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.
Anandtech's review of 27" iMac w/6970M
- Thread starter Maziar
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't understand this part of the(se) review(s) because I am ignorant! Can someone point me to a place I can learn about this stuff? Layman/simpler is better. I'm a lawyer, not a tech guy or visual production guy. I probably am fine with whatever settings show up from the factory, but I am quite willing to calibrate with instruction, and would like to do so. That way I could at least train my eyes to the right colors, etc.
Apple has done a basic calibration which is designed to have a reasonably accurate, good looking display. Designers and other graphics professionals require the onscreen colors match the actual color. This is important when designing, for example, print advertising. You have to make sure the color in on screen is the actual color the product you are advertising is. And when printed, it has to still be the exact same color as the original product.
That level of accuracy isn't really needed for other people. If you want to have a more accurate display just for the fun of it you might want to start with this link for more information. I'm sure a graphics professional will be along shortly for more detailed information than I can provide.
Good enough for me. Thanks for the info and the link! If grey looks gray (joke/pun) and green looks green, I'll survive.
Wll it's not just calibrating. The issue is the iMac seems to have continuing issues with uniformity. That said, if I didn't do photo work, I wouldn't have cared. Is not a huge problem for most, but more than annoying for those of us who want uniform screens we can then calibrate to be more accurate.
My issue was even after using a hardware calibrator the top was tinged red, the bottom yellow. Then on top of that there was a band of brighter screen at the bottom. There's a very very long thread in the iMac forum about the issue. You can see photos of the issue.
That said, even for Everyday users I think getting a calibrator of some level on sale is a good thing, they are as little as $60.
Is this a hardware thingie? Can't a casual user just use a guide and adjust to her/his preferences?
The color accuracy of my computer screen has no monetary influence on my life.
Yea. But you'd spend a fair bit of time on supercal (good software). In the end I'd guess your time is worth more than the price of an inexpensive calibrator like the Pantone Huey (not pro). If you ever watch video it's a nice add and compensates for room lighting as well.
I'm not trying to convince, just give you a relatively inexpensive option should you want better color. Just as I use a DVD and gels to calibrate my expensive tv's and it enhances my viewing. Sure I could pay someone hundreds, but I can get 90% there with the DVD.
I don't propose by any stretch you get a pro calibrator. The nice thing is even the Pantone I mentioned is all automatic. Takes 10 seconds.
I'm not trying to convince, just give you a relatively inexpensive option should you want better color. Just as I use a DVD and gels to calibrate my expensive tv's and it enhances my viewing. Sure I could pay someone hundreds, but I can get 90% there with the DVD.
I don't propose by any stretch you get a pro calibrator. The nice thing is even the Pantone I mentioned is all automatic. Takes 10 seconds.
This pretty much seems to summarize the gaming:
I'm in the market for a new desktop, and I'm trying to figure out if I just want to build a miniITX or buy an iMac.
The review was the best I've seen of the new iMac and pretty much hit the pros and cons that I've felt about the system. I still have a hard time thinking about putting down $2K on a machine with an underpowered gpu and no upgradability besides the RAM.
I'm not a big gamer, just want to be able to play Diablo 3. I mainly will use it for web development and photo editing, so I know everything else has more power than I need. Decisions, decisions, decisions ...
I'm in the market for a new desktop, and I'm trying to figure out if I just want to build a miniITX or buy an iMac.
The review was the best I've seen of the new iMac and pretty much hit the pros and cons that I've felt about the system. I still have a hard time thinking about putting down $2K on a machine with an underpowered gpu and no upgradability besides the RAM.
I'm not a big gamer, just want to be able to play Diablo 3. I mainly will use it for web development and photo editing, so I know everything else has more power than I need. Decisions, decisions, decisions ...
This pretty much seems to summarize the gaming:
I'm in the market for a new desktop, and I'm trying to figure out if I just want to build a miniITX or buy an iMac.
The review was the best I've seen of the new iMac and pretty much hit the pros and cons that I've felt about the system. I still have a hard time thinking about putting down $2K on a machine with an underpowered gpu and no upgradability besides the RAM.
I'm not a big gamer, just want to be able to play Diablo 3. I mainly will use it for web development and photo editing, so I know everything else has more power than I need. Decisions, decisions, decisions ...
How about refurb 27" iMac AND a Mini-ITX gaming rig? The iMac is only 300$ more than 27" ACD and it gets you a full computer. For 800$, you should be able to put together a decent gaming rig. Just make sure to get a GPU with (m)DP so you can connect it to the iMac's display without expensive adapters. A used iMac would be even less, leaving more money for a powerful PC.
It's just one option that crossed my mind. Could be worth considering if you want a Mac and a PC.
This pretty much seems to summarize the gaming:
I'm in the market for a new desktop, and I'm trying to figure out if I just want to build a miniITX or buy an iMac.
The review was the best I've seen of the new iMac and pretty much hit the pros and cons that I've felt about the system. I still have a hard time thinking about putting down $2K on a machine with an underpowered gpu and no upgradability besides the RAM.
