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

Apple Releases iMacs

Re: Re: Re: Poor graphics

Originally posted by LethalWolfe


I think you might be confusing the MX and the Ti or FX. The MX's are Nvidia's budget cards. The Ti's get spanked by the 900 Pro, and the FX Ulta (which will hit shelves next month) barely beats the 900 Pro in benchmarks, but it's also going to cost 1.5-2x as much as 900 Pro.


Lethal
Click to expand...

Actually you are the one that is confused. Don't hurt me was referring to the ATI9000 Pro which he is correct in saying performs equally with a G4MX. The major difference being that the ATI9000 has vertex shaders and a bunch of other on hardware goodies that the G4MX doesn't have.

The card you are referring to is the ATI9700 PRO. Yes that little 7 makes a very big difference on an order of almost 3x the frame rates of the ATI9000 or the G4MX.

To anyone complaining about the G4MX for modern games, don't. The G4MX has more then enough muscle to play games like QuakeIIIArena at 1024x768 max everything at 80-100FPS. What more could you ask for.
 
tools

Most of you peeps are tools. This new iMac is a nice bump, and it's cheaper. wtf are you whining about?! I think 80% of this board are windoze trolls or microsoft marketing execs, sometimes. Gimme a break.

What I don't understand is people who say the current iMac 800 is slooooooow. I have a G4 450 sawtooth with Rage 128 card, and I think it's pretty darn snappy in OS X. Of course I have a gig and a half of ram (dirt cheap) which makes a big difference from what I hear. When I move up to a radeon card and can take advantage of quartz extreme, things are going to rock on my 3 year old tower, which seems to get BETTER performance every time apple releases an update, as opposed to another OS company I know of, which releases updates which bog older systems down like mad.

As for lack of firewire 800, give me a frigging break. As has been said time and time again, current hard drives can't even saturate a firewire 400 bus -- why the HELL do you need firewire 800? To compensate for your tiny weiner or something?
 
Re: Re: Re: Poor graphics

Originally posted by LethalWolfe


I think you might be confusing the MX and the Ti or FX. The MX's are Nvidia's budget cards. The Ti's get spanked by the 900 Pro, and the FX Ulta (which will hit shelves next month) barely beats the 900 Pro in benchmarks, but it's also going to cost 1.5-2x as much as 900 Pro.


Lethal
Click to expand...

LethalWolfe i think you are mistaken. Although I will agree with you that the MX cards arent the greatest gaming performance cards made by Nvidia. Their Ti 128MB DDR card for macs destroys ATI's 9000 Pro (they don't make a 900), only ATI's 9700 beats out the Nvidia Ti 128 by 30-40%. And Nvidia's latest offering, the FX Ultra barely beats out the 9700 by about 10%. Unfortunately for Nvidia's sake, ATI is dropping their latest card in early spring that will once again put them on top of the graphics card kingdom.

If you need some more technical proof of this, I'd be happy to provide it to you Lethal.

Tyler
 
Originally posted by LethalWolfe


Errr... the iMac has a GeForce 4 MX which is comparible to GeForce 2 era cards. It's fine for light to moderate gaming, but the only games it will "smoke" are games that are are a couple of years old.

The fact that a $2300 computer has a budget video card in it is rather amusing.


Lethal
Click to expand...
Last i checked it was 1799 and the geforce 4 mx is still 64 mb:eek:
 
Ordered the 17" with 512MB (One Chip) Bluetooth and Airport Extreme. Can't wait.

I'm a switcher. I'm a data network engineer. I was an MCSE (let it lapse). I am a CNE5, a CCNP (Cisco) and a CCDP (Cisco). Work heavily with Microsoft stuff and hate it. Love Unix and Linux.

Looking forward to finally editing 10+ hours of videotape.

Looking forward to organizing 2-3 GBs worth of photos.

Looking forward to organizing 8 GBs worth of music.

Looking forward to my wife not having to call me 2-3 times a day asking for help with the computer.
 
Re: Re: Re: Poor graphics

Originally posted by LethalWolfe


I think you might be confusing the MX and the Ti or FX. The MX's are Nvidia's budget cards. The Ti's get spanked by the 900 Pro, and the FX Ulta (which will hit shelves next month) barely beats the 900 Pro in benchmarks, but it's also going to cost 1.5-2x as much as 900 Pro.


Lethal
Click to expand...
you are the one wrong my freind,the ti's are getting spanked by the 9700 not the 9000. the 9000 is a 64 mb card in the mac world the ti is a 128. so again not much difference in 2 64mb cards. And the fx just edged out the 9700 but by a slim margin. REMEMBER THE GEFORCE4MX CAME WITH 32 or 64mb. we are now talking about the 64 version like the 9000 which is 64.
 
