010/memy_10_586.jsp
The 21.5 also has the option for the i7 2600S. Which is the same processor as the 2600 just a slower base clock, but they scale the same the i7 2.8 from 2.8Ghz to 3.8Ghz and the i7 3.4 scales from 3.4Ghz to 3.8Ghz so the performance for the two is almost idenical for both. The i7 2600S actually costs about $80 more than the 2600. So your assumptoin that they put in better processor or anything else is far fetched. I am not going to give benchmarks again for the hundreth time so I am going to cut and paste for you. You cannot just look at a base number or a base clock and assume that one is faster than the other.
You're dreaming if you think that the 27's will get different hardware or some better SSD or SATA 3. It takes months for validation, testing, and overall would be suicide marketing wise if they did so.
Where are these rumors and fantasies coming from?
(Turbo 2.0) the Core i7-2600 and core i7 2600S will power gate three of its four cores and turbo the fourth core as high as 3.8GHz. Even with two cores active, the 32nm chip can run them both up to 3.7GHz.
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/d...d[4787]=on
The Core i7 2600s will and does exceed it's TDP of 65W when the power is needed.
The core i7 2600s ability to 'scale' from 2.8 to 3.8 allows it to remain most of the time at 65W of total TDP. This is evident in the single and dual threaded benchmarks. The numbers are almost identical.
Secondly the only difference between the processors is that the i7 2600s has a lower base clock. That is it. They scale the same, regardless of TDP.
They are the same processor. Same silicon, same features. Most of the time the i7 will run at 2.8 reducing it's TDP. When applications demand more power, it will scale the same as the i7 3.4.
Look at the bench marks. In single threaded applications, the numbers are almost identical. It's only heavily threaded applications that the i7 2600 has a slight advantage, that is due to the i7 2600s having to scale to the same speed as the i7 2600. That takes a few milliseconds longer. Most of the time it will run at it's designed TDP and run at 2.8 GHz. When taxed, it will scale the same as the 2600. Exact same.
Turbo Boost 2 is innovative mainly in the way it allows the processor to exceed its TDP for a certain time (up to 25% over, or 120W on models with a TDP of 95W or 95W on models with a TDP of 65W), thus allowing Turbo Boost more of a margin. While this is obviously a bonus in terms of acceleration, it is worth asking how such an operation is possible without taking the CPU beyond its spec, and thus risking seeing the throttling mechanism kick in. The TDP is defined so the die temperature doesn’t exceed a ceiling beyond which the circuit’s integrity is no longer guaranteed.
What Intel is actually doing is exploiting a physical phenomenon: there’s a period of time before the processor actually heats up. The explanation is very simple: when the CPU is sollicited, it starts to heat up, this takes some time and the package doesn’t hit its TDP right away, if it hits it at all (if the increased load lasts long enough). Thus even if the heat disippated by the processor is higher than the TDP during this heating up period, there isn’t enough time for the additional heat to take the package heat over the top.
Of course, the skill here lies in managing the application of this mechanism. The longer it’s applied, the more acceleration you get but also the further you take the CPU beyond its spec, increasing the likelihood of setting off the throttling mechanism. It’s difficult to determine an optimal value, because how much the CPU temperature increases obviously depends on the cooling mechanism used, a point that is external to the processor and therefore not universally quantifiable.
If you doubt what I am telling you google is your friend.
The benchmarks back this up. There is not much difference in performance between the two processors. The i7 2600 is the fastest quad core processor on the market. The i7 2600s is a close second. Lke 1a and 1b.
Overall.
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/d...sult,2414.html
Single threaded.
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/d...aded,2406.html
Multi threaded.
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/d...aded,2407.html
Handbrake( the benchmark you referenced).
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/d....264,2421.html
Look at the sandybridge M processors in the macbook pro's which perform almost on par or exceed their desktop counterparts.
The only reason they don't offer the better GPU in the 21.5 is because of heat issues, nothing else.
For all intends and purposes, the i7 2600S in my opinion is "superior' to the core i7 2600 providing lower power while retaining %95 of the performance.
Last edited:
Dutch Online Apple store
I ordered an 27" 3.4G iMac with 8GB RAM, 256GB + 2TB HD and 2GB GPU on May 6th 2011 via the Dutch Online Apple store. The orderstatus still notes 17/20 Jun 2011 as shipping/delivery date. Can't wait!!
I ordered an 27" 3.4G iMac with 8GB RAM, 256GB + 2TB HD and 2GB GPU on May 6th 2011 via the Dutch Online Apple store. The orderstatus still notes 17/20 Jun 2011 as shipping/delivery date. Can't wait!!
Exactly the same order details for me (UK) and it hasn't changed ... I still wonder if the July changes are a glitch as someone previously reported?
This is exactly what I have wondered about. Fretting about bus speed is like fretting about RAM speed (somewhat the same thing, no?). I really don't think 99.99% of people will ever be able to tell the difference, yet I am caught up in it, too. Worrying about whether the SSD on the new iMac is a 6 or a 3.
Would it ever matter to me? Am I passing on a Porsche, holding out for a Ferrari, when I really only ever drive country roads?
fantastic summary: thanks !!!
considering the price, adding up the i7 option is really a good deal for the 21.5" iMac
moreover, it will increase the value of the machine if anyone would like to sell it back in 18-24 months...
but for now, it is really a value for money option
i've decided to get the i7 and increase the ram instead of going for an overpriced SSD option
Another thing people need to consider: Toshiba and Samsung can produce in quantities that Apple needs. Most other manufacturers can't outside of Micron.
Let's hope
gets this SSD business sorted out and iMacs rolling to customers sooner rather than later.Think my 1.5TB external disk hooked up via FW800 to my mid-2010 Mac Mini has given up the ghost.
Awesome. Would've been nice if the iMacs had... y'know, shipped and such. I now have to replace the hard disk with one I'll use for no more than 30 days, as well as the fun of restoring from Time Machine backups.
UPDATE: Not the drive, it's the power supply being unable to deliver enough power. Drive works fine. OWC shipping power supplies with external drive enclosures that can't last more than 4 months? I'm shocked, I say: shocked. This has never happened before, except for the 5 failed power supplies in the past year. Sourcing my own PSU from a different manufacturer than Asian Power Devices. It'll get here way faster, and it'll probably last more than 4 months.
Awesome. Would've been nice if the iMacs had... y'know, shipped and such. I now have to replace the hard disk with one I'll use for no more than 30 days, as well as the fun of restoring from Time Machine backups.
UPDATE: Not the drive, it's the power supply being unable to deliver enough power. Drive works fine. OWC shipping power supplies with external drive enclosures that can't last more than 4 months? I'm shocked, I say: shocked. This has never happened before, except for the 5 failed power supplies in the past year. Sourcing my own PSU from a different manufacturer than Asian Power Devices. It'll get here way faster, and it'll probably last more than 4 months.
Last edited:
Yeah I feel your pain,... one of my RAM sticks in my Mac Pro apparently died, as System Profiler is now showing 3GB.
I'm holding out hope for the dude a few pages back who said an Apple rep told him his machine was due to be assembled this past Friday for shipping this coming week...
I'm holding out hope for the dude a few pages back who said an Apple rep told him his machine was due to be assembled this past Friday for shipping this coming week...