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

designaholic said:
Performance. They obviously know what they are doing.
Click to expand...

No, they are not. First of all, none of AMD GPUs can handle 5K resolution. Secondly, ONLY Nvidia Maxwell can even run that type of resolution, on single display. ONLY Maxwell cards have HDMI 2.0 and DP 1.3 that can handle that resolution.

3rd. Top end single GPU from AMD costs over 500$. Nvidia GTX970 costs 200$ less, and is on par in terms of performance. Seocndly, R9 290X draws over 270W of power, the Geforce from Nvidia draws almost half that with 142W.

I think the whole article is BS in consideration TECHNOLOGY and Pricing right now.

Only AMD card that COULD possibly handle 5K display right now is few months to come, and that is AMD Fiji GPU.

If we are talking about 4K, then simple integrated GPU from Intel can handle double resolution from 21 inch iMac. But for 5K, iMac MUST have Nvidia Maxwell, or AMD Fiji. Maxwell are right now. Fiji will be next year. If Apple will show 27 inch 5K Display for their computers, whole lineup including Mac Pro must have Maxwell GPUs.
 
Devie said:
Agreed. AMD are always playing catch up to Intel/nvidia... will be rather disappointed if they go with them.
I was really considering the next iMac to replace my 2010 27"... That was until I saw LGs 34" ultra wide in person... Then they make a curve in which reviews are glowing. Might have to get a mbp now instead
Click to expand...

Not GPU wise they aren't. I really don't understand the AMD negativity in this thread, they still make excellent GPUs and are competitive with NVidia. Especially when talk focuses on same generation chips. In some ways they vastly outperform NVidia too.

In any event I honestly believe Apple makes such switches on technical merit. The likely hood is there was good reason for the switch.
 
wizard said:
Not GPU wise they aren't. I really don't understand the AMD negativity in this thread, they still make excellent GPUs and are competitive with NVidia. Especially when talk focuses on same generation chips. In some ways they vastly outperform NVidia too.

In any event I honestly believe Apple makes such switches on technical merit. The likely hood is there was good reason for the switch.
Click to expand...
Amd are cheaper at same performance, OK but nVidia use to be more convenient specially on those apps designed for CUDA, I prefer nVidia.
 
wizard said:
Not GPU wise they aren't. I really don't understand the AMD negativity in this thread, they still make excellent GPUs and are competitive with NVidia. Especially when talk focuses on same generation chips. In some ways they vastly outperform NVidia too.
Click to expand...

But its exactly this generation that AMD is inferior. Maxwell delivers a substantially better performance per watt. I agree with you that AMD offering were in general better than their respective Kepler counterparts.

----------
koyoot said:
No, they are not. First of all, none of AMD GPUs can handle 5K resolution. Secondly, ONLY Nvidia Maxwell can even run that type of resolution, on single display. ONLY Maxwell cards have HDMI 2.0 and DP 1.3 that can handle that resolution.
Click to expand...

Don't you think this can be remedied with some sort of custom display interface chip? The existing cards are certainly powerful enough to do desktop composition on a 5K display and even the current OpenGL implementations on OS X allow render targets of 16k x 16k pixels
 
Mago said:
Amd are cheaper at same performance, OK but nVidia use to be more convenient specially on those apps designed for CUDA, I prefer nVidia.
Click to expand...

Cheaper? Where? R9 290X costs over 500$, Nvidia GTX970 costs 329. 290X TDP is 250W, and GTX970 is 145W.

Where are they cheaper?
leman said:
Don't you think this can be remedied with some sort of custom display interface chip? The existing cards are certainly powerful enough to do desktop composition on a 5K display and even the current OpenGL implementations on OS X allow render targets of 16k x 16k pixels
Click to expand...
No, because ONLY Maxwell GPUs can Handle 5120x2880 on SINGLE display. Let alone 2 or 3 displays.

For 4K even the old D300 from MP is good enough. But 5K is completely different story.
 
Last edited:
furi0usbee said:
I'm so used to my 15" rMBP, I don't know if I could go back to an iMac. I wanted to get a Mac mini just to have around, but with no Apple retina displays out there, I never did. I wish Apple would make a 24" retina iMac. 27" is too big for my space. For me, 24" is the perfect size so I don't have to move my eyes to much or my head.
Click to expand...

I have my 15" rMBP set up with a 24" 1920x1200 monitor alongside. A 27" iMac would take up less space than those combined.
 
Let's tank up the iMac so it will have just enough umphh to push out to all those unnecessary pixels ... then the AMD and i7 will take forever to accomplish mundane tasks and leave us all with an expensive desktop that lags.

I'd just like a TBD that updates the USB2 ports to USB3 and leaves the display alone ... which is apparently too much to ask in a Retina-happy world.
 
Introducing the 27-inch iMac with Retina display...starting at $2,999 with an underpowered chip until a Broadwell version is released next year.;)

I'm very pro-Retina iMac. But, this first version is likely to have a bumpy road and very high price tag for early adopters (I can see the yellow-screen threads now on MacRumors). Prices dropped big time on the rMBP's after 6 months or so. The late-2015 iMac with Retina will be the one to get. Better pricing and likely an updated case design (if Apple holds to it's 3 year iMac design cycle...this one will have lasted late 2012 through late 2015).
 
koyoot said:
No, they are not. First of all, none of AMD GPUs can handle 5K resolution. Secondly, ONLY Nvidia Maxwell can even run that type of resolution, on single display. ONLY Maxwell cards have HDMI 2.0 and DP 1.3 that can handle that resolution.

