There are plenty of them for the Core i5 750 and i7 860 to get a feeling for it.
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.
Apple Releases Updated iMac Models With 21.5- and 27-Inch LED Screens
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The same core i7 chip scored a 19876 in cinebench. That's about 1000 faster than the dual quad 2.8 Xeon (prev gen) I use at the office.
It's the "Cyber Power gamer extreme" on this link:
http://hothardware.com/Articles/Cyb...me-3000/?page=6
If that cinebench number holds true on the iMac, then I will be VERY happy.
The quad-core iMac seems like a real winner in almost every aspect, but it would have been nice to see Apple cram a more cutting-edge video processor into the machine - not the same chip (Radeon 4850) I have in my 6-month-old 24" iMac (which wasn't even cutting-edge then).
Why Apple always lags in the GPU department truly befuddles me.
The quad-core iMac seems like a real winner in almost every aspect, but it would have been nice to see Apple cram a more cutting-edge video processor into the machine - not the same chip (Radeon 4850) I have in my 6-month-old 24" iMac (which wasn't even cutting-edge then).
Why Apple always lags in the GPU department truly befuddles me.
You are befuddled? Maybe ignorant of the facts is all.
The iMac line uses a mobile GPU. It's completely impractical to put a desktop part in the iMac, as it would require a huge chassis, would sound like a jet engine, etc.
The absolute best ATI mobile GPU that is available to Apple would be the 4870 mobile GPU, which runs about 30% faster than the 4850 part they are currently using. I would expect to see the 4870 on the next refresh.
The 4850 part is only about 8 months old. It was announced over a year ago and only began shipping in machines about 6-7 months ago.
Another option would be to run the mobile 4870 in a crossover dual configuration. If buying an Alienware, etc, with this configuration it adds about $700 to the cost to configure, so I have a feeling Apple doesn't feel there is a huge market for this in the iMac.
To summarize... if you are frustrated with iMac GPU choices it's because you don't understand (or don't care) that it is a mobile part.
If you want a desktop GPU then buy a Mac Pro, or buy a Windoze tower and turn it into a Hackentosh.
Um, thanks - I knew this already.
So why not include this "absolute best" GPU in Apple's brand-new "absolute best" machine? This is what I'm griping about.
And a 30% gain is significant.
You're incorrect.
I don't want a desktop GPU, I want the best mobile GPU available for Apple's top-of-the-line iMac. And the Radeon 4850 ain't it.
It's always amusing to hear the "Kool-Aid" or "sheep" accusations from the Windows (90% market share) crowd. These people apparently own no mirrors.
But hey, Windows 7 was AidenShaw's idea!
As is apparent by his Amway style sig - a-penny-a-click-will-turn-the-trick....
Um, thanks - I knew this already.
You (and I) don't know what kind of heat constraints, etc, they have with this new iMac. It's entirely possible that it cannot handle the heat output from the 4870 part.
It could also be that they don't want to eat the $50-$100 cost difference between the two parts so early in the model launch when they are absorbing higher than normal air freight costs, etc.
Also, when I take another look at benchmarks between these parts, there is actually only about a 10-15% difference in nearly all applications between the 4850 mobility and the 4870 mobility. So, you aren't missing much.
It is worth noting that the ATI Mobility 5000 series was announced four weeks ago and should be available in time for the next iMac refresh. This part will offer real improvements over the current series and I would say has a high likelihood of being made available in the next iMac refresh, at least as a BTO option.
If you are a GPU hound then it makes sense to wait six months and see if this part makes it into the next iMac update.
Overclock the 4850.
I'd rather wait for this Spring 2010 iMac that I think will be offered;
Price - $1999
i7 CPU standard.
ATI Radeon 5000, standard or $100 BTO.
BD-ROM drive standard... burner $199 BTO.
I will buy that, my corporate discount will pay for the RAM upgrade to 8GB. I will be set with that Mac for at least a couple of years.
ATI's Mobility HD 58xx isn't too far off but I don't expect Apple to pick it up that soon. Is the corporate discount good enough right now to be a better deal than just adding another 4 GB of RAM from a third party?
That's entirely possible. It's also entirely possible that Apple doesn't mind being one step behind in their GPUs, as has been their history over recent years.
That should simply be part of doing business in the "premium product" category.
My GPU needs have greatly lessened since I bought a PS3 and decided to do all my gaming that way. I'm tired of having to reboot in Boot Camp only to have to deal with all the hackers and cheats in the PC gaming world. Methinks console gaming better levels the playing field and will provide a more enjoyable experience overall (though I don't game all that much these days anyway).
I'm just hoping someone finds a way to connect an HDMI device (i.e. PS3) to the iMac via the new video-in capability.
(BTW, Uncharted 2 is absolutely amazing - visually and gameplay-wise.)
I'm tempted to do the same, although Spring 2010 feels like a long, long time away...
Overclock the 4850.
Can this be done on the iMac? Do you have a link to a good How To?
I'm sure netkas knows how to do such magic under OS X but under Windows it's dirt simple. I remember clocking my Mobility X1600 back to stock speeds and beyond. Those were good days.
Come on now. Apple was able to bring the 4850 mobility part out in the same time frame (well, there was an extra 60 day delay). If Apple is going to go with ATI exclusively in all of their high end iMacs I think they will get advance orders of parts and the 5000 is a shoe-in for next refresh as long as the parts are out.
8GB of Ram has gone up to $200 so it's really no cheaper than getting it from Apple. The only advantage going the self-upgrade route is you get $90 of Apple memory you can eBay for $50. My time isn't worth it to save $50-$100 I would just get it pre-installed.
I believe the new iMacs have 4 RAM slots, with only two filled (based on what my new iMac-buying friend was told at the Apple store). You can get 2GB modules for around $50 a pop, so for $100 your 4GB iMac is now an 8GB iMac.
The $100 saved seems worth the time to turn a couple of screws and pop in the new modules. To me anyway.
I would not recommend mixing old modules with new ones. Ever. If you are going to put 8GB in the best bet would be to buy four matching new 2GB modules and then sell the old ones.
I can't imagine any noticeable impact if the new modules are the same capacity/speed/spec and quantity (i.e. not having an odd number of modules). As long as you buy good RAM, of course.
Insisting on a matching brand across all modules seems like overkill - and even then you can run into problems between modules.
You can do whatever you like, just speaking from my own experience building and repairing machines over the past 18 odd years.
It's only recommended to not mix modules within the same set, i.e. dual channel or tri-channel groupings. Outside of that, it doesn't matter.
Do you have to put ram of all the same size/spec in the iMac? How does this model work- do you have to add two at a time that are the same size, or can you add a single 4 GB chip?
I can't honestly tell you with the most recent one without doing more research, but assuming it's like any other dual channel machine, you have to put them in pairs, i.e. (2) of the same 2GB module, in one pair, (2) of the same (but perhaps different than the first two) in the other pair.
That's how it's been for dual channel so far, in my experience.