GF4 MX blows. it doesnt matter though, since you dont want to be gaming on an lcd anyway. It's as funny as hell to watch my friend playing on his. the guys in counterstrike actually do look like ghosts, lol
 
Did anyone else notice

that the Hard Disk speeds got bumped to 7200 RPM and the bus on the 17" model is now at 133 MHz?
 
Re: LAME AS@ "UPGRADES"

Originally posted by utilizer
This is absolutely nuts for them to price the iMac line at this price
Click to expand...
I disagree. Go to the Dell website and price out a Dimension 2350 with a 2.0GHz P4, equivalent RAM, HD, LCD monitor, DVD burner, etc., and you will find that you will come within $200 of the 17" iMac.

This is including outfitting the Dell with WinXP Pro because of OSX's superior networking capability. Add into this the fact that the base software package for the Dell is nowhere near as good as the iMac software package, and the fact that the built in video on the Dell is inferior to the GeForce4 MX on the 17" iMac (and not upgradable), and the iMac starts looking like the better deal.

In fact, the software package is the most overlooked part of any discussion of the performance of Macintosh computers.

All the usual disclaimers in trying to compare Mac and PC systems apply.
 
at first glance, i was somewhat unimpressed..

now i'm a little more impressed... just one note

to all those who mention that the low end is now 200 dollars cheaper and 100 mhz faster... yes, true.

but.

in general. when machines are upgraded, one looks at the price points, as opposed to the machines themselves... so for instance, unless i'm wrong (which i could be.) the old low end (700 mhz 15") was 1199.... well now the current low end (800 mhz, 15") is 1299.

so yes, it's faster. but the lowest end is now 100 bucks more.

which, for an upgrade, is a bit weak. however, like folks have said, clearly apple is squeaking by here until there are some good chips ready.

granted, this is not quite comparable to the "hey, we have to raise the imac prices 100 bucks" thing, but it's still a bit crappy... however, the high end is quite impressive i'd say.
 
Originally posted by Abercrombieboy
I would like to get one of the 17" 1Ghz iMacs to replace my old iMac DV 400, but after reading all the complaints I don't think I will get one. It sounds like it won't have much better performance then my older iMac. ;o(
Click to expand...
the new high end imac will smoke your classic easily in every test! think of the new powermac 1 gig versus your machine and your telling me no difference? Heck my powermac 800 smokes my wifes imac500 crt in everyway.
 
Originally posted by possible switch
Okay, I'm a poor college student with a Dell Insprion 4000 that blue screens at least 5-10 times a day. It runs hot. It's slow. I never carry it anywhere. It doesn't like to let me multi-task.

I was in the market for a new iMac. I almost bought the old low end iMac before I stumbled across macrumors.com. I've since waited patiently for upgrades. FINALLY, they're here. I just don't know what to do though.

The 15 inch one is just the old model, but cheaper. The middle-of-the-line one calls my name, but I don't have $1800 for the computer, $200 for Office X, and the extra bucks for a memory upgrade because 256 seems low.

I have about $1600 I'm willing to spend, but on a low end model that is now working on its second year?

*sigh* I guess I have no choice but to stay in the PC world. I haven't had much time to think about it, but I feel like I'd just be wasting my money by buying an iMac.

**I've heard too many bad things about screens and stuff on the eMacs and simply don't have room for something that size in my dormitory setup.**
Click to expand...

Couple of things... Inspiron is a laptop. Do you not want another laptop? If you might want a laptop, check out the iBook.

As for the iMac... I would look at the intro model with 512MB and the AppleCare warranty for $1568/$1668 depending on if you want 2 or 1 sticks of memory in it. This machine would do most anything you want... unless you are doing serious programming and/or gaming.

As for the "low end model" being old... it also very reliable. The DDR that is in the higher models has been a joke so far. BlueTooth is not very usefull for most people yet, and Apple is not the company to get it moving (that would be Dell and Gateway).

If you want to straight up compare the low to mid range of the PC world vs the Mac world... you can't do it. PC is going to be cheaper.

I feel your pain as for the Inspiron though. Those things are truly horrid hot flimsy machines. I assume your warranty has expired...?
 
Re: I miss the old imac!

Originally posted by copperpipe
What happened to the sweet lovable and CHEAP mac! People need a Mac they can get for $800 (or less!) to do the basics - surf the net, use their digital camera, email, write a paper, etc... And they don't need a flat panel display for that! And the thing is that people that buy these computers will fall in love with OS X, and upgrade in the years to follow. The ol' imac was lovable, I still love mine, and it filled a very respectable niche. The new imacs are cool, but they're TOO MUCH! Listen up Steve, you're missing a huge segment of the switchers with this nonsense.

