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

Apple Releases New iMacs

diamond.g said:
Sadly, unless CPU-Z and Intel Processor ID are wrong, it is Santa Rosa...
Click to expand...

I'm starting to believe that Apple has tweaked the EFI settings and overclocked FSB of these processors. In addition, 800Mhz SO-DIMMs became usable.

I can hardly believe that both the ID of the CPu and NB is read wrong.

Why did Apple do this insted of refreshing all the line to Montevina in June, I cannot understand...
 
Anaxarxes said:
I'm starting to believe that Apple has tweaked the EFI settings and overclocked FSB of these processors. In addition, 800Mhz SO-DIMMs became usable.

I can hardly believe that both the ID of the CPu and NB is read wrong.

Why did Apple do this insted of refreshing all the line to Montevina in June, I cannot understand...
Click to expand...

It is only a 66/33 Mhz overclock so it is doable (and very sparse). It is depressing though...
 
So is the final consensus Apple OC/Tweaked SR boards & CPUs for this revision?
 
Anaxarxes said:
This could be, since v1.44.2 does not support P45/G45/47 as well as PM45/GM45/47.

I could understand if the fields were blank. But this seems to be SR.
Click to expand...
I have to agree. I've seen blank fields in CPU-Z for unknown hardware with engineering samples. It happens more often with chipsets then processors. Processors tend to report something close to their final identification.
 
CWallace said:
Fair enough. Nice of Intel to tweak Santa Rosa for Apple to give it many of the benefits Montevina will be delivering to the other OEMS later in May/June.
Click to expand...
As much as we wanted Montevina what are the benefits over this special Santa Rosa for the iMac? :D

That sounds familiar.
 
CWallace said:
Fair enough. Nice of Intel to tweak Santa Rosa for Apple to give it many of the benefits Montevina will be delivering to the other OEMS later in May/June.
Click to expand...

If this is just an EFI overclock, the existing 2.8 Extremes can run it as well. I kinda think it is an interesting move on Apples part since Cantiga is supposed to be here in June.
 
GeekLawyer said:
Just in time for the "economic stimulus" monies that will begin to hit bank accounts today in the US.

Nice, predictable bump. I sure wish I could justify replacing my original white CD 20" iMac... but I'm not there yet. For everyone else, enjoy!
Click to expand...


I'm gonna stimulate some exercise with that cash and put it towards a new bicycle.... I have the CD 2.0 20" iMac too, and its just not a compelling upgrade. Even on demanding games under bootcamp, I just jack the video overclock a bit and its all good... Maybe next rev. BTW, is this a "real" video card now? (i.e. not bottom of the barrel)
 
diamond.g said:
It is only a 66/33 Mhz overclock so it is doable (and very sparse). It is depressing though...
Click to expand...

But it's also Exxxx, not Txxxx like Intel's Mobile line. But the chipset is PM965, so it's mobile.

It looks like Apple took a E8400 DESKTOP CPU, underclocked FSB to 1066Mhz from 1333Mhz, and changed the multiplier from 9 to 11.5 (that ensures the TDP of the CPU would not be affected since the speed bump will only be 66Mhz), and somehow managed to run this desktop CPU on a mobile chipset, which also does not support 1066Mhz FSB, nor 800Mhz DDR2 SO-DIMM.
 
Eidorian said:
As much as we wanted Montevina what are the benefits over this special Santa Rosa for the iMac? :D

That sounds familiar.
Click to expand...

In theory better thermals (slim enclosure makes more of a difference here). Oh and AFAIK Cantiga is going to support the Quad Core Mobile Penryn (the one with the crazy TDP before Nehalem is released).
 
Anaxarxes said:
But it's also Exxxx, not Txxxx like Intel's Mobile line. But the chipset is PM965, so it's mobile.

It looks like Apple took a E8400 DESKTOP CPU, under clocked FSB to 1066Mhz from 1333Mhz, and changed the multiplier from 9 to 11.5, and somehow managed to run this desktop CPU on a mobile chipset, which also does not support 1066Mhz FSB, nor 800Mhz DDR2 SO-DIMM.
Click to expand...
I thought the Sockets were different for the mobile chips?
 
Eidorian said:
As much as we wanted Montevina what are the benefits over this special Santa Rosa for the iMac? :D
Click to expand...