3rd. Top end single GPU from AMD costs over 500$. Nvidia GTX970 costs 200$ less, and is on par in terms of performance. Seocndly, R9 290X draws over 270W of power, the Geforce from Nvidia draws almost half that with 142W.

I think the whole article is BS in consideration TECHNOLOGY and Pricing right now.

Only AMD card that COULD possibly handle 5K display right now is few months to come, and that is AMD Fiji GPU.

If we are talking about 4K, then simple integrated GPU from Intel can handle double resolution from 21 inch iMac. But for 5K, iMac MUST have Nvidia Maxwell, or AMD Fiji. Maxwell are right now. Fiji will be next year. If Apple will show 27 inch 5K Display for their computers, whole lineup including Mac Pro must have Maxwell GPUs.
Click to expand...
You may be right. or perhaps they are getting access to the newer AMD stuff early. Rumours either way.
 
mrbyu said:
Have you been sleeping in the last few years? The size of the UI elements won't change at all, only the pixel density gets quadruplicated, which is actually very good for your eyes.
Click to expand...

That's not actually the case if you're using a new Mac Pro with a non-Apple 4K display - everything is much smaller or too big. They haven't really worked it out.
 
TMay said:
I'm thinking that the AMD GPU's in the Mac Pro have been very successful. Anyone even remember a problem being reported here on MacRumors?


Of course that's workstation graphics, not gaming.
Click to expand...
Exactly! Not to mention Apple doesn't have any interest at all in gaming on the Mac platform. People wanting to game on the Mac simply don't get it.

----------
kaellar said:
Switching to AMD graphics as soon as nVidia releases extremely efficient 900m series??
Either the rumor source is idiotic or Apple is..
Click to expand...
Or the idiot is the person that thinks that AMD has stopped developing new hardware and doesn't have a generation of new chips in the pipe line.

Remember folks AMD uses the same foundries as NVidia.
 
If this rumor is true, I'd wait for the second or third generation... I'm currently happy with my late 2012 iMac. :)
 
I'm on koyoot side , no realistic cue suggest the new iMac having AMD gpu, but I don't consider Apple will offer an 5k display as soon, maybe on q3/15 not earlier and actually I didn't consider will happen next year, if Apple decided to sell an retina iMac this year will be 4k/nVidia 980.

Facts asap nVidia released 9xx cards Apple updated Yosemite yo support it (unnecessary unless they will include on an new product).

5k monitor are too new and immature to be offered on an mainstream product as the iMac, while there are now a plethora of 4k panels at 27/28" good (and cheap) enough for an mainstream product.

Anyway an retina iMac will require at least some form factor review to handle extra heath from new cpu/gpu combos.
 
designaholic said:
You may be right. or perhaps they are getting access to the newer AMD stuff early. Rumours either way.
Click to expand...

Rumors are that R9 390(not X which will be even more "powerful") say that it will need water cooling for best efficiency. That kinda sets the tone for power of that chip...


Secondly, we know that Fiji with HBM Memory will come in few months which means - next year. Dont think that they will get that early to new chips from AMD.


Edit. One more thing. Read about what feature is Dynamic Super resolution. Its the purest definition of Apple Retina feature.

If Apple will decide to unveil their Retina display in desktop, every computer that supports it will have Maxwell GPU, if were talking about 5K. Including Mac Pro. For 4K even Iris Pro can handle it.
 
Last edited:
The idea of an iMac always tempted me. But, I hate being chained to my desk. I'm glad I'm not in the video editing profession or related field that requires me to be stuck at workstation.

As for the AMD debacle, I hope for the sake of the average consumer, that Apple/AMD streamline their driver updates for the iMac because I doubt that very many people are going to enjoy trying to figure out how to wade through AMD's sea of drivers much less choose the correct one and manually install it.:(
 
Aloft085 said:
The graphics card is primarily for any kind of gaming, not just high-end stuff. Also, at 5k of resolution, even more average tasks are going to prove extremely taxing. You'll be able to check your email and read Facebook just fine, but computers should be able to do a variety of more complex tasks if needed.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I would still want to use photoshop, for example. But I've read comments from people who go nuts because of lag in first person shooter games because the graphics don't redraw fast enough. This would never be the case for me.

I guess I wanted to know if this is only a concern for folks whose common use cases demand excellent graphics performance, like gamers.

----------
pokestuff said:
No it won't "work" with quite a number of 3D rendering and video composing and mixing programs, so you won't be able to use the GPU rendering for example. Same goes for the current Mac Pro.
Click to expand...

All right, but again, if I don't do that, ever. How many people going about their lives will render things in 3D in their common computing tasks?
 
troop231 said:
Extremely unlikely. Apple wants you to pay up.
Click to expand...

It's not just "paying up" like everyone likes to complain about, it'll be technically impossible. The graphics/CPU won't be able to run at that resolution. Not to mention how expensive just the panel will be.
 
paulrbeers said:
You really don't understand how Apple (or PC's for that matter) handle "retina" displays do you? They double the pixels so that text is EXTREMELY crisp, but the text stays the same size as it always has (as well as icons and what not). You don't get anymore "desktop" space, just everything looks so much more crisp.
Click to expand...

Not having used a retina display, you're right, I don't understand it.

But resolution is resolution. And if you double it on the same size screen everything is going to have to be smaller. Meaning a lot more squinting...
 
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