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

Apple May Launch 27-Inch Retina iMac With AMD Graphics as Soon as Next Month

Let's say we see Nvidia 9XX cards, is it likely we would only see them in the retina version?

Because the retina price is going to be many many thousands of dollars and I'm still waiting for the day I can game on a Mac without going completely broke.
 
The Deepness said:
Would there be AAAAAAAAAANY chance of upgrading the displays in my 2012 or 2013 27" iMacs to one of these 5k displays? :confused:
Click to expand...

The only way that could happen is if you can upgrade the GPU card (which has the newer connector for the 5K display). Older 27" iMac all the way back to 2009 have been upgraded to new GPUs over the years. But with the newer form factor, I don't know how upgradable the GPU card is and the the 5K display having the exact same mounting screws as in the 2.5K display may also not be the same.

Even worse, you won't even be able to drive a 5K thunderbolt display from your 2012 or 2013 27" iMac because it won't have Thunderbolt 3 (DisplayPort 1.3 spec). Though, I think ThunderBolt 2 should be able to drive a 5K display at a lower refresh rate of 30 Hz? But this is not very desirable.

Remember, a 5K display is the same resolution as FOUR 2.5K (2560x1440p) displays. The current iMacs can drive two of these current Thunderbolt displays but not four! (Actually they can support a little more - two 2560x1600 displays)
 
gatortpk said:
The only way that could happen is if you can upgrade the GPU card (which has the newer connector for the 5K display). Older 27" iMac all the way back to 2009 have been upgraded to new GPUs over the years. But with the newer form factor, I don't know how upgradable the GPU card is and the the 5K display having the exact same mounting screws as in the 2.5K display may also not be the same.

Even worse, you won't even be able to drive a 5K thunderbolt display from your 2012 or 2013 27" iMac because it won't have Thunderbolt 3 (DisplayPort 1.3 spec). Though, I think ThunderBolt 2 should be able to drive a 5K display at a lower refresh rate of 30 Hz? But this is not very desirable.

Remember, a 5K display is the same resolution as FOUR 2.5K (2560x1440p) displays. The current iMacs can drive two of these current Thunderbolt displays but not four! (Actually they can support a little more - two 2560x1600 displays)
Click to expand...

Thanks for the thorough explanation. I knew it was highly unlikely (i.e., technically impossible), but I didn't know the specifics of the hardware involved. Much appreciated.

Sounds like an affordable 5k Retina iMac may be a ways off. We'll see. When I do upgrade (likely in a few years), no doubt it, and probably most other displays, will have Retina (or comparable) resolutions.

----------
iSayuSay said:
Yes you can .. It's called "sell the old iMac and buy the new one."
Click to expand...

Exactly! :D
 
If the new rumoured iMac is using AMD mobile graphics, what have they got in the stable that is as good as the 980M?

Apple should just go with the 980M and be done with it.
 
Georgio said:
If the new rumoured iMac is using AMD mobile graphics, what have they got in the stable that is as good as the 980M?

Apple should just go with the 980M and be done with it.
Click to expand...

The still unreleased R9 M295X. It's slightly more powerful than an 880m.

I think Apple is making the right call here. I'm an nVidia fan but a strong AMD is good for everyone. If AMD is tuning the M295X to suit the 5K iMac, the end result should be better than waiting for nVidia to "get around to it."
 
Since the late 2013 Mac Pro uses all AMD graphics, after years of both AMD and NVIDIA including Quadros, there is probably some specific reason(s) why Apple went with AMD on the Mac Pro, one of which may be AMD's focus on OpenCL vs. NVIDIA's focus on CUDA and another may be AMD's willingness to make custom GPUs for Apple (FirePro Dx00). Since NVIDIA has the lead in perf/W and perf right now, I think that some of those non-performance-based reasons also apply to a Retina iMac.

The Tonga chip supposedly has 32 CUs and a 384-bit bus. It's possible that AMD is making some kind of custom Tonga-based part for Apple. Given the TDPs of mobile GPUs in current and previous iMacs, I can see a custom Tonga part having a similar or slightly lower TDP compared to the Dx00s (108-116 W depending on the part) and with above an 800 MHz boost clock.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if Adobe will update Premiere Pro to benefit more from an AMD card. Adobe Premiere Pro has CUDA (Nvidia) support, and it does render faster with it.
 
butcherbird said:
I wonder if Adobe will update Premiere Pro to benefit more from an AMD card. Adobe Premiere Pro has CUDA (Nvidia) support, and it does render faster with it.
Click to expand...

Adobe did in 2013, Firepro is supported. I went to SIGGRAPH Vancouver the other month, Firepro was being used all over the place.

http://www.fireprographics.com/ws/mae/adobe/index.asp

Nobody knows what AMD solution is being used, everyone will be happy if it is fast as hell and less energy consuming like the 980. I'd like to see a similar GPU+Touchscreen upgrades for the Macbook Pro, to match and beat the likes of the GIGABYTE P25 V2 http://www.ncix.com/detail/gigabyte-p25-i7-4810mq-128gbx2-d4-98656-1349.htm
 
Last edited:
> When you play games, you can just run the game at 2560x1600. Or 1080p if you prefer.
Liberty. said:
But it looks like rubbish then.
Click to expand...

LOL, spoiled kids today! 2560x1600 looks rubbish!

Try a spectrum 128k on your cathode ray tube TV! Now those were graphics.
 
iMacmatician said:
Since the late 2013 Mac Pro uses all AMD graphics, after years of both AMD and NVIDIA including Quadros, there is probably some specific reason(s) why Apple went with AMD on the Mac Pro, one of which may be AMD's focus on OpenCL vs. NVIDIA's focus on CUDA and another may be AMD's willingness to make custom GPUs for Apple (FirePro Dx00). Since NVIDIA has the lead in perf/W and perf right now, I think that some of those non-performance-based reasons also apply to a Retina iMac.
Click to expand...

Price and Open CL.

AMD will heavily compete on price, that's the big reason why they are in all the gaming consoles. With less than 15% of the workstation graphics market and the chance to sell two GPUs per system you can bet they jumped at this and made an offer that NVIDIA wouldn't compete with.

It is also beneficial for Apple to push OpenCL rather than CUDA.
 
*please support video-in*
I know technical the past few iMac models have supported video in via Thunderbolt, but I would really love to see HDMI or video input via USB3 alt mode. I would finally be able to ditch my TV in my bedroom :)
 
Watch - if it happens, it will be the high-end equivalent of the biggest rip-off in Apple's line: the 1.4 GHz iMac.
 
Liberty. said:
That doesn't make any sense. Anything below the native resolution will always look worse.
Click to expand...

Will look worse than the native resolution sure. But when the native resolution is 5120x2880, sure it will look worse than than that. But you are still running your game at 2560x1440. Which is the extreme high end for gaming.
 
McGiord said:
How many of those low end iMacs are sold?

I'm sure the many in this forum are not the typical target customer for it.
Click to expand...

I got one for my parents because they kept getting viruses on their Windows machine. They already had sticker shock when they saw what an iMac costs. Got it on sale at MicroCenter for $999. Honestly, except for the bootup time (which is partially due to 5400 RPM drive), it's plenty fast. My Dad even remarks at how fast it is compared to the old Windows machine (which was no slouch with an SSD in it).

So yeah, it may not be the best bang for the buck, but it is the least buck which was mattered in this case :D
 
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