Nothing, really. Since the iMac doesn't use integrated graphics, which makes it all the nicer since we get "the goodies" early. :)


diamond.g said:
If this is just an EFI overclock, the existing 2.8 Extremes can run it as well. I kinda think it is an interesting move on Apples part since Cantiga is supposed to be here in June.
Click to expand...

I am not hip on the intricacies of EFI, but would this allow Apple to use their pre-existing stock of iMac systemboards manufactured last year?
 
CWallace said:
I am not hip on the intricacies of EFI, but would this allow Apple to use their pre-existing stock of iMac systemboards manufactured last year?
Click to expand...
I am going to say yes, assuming nothing else has changed (IE Apple was using Santa Rosa before just without Penryn). It is a pretty ingenious way to clear inventory. I would also suspect that even if Cantiga (Montevina) were to be used it may be a stealth update at this point.
 
diamond.g said:
In theory better thermals (slim enclosure makes more of a difference here). Oh and AFAIK Cantiga is going to support the Quad Core Mobile Penryn (the one with the crazy TDP before Nehalem is released).
Click to expand...
A fall Montevina update is still an option. At least we now know that the iMac can handle a 55W TDP CPU. Apple will more then likely overclock the QX9300 as well. It makes you wonder since the processor did report it was an E series vs. a T series processor.

diamond.g said:
I thought the Sockets were different for the mobile chips?
Click to expand...
The sockets are different.

CWallace said:
Nothing, really. Since the iMac doesn't use integrated graphics, which makes it all the nicer since we get "the goodies" early. :)
Click to expand...
I'm glad we agree.

Anaxarxes said:
Wouldn't surprise me if Intel made a custom LGA775 socket design for the mobile motherboard of these new iMacs.

They made a custom friggin' CPU for MBA.
Click to expand...
I was about to suggest the same thing. Intel's Core 2 desktop and mobile processors are more or less identical.
 
Theory:

Intel aggressively pushes 45nm parts, Apple had to update Notbook lines, that fine. Intel pushes more, Apple decides that they are going to run out of 65nm chips in iMac but does not want to use new45nm chips in new iMac:

1.) They tend to be slower because of L2-cache in entry level lines (3MB vs 4MB )
2.) Mobile chips are more expensive per clock, and on a desktop it really doesn't justify, even for a slim computer like iMac.
3.) Apple turns to Intel to solve the problem, Intel suggests to use desktop processors with tweaks, new desktop socket mobile motherboards for iMac and slightly lower TDP for processsors due to lower FSB speeds ( 65W of E8400 vs 55W of E8435 found in iMac )

Does this make sense?
 
Anaxarxes said:
Theory:

Intel aggressively pushes 45nm parts, Apple had to update Notbook lines, that fine. Intel pushes more, Apple decides that they are going to run out of 65nm chips in iMac but does not want to use new45nm chips in new iMac:

1.) They tend to be slower because of L2-cache in entry level lines (3MB vs 4MB )
2.) Mobile chips are more expensive per clock, and on a desktop it really doesn't justify, even for a slim computer like iMac.
3.) Apple turns to Intel to solve the problem, Intel suggests to use desktop processors with tweaks, new desktop socket mobile motherboards for iMac and slightly lower TDP for processsors due to lower FSB speeds ( 65W of E8400 vs 55W of E8435 found in iMac )

Does this make sense?
Click to expand...
Yeah, and it is still depressing, in the was excited about Cantiga kind of way...
 
Wow, starting to look pretty good. I bet quite a few people were surprised to see the speed, ram, HD, and gpu all get bumps. Especially the gpu, no one seemed to think that this would be available just yet.

I'm waiting for two things Apple, 3.6GHz or better cpu speed and a blu-ray drive.

I wonder if the release of a 30" iMac is closer now that cpus and gpus are getting that much cheaper. A nicely configured 24" is under $3k now, I'd pay $1K more for a 30", but it would have to have a screaming gpu.
 
mini?

so does this rule out mini's anytime soon? no tomorrow? what are the possibilities? :( please help. i was one minute away from buying a mini last week and i stumbled upon these rumors...
 
Axemantitan said:
The manufacturer's page says it's $729.99 and to play HD movies it says, "To play a protected BD movie in HD through a digital DVI or HDMI interface: HDCP GPU + HDCP ready display."
Click to expand...
I didn't think Apple had any HDCP compliant connections. What Mac application will play back a BluRay-disc movie anyway?
 
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