Cp
Click to expand...

It sounds like you may have contradicted yourself. . .
If people want a Mac to do just the basics with, they can still get a G3 iMac for under $800, just like you want (not that I'm saying it's worth that much).

And you who own an G3 iMac (I know you paid more than $800 for it) are not willing to upgrade because the new ones are too expensive?
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Poor graphics

Originally posted by MacBandit


Actually you are the one that is confused. Don't hurt me was referring to the ATI9000 Pro which he is correct in saying performs equally with a G4MX. The major difference being that the ATI9000 has vertex shaders and a bunch of other on hardware goodies that the G4MX doesn't have.

The card you are referring to is the ATI9700 PRO. Yes that little 7 makes a very big difference on an order of almost 3x the frame rates of the ATI9000 or the G4MX.

To anyone complaining about the G4MX for modern games, don't. The G4MX has more then enough muscle to play games like QuakeIIIArena at 1024x768 max everything at 80-100FPS. What more could you ask for.
Click to expand...

D'oh, yer right. I got my 9x00's mixed up. :eek:

I wouldn't call Q3A a modern game though. ;)


Lethal
 
Re: Re: LAME AS@ "UPGRADES"

Originally posted by wilburpan
In fact, the software package is the most overlooked part of any discussion of the performance of Macintosh computers.

All the usual disclaimers in trying to compare Mac and PC systems apply.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Because we all know that iMovie 3.0.1 is such a good program ;)

Apple's free packaged software is better than Dell's? Big whoop! If you want real software (Photoshop 7) then you have to pay for it, regardless of the new system you buy.
 
Originally posted by DeusOmnis
GF4 MX blows. it doesnt matter though, since you dont want to be gaming on an lcd anyway. It's as funny as hell to watch my friend playing on his. the guys in counterstrike actually do look like ghosts, lol
Click to expand...
you will be able to game on this machine and your friends are using the old hardware!
 
Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
the new high end imac will smoke your classic easily in every test! think of the new powermac 1 gig versus your machine and your telling me no difference? Heck my powermac 800 smokes my wifes imac500 crt in everyway.
Click to expand...

Yea, his old DV will do about 200 million instructions per second, and the new iMac somewhere in the neighborhood of 4 billion.

Man, are people really this dense?
 
Originally posted by e-coli
They're wringing every last drop of profitability out of that pitiful, outdated G4 chip.

Clearly the compay is floundering to differentiate their models on all fronts.

sad.
Click to expand...

Let's all say it...eMac eMac eMac.

It's obvious that Apple is integrating the eMac (read CHEAP iMac) into it's consumer desktop line. I kind of expected this. You can get a good cheap Mac. 999 for a G4 700 MHz G4? Add a little ram and you got a work horse and a half. The screen bugs have been worked out as Apple has admitted and offered to fix the screen! If you want cheap then you aren't going to get a FP. I don't think it matters. I am still using my G4 TiBook 667 with 512 MB or RAM and truthfully I am hardly maxing it out. One thing I learned when I switched a year ago was that like V8's and old American Muscle bigger isnt always better. My G4 667 SMOKES my P4 1.8GHz Thinkpad...they even have the same amt of memory. The truth is no one really needs a 1Ghz G4 to run OS X and it think it's damn nice that Apple gave us one. I wont be upgrading my TiBook ever because of speed, it will be because something cooler and more envious comes out. Isn't that the way it is with Apple users? I think too many POWER HOGS are making to much noise. It is further more obvious that the 15' iMac is going the way of the dinosaur. In 6 months we'll see 17" only iMacs.

AND why is it that everyone keeps forgetting the awesome thing Apple did today with the eMac? A 17" G4 Mac for 999? Weren't we all asking a year ago for just that? Maybe if Apple would have called the eMac the the iMac II you'd all stop complaining.

And if i hear one more person complain about how apple is floundering especially APPLE PEOPLE i am going to go postal. Apple is doing the best it can while waiting for the 970 or G5 or what ever else will come out.

Again we caused this ourselves. We all wanted more power G4's in every model line MORE POWER! and now we got what we asked for. 4 model lines basically identical in every way.

Ask you self are you really using this much power or do you want bragging rights? Who cares if the PC idiot next to you has a 2.2 GHz P4? Why isn't it enuff to have a more efficent, more elegant, more unique computer?


Ok...now off my soap box...I got splinters from standing on it so long!
 
Originally posted by yzedf


Couple of things... Inspiron is a laptop. Do you not want another laptop? If you might want a laptop, check out the iBook.

