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 to Use Newly Released Quad-Core Desktop Processors?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Take a chill pill.
They're not worthless just because you've put in a bunch of hours into the Gainestown thread.
They are, in fact, quite decent chips.
In other words; enough with the zealotry.
Having more cores ties in nicely to Grand Central coming this year.
How the iMac would cope with the heat I have no clue, maybe they can do it, maybe they can't!!
Holding out for a Core i7 iMac, so going to be a while yet!!!
How the iMac would cope with the heat I have no clue, maybe they can do it, maybe they can't!!
Holding out for a Core i7 iMac, so going to be a while yet!!!
It's possible the iMac could put on a little weight to support these chips, the performance and cost benefits could pay off for it.
The Mac Midi is almost possible though... Apple might just be dumping both the Mini & ATV and replacing them with a single media center system, if these Atom/Ion rumors are to be believed. it could pave the way for a new consumer desktop in their range.
The whole economic situation might push apple to be a little more aggressive with their range.
The Mac Midi is almost possible though... Apple might just be dumping both the Mini & ATV and replacing them with a single media center system, if these Atom/Ion rumors are to be believed. it could pave the way for a new consumer desktop in their range.
The whole economic situation might push apple to be a little more aggressive with their range.
A Core i7 iMac would be nice. Don't see that till the end of the year assuming usage of mobile chips. The C2Q's proposed draw too much power to be used in an iMac with it's existing cooling system.
Yea it will be bedroom quiet. Thats because Apple aren't going to make anything like that. You can dream I suppose, in your bedroom!!
I think "New Product" means "New Product." I suspect Apple is going to release an upgradeable mid tower so many people have been clamoring for. The iMac is good for a lot of people but not for people that want to have the ability to upgrade their video card or people that want more then two memory slots. The Mac mini pretty much has the same issue, hasn't been selling well and has the same form factor as Apple TV (another product that's not doing that well.) The Best thing for Apple would be to release a Mid Tower and then put an optical drive in AppleTV and have the Apple TV and OS X GUIs (installable option) available as two different users. Traditionally you would think that a mid tower would cannibalize iMac and/or MacPro sales, but with so many people moving to portables it would help to galvanize Apple's position on the desktop for a lot of people that have major complaints about Apple's desktop strategies and go about building Hackintoshes to attempt to resolve those problems. It also wouldn't hurt Apple to look at the success of games on the iPhone and decide to take the idea of getting game developers on board seriously.
I could see a high-end 24" iMac with quad-cores coming. I don't see all iMacs going quad-core right now. The price points don't make sense.
I've never understood Apple's desktop strategy. Offering a consumer level tower wouldn't require them to have to sit on too much excess inventory (usually a reason a company reduces their offerings.)
I think its plausible to see a new product that marries the Apple TV and Mac Mini, but seeing Apple's long time strategy on desktops, I think we'll all be disappointed with the outcome. I doubt it would be anything along the lines of the old G4 tower.
However, being shamed by HP's Best Of Show (a pc at macworld! ha ha ha!)maybe steve-o's ego will be hurt enough to push a mac version of such a device.
If I could plot a graph of xMac likelihood, I reckon it would be peaking right about now, albeit at around 25%. Between intel's roadmap, the recession, and the conflicting rumours about the mac mini getting bigger/smaller with less/more features and power, the promised land cannot be far away.
The fact is that something drastic has to happen to apple's desktops now anyways, purely because of the way nehalem is being rolled out. Whether it be desktop-class chips in the iMac (surely a tall order now that they're half the thickness of the g5 days...?), Mac Pro (which seems like a big step down), a bigger mini or (gasp) a new product altogether (that looks suspiciously like the cube), there is no way apple can twiddle their thumbs waiting for mobile variants whilst dell gets a 6-month lead on this generation of processors.
Come fervent product-line-gap-denying zealots, fanbois, protesters of cannibalism and even the few rational observers of apple's nichey marketing strategy (by which I mean you, Tallest Skil): heap your venom upon us. For my own part, i'm used to it. I may relent and buy an MBP with external display but I will never give up hope. Why, just 2 years ago most of this forum was adamant that there would never be a multitouch fullscreen video ipod, because it would cannibablise iPhone sales, even tho the iPhone hadn't even come out yet and the iPod had an 85% marketshare to protect.
The fact is that something drastic has to happen to apple's desktops now anyways, purely because of the way nehalem is being rolled out. Whether it be desktop-class chips in the iMac (surely a tall order now that they're half the thickness of the g5 days...?), Mac Pro (which seems like a big step down), a bigger mini or (gasp) a new product altogether (that looks suspiciously like the cube), there is no way apple can twiddle their thumbs waiting for mobile variants whilst dell gets a 6-month lead on this generation of processors.
Come fervent product-line-gap-denying zealots, fanbois, protesters of cannibalism and even the few rational observers of apple's nichey marketing strategy (by which I mean you, Tallest Skil): heap your venom upon us. For my own part, i'm used to it. I may relent and buy an MBP with external display but I will never give up hope. Why, just 2 years ago most of this forum was adamant that there would never be a multitouch fullscreen video ipod, because it would cannibablise iPhone sales, even tho the iPhone hadn't even come out yet and the iPod had an 85% marketshare to protect.
Put'em in the MBP. They must be sitting on their hands with quad core integration until snow leopard is ready.
Desktop chips in the iMac seems like a tall order. Desktop chips in the MBP is nothing short of impossible. The battery would last 15 mins., and you'd be frying eggs off the new unibody enclosure.
When you listen to what Steve says, Apple are more interested in performance per watt rather than outright power.
I don't see desktop chips in the iMac. Yes I know the G5 was a desktop chip, but I don't see it happening again!
I guess that is why they are developing snow leopard - making the most out of lower powered chips.
I don't see desktop chips in the iMac. Yes I know the G5 was a desktop chip, but I don't see it happening again!
I guess that is why they are developing snow leopard - making the most out of lower powered chips.
You're right of course, instruction set, cache size, memory bandwidth, OS and program code etc etc the list goes on, all play a big part. Not to mention that while processor clock frequencies increased x120 bus speeds have only increased about x10 (mid-late 386 to C2D).
Still, isn't it amusing somehow how the number 3Ghz stands as an invisible wall? While some have peeked over, it's stood there for surely 6 years now.
At any rate I'm crossing my fingers for a Desktop-based iMac, and Mini (in a slightly bigger case and with a discrete GPU).
iMac is a home machine though and I suspect home users do prefer glossy as it makes the colours pop more than a matte. I'm with you as I do a lot of photography and a glossy screen makes colour accuracy more difficult.
Are you sure you don't mean 4 Ghz? My girlfriend's ancient (c. 2004) laptop has a cpu of 3.06 Ghz (as does the top end imac). In fact, Prescott processors reached 3.8 Ghz before intel regressed to the Pentium III design to launch the core range.