Aaaaand they fixed the specs... Now it's "2.7GHz quad-core Intel Core i5 processor (Turbo Boost up to 3.2GHz) with 4MB L3 cache". So far only on US apple site.
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 Updates iMac with Haswell and Faster PCIe Flash Storage
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Aaaaand they fixed the specs... Now it's "2.7GHz quad-core Intel Core i5 processor (Turbo Boost up to 3.2GHz) with 4MB L3 cache". So far only on US apple site.
Finally the 21" comes with 1GB of Vram by default!! Took them long enough. People should not have had to get the 27" just to get the 1GB (or more) of graphics. Suck though that the 21" 1TB HDD is only 5400rpm while the 27" 1TB HDD is 7200rpm. Too bad iMac's are not (or no longer) easy to upgrade. Hope new MBP and/or Mac Mini's are up next.
Last edited:
Baseline 27" is £1599 ($2555) here in the UK.
In the US it's £1125 ($1799)!
So we pay an extra £474 ($757).
I don't understand the massive price discrepancy.
The UK price includes VAT but the US price is tax free.
If you compare the VAT free price of £1332.50 ($2132) you can see we are only paying an extra £207.50 ($333).
They've always charged a lot more outside the US, it used to be a premium of between 8-12% (before tax) in the UK but it has crept up over the last couple of years.
They seem to get away with it so I can't see them reducing it any time soon.
C
champ01
Guest
I dislike this design so much.Its designed to make people pay way more then needed if they want to max it out. Its also designed so you can't repair it on your own. Basically in a few years it would be out of juice so you need to buy a totally new iMac or its broken and you'll need to pay way more then needed to get it repaired which wouldn't be worth it.
It seems that Apple has found a way to downgrade everything they make, create planned obsolescence to its full potential, drive up the costs for endusers and stopped listening to a single thing endusers really are asking for.
Green my ... Its not about an amazing product anymore where the endusers can go all the way. Now its all about looking pretty and getting filthy rich.
Personally I would like to have seen bigger version with a higher resolution and the option for touch screen but I also know Apple won't give us that because it would decrease their sales on iPads with the stripped down 64bit OS that's coming up soon. (and we all know sales from iOS devices are way higher)
I had so much hope for a new Mac Pro but its just as terrible as described above with the iMac.
On a brighter view of things. There are many crowd funding projects going on and many factories are beginning to be completely automated making it able for small companies with lower budgets to come up with new designs and produce them which wasn't doable before. This will the time where Apple has to step up again. (I hope)
It seems that Apple has found a way to downgrade everything they make, create planned obsolescence to its full potential, drive up the costs for endusers and stopped listening to a single thing endusers really are asking for.
Green my ... Its not about an amazing product anymore where the endusers can go all the way. Now its all about looking pretty and getting filthy rich.
Personally I would like to have seen bigger version with a higher resolution and the option for touch screen but I also know Apple won't give us that because it would decrease their sales on iPads with the stripped down 64bit OS that's coming up soon. (and we all know sales from iOS devices are way higher)
I had so much hope for a new Mac Pro but its just as terrible as described above with the iMac.
On a brighter view of things. There are many crowd funding projects going on and many factories are beginning to be completely automated making it able for small companies with lower budgets to come up with new designs and produce them which wasn't doable before. This will the time where Apple has to step up again. (I hope)
i think it is likely they will release a 4k cinema screen along side the mac pro
Last edited:
iMac Late 2013, DisplayPort Dual Mode?
All these Nvidia graphics (GT 750M, GT 755M, GTX 775M, GTX 780M... Intel Iris Pro 5200 I'm not sure) allow 4K resolution by DisplayPort 1.2 (not yet in these iMac) and DisplayPort Dual Mode
Anybody know if DisplayPort Dual Mode may be possible in iMac Late 2013?
Regards
All these Nvidia graphics (GT 750M, GT 755M, GTX 775M, GTX 780M... Intel Iris Pro 5200 I'm not sure) allow 4K resolution by DisplayPort 1.2 (not yet in these iMac) and DisplayPort Dual Mode
Anybody know if DisplayPort Dual Mode may be possible in iMac Late 2013?
Regards
It's just a matter of time before the cops nab 'em. My iMac had exchanged hands several times by the time it popped up at the Apple Store two days after it was stolen. The detective working the case backtracked it through all those people, getting names, cars, culprits on video, the works. They're gonna get theirs soon enough.
yes, it all depends how far away from your computer you sit - (i sit 40-50cm from a laptop and 60-