As for the iMac... I would look at the intro model with 512MB and the AppleCare warranty for $1568/$1668 depending on if you want 2 or 1 sticks of memory in it. This machine would do most anything you want... unless you are doing serious programming and/or gaming.

As for the "low end model" being old... it also very reliable. The DDR that is in the higher models has been a joke so far. BlueTooth is not very usefull for most people yet, and Apple is not the company to get it moving (that would be Dell and Gateway).

If you want to straight up compare the low to mid range of the PC world vs the Mac world... you can't do it. PC is going to be cheaper.

I feel your pain as for the Inspiron though. Those things are truly horrid hot flimsy machines. I assume your warranty has expired...?
Click to expand...
\

I don't want another laptop. I've determined that I don't like them and don't ever move them, so it's pointless for me to get another. Heck, I don't care about bluetooth and all that stuff. I don't even know what it is/does. Yes, my warranty has expired on my laptop. The problems started within a month of the warranty's expiration, and that's been over a year ago. No matter what I or anyone else does, it still sucks.
 
Re: Re: LAME AS@ "UPGRADES"

Originally posted by wilburpan

I disagree. Go to the Dell website and price out a Dimension 2350 with a 2.0GHz P4, equivalent RAM, HD, LCD monitor, DVD burner, etc., and you will find that you will come within $200 of the 17" iMac.

This is including outfitting the Dell with WinXP Pro because of OSX's superior networking capability. Add into this the fact that the base software package for the Dell is nowhere near as good as the iMac software package, and the fact that the built in video on the Dell is inferior to the GeForce4 MX on the 17" iMac (and not upgradable), and the iMac starts looking like the better deal.

In fact, the software package is the most overlooked part of any discussion of the performance of Macintosh computers.

All the usual disclaimers in trying to compare Mac and PC systems apply.
Click to expand...
The imac is a better machine and when you do go to sell it it will be worth more!iphoto is just to cool,same with itunes,imovie,OSX, mac software is just better and easier:)
 
Re: Disappointment?

Originally posted by brian0526
It seems the mood is one of disappointment with the iMac updates. Since I haven't yet taken the plunge in to the Apple world, I'm not sure what I should have expected.

The updates seem to be pretty much in line with the most recent rumors. The one thing I still find baffling though is in the high end iMac Apple doesn't max out the memory in the first slot. That just seems dumb to me.

Speaking of that, I want to pretty much max out the RAM. Would you suggest I pay the people at the Apple store to switch the 256 MB chip for a 512 and buy a 512 from a third party? Or, maybe I should just leave the 256 in there and buy a 512 from a third party?

Given the price sensitivity in the market right now and the limitation on the G4 clock speed, I think this is about all Apple could have done for now. FW-800. Does a consumer really need this? What's going to drive those kinds of speeds? Gigabit Ethernet to surf the web? Don't think so.

This seems like a reasonable update. The way I figure it, I'm getting a 25% faster CPU, a 33% faster bus, double the graphics RAM for 10% less than I would have paid if I had bought a month ago.

Peace,
Brian
Click to expand...

You are right. This is a reasonable update, given what was available to Apple. Now we can always argue about prices...

NicoMan
 
I dont understand how people are complaining about how these computer or now to exspensive and thier susspost to be consumer machines... Hell they were more exspensive a day ago. The updates I can understand why your not all to happy with them, but I dont see what else apple could of done considering the processors thier working with and also the fact that if they did all that much more they would of had to jack up the price even more and most of you are complaining about what the price is NOW. All I know is if I was in the market for an imac Id definitly be getting one right now
 
Originally posted by possible switch
\

I don't want another laptop. I've determined that I don't like them and don't ever move them, so it's pointless for me to get another. Heck, I don't care about bluetooth and all that stuff. I don't even know what it is/does. Yes, my warranty has expired on my laptop. The problems started within a month of the warranty's expiration, and that's been over a year ago. No matter what I or anyone else does, it still sucks.
Click to expand...

You really should consider an eMac. It's an awesome machine. My best friend bought one because he wanted a cheaper iMac and has no regrets. True it is a bit bigger than the iMac but not that much bigger. It's a great machine for just about everything. If you really want the iMac the lower end iMac is the best deal for you. It will fly past your Dell and will be more than enough power for anything you want to do. Don't be confused by all the people in this group who complain and squabble over Mhz. I have a G4 TiBook 667 and an iMac 15" FP 700Mhz and they both do everything i throw at them, iPhoto, iTunes, iMovie, Office, Photoshop, the Sims etc.

Also I'd go with the older model because it has shown to be a very dependable machine with little or no issues with it's hardware.

Please switch and enjoy. I did and I guarantee you won't be sorry!
 
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