I'm not a big gamer, just want to be able to play Diablo 3. I mainly will use it for web development and photo editing, so I know everything else has more power than I need. Decisions, decisions, decisions ...
people always talk a lot about upgradability but in the end, how often do you really upgrade your computer?
the power of computer increases every 2 years
but now we have reached a "limit",
actually, there is no limit to such power
but when i say limit, i mean that now, a common user will not be able to notice any difference no matter which machine you buy
and finally, you should also ask yourself, if you really want to spend most of your money in getting the more framerates you can get for a game, or just the right budget for the right machine that will run everything smoothly
you should just buy a high-end iMac (21 or 27) and stop hesitating for a 2nd PC
unless you are an extreme hardgamer, the iMac is made for you
Yeah, probably should have explained the situation more. Wife and I are expecting our first child, so the office has been converted to a nursery and the new (and smaller) desk is now out in the living room. I've sold my custom built PC and we're just using our MBP (2008) for now. I hook that up to an external monitor, but that has been giving me issues lately that belong in another forum.
Budget and space simply won't allow for both the imac and the itx rig.
I think about that as well. When I had my custom PC it lasted me 4 years. In that time I upgraded the RAM and Video Card, that's it.
I'm leaning more towards the imac simply cause i'm a casual gamer and don't really care about max frame rates.
most games run smoothly on the latest iMac
the machine itself is so strong that you can use it for all of your other needs
you won't be disappointed
i would not be so sure for 2010 iMac but this year, the configurations are very nice
besides from SSD concerns, overall pricing and configurations are good deals that would last for years
The thing is, current iMac is fine for running today's games but like Anand mentioned in his review, what about games coming in 2012 or 2013? It most likely won't be able to drive them at the native resolution with good graphics while keeping a playable frame rate. That is the biggest issue. Since you have absolutely no upgradeability, you are forced to sell your whole iMac to get an upgrade.
The previous gen 1999$ iMac goes for 1449$ in refurb store currently. I wouldn't pay more than 1400$ for a used one. That means 600$ loss in resale value during the first year. If you upgrade every year, like you should be if you want to run the latest games at the best possible graphics, you will spend roughly 1800$ on upgrading your system in 3 years.
In PCs, you may not have to update that often due to the better parts and even if you do upgrade, you don't have to buy a whole new machine, usually upgrading the GPU is enough. In long run, that will end up being significantly cheaper. Upgrading the GPU shouldn't cost you more than ~200$ depending on what GPU you are getting and how much you can sell your old one for. That times three is 600$, the same as what one iMac upgrade will cost you.
If you are into computers, then you know when is a good time to buy parts too. If you bought i7-920 when it came back in late 2008, you have used it for over 2.5 years now. Should be more than enough until LGA 2011 CPUs start to arrive when you could consider upgrading. If you're on budget, you could easily hold on till Ivy Bridge, or even Haswell in 2013 while still keeping a good gaming performance (assuming you have a decent GPU too).
Of course, for an average gamer, iMac is fine. One has to talk to oneself and figure out how important gaming is. For a hardcore gamer, a homebuilt PC is the only thing that will satisfy your need.
Well, often, in fact. Having experienced painful HD failure in the past, I replace my hard drive annually and use the old ones for misc storage. This routine has let me stay with a Dell XPS 1330m as my primary computer for 4+ years...! The difficulty of changing the HD in the new iMac is the #1 disincentive for me to buy it. The TB ports and an SSD boot drive factory installed get me past this, for the most part.
considering your response - then it will mean that you are not buying the right hardware at the right time
if you often update your hardware, it means that you are spending a lot of money every X months because it doesn't fit your needs anymore
games requirements do not change every 6 months
if you have a powerful PC, you should be able to run games for a long period of time
in your case, you should better consider a good investment and stick with it
if you still want to update it regularly, then, the iMac is not made for you, or your expectations go beyond a Mac or even a PC can offer you on the instant
Um, huh? When I consider your response, it doesn't make any sense at all. Hard drives DO fail, not if but when. If today you buy a maxed out iMac 2011, the hard drive will fail. If today you buy a maxed out Dell, the hard drive will fail. If today you buy my 4-yr old 1330m with a brand new hard drive, the hard drive will fail. No matter the specs, no matter the expectations, no matter your level of tech expertise or education or income or religion, your hard drive will fail. If your computer system is highly dependent on the integrity of its hard drive, WHEN that hard drive fails you will be screwed regardless of how fancy or common your screen, CPU, GPU, or anything else is. In such a system, prophylactic replacement of the hard disk is just good common sense.
The sentiments expressed in the review are exactly mine. If only upgrades were more available and easier. Doesn't stop me buying iMacs because I appreciate the design goals but it would be icing on the cake to replace the graphics card to a more modern one but then Apple wouldn't make their incredible profit either.
The 27" has actually come a long way from it's start in that when it originally came out the 4850 was not even able to play then current games at full res in max settings smoothly. The 6970M finally matches up to the screen, at least for the next year. Maybe the next revision will be able to give us a more forward looking card. At least we are moving the right direction.
The 27" has actually come a long way from it's start in that when it originally came out the 4850 was not even able to play then current games at full res in max settings smoothly. The 6970M finally matches up to the screen, at least for the next year. Maybe the next revision will be able to give us a more forward looking card. At least we are moving the right direction.
there is always a weak part in a machine
for a computer, i agree it's the HD
but comparing a mac to a dell is not really relevant
comparing a Mac to a PC in general is relevant
i pay for a service, for a system, for an OS, i don't just compare specs
otherwise, you will always question why a Ford costs 10% a Ferrari while they both have 4 wheels, an engine and 4 seats...
my point is, if you get a new machine every year, it means that at your first purchase you already chose the wrong one...
if you think that the actual iMac will not match your needs in 6 months then, this machine is not made for you
there is always a Mac for everyone, depending on what you do with it
there is no perfect machine
and if you are not happy, then you will always have to build your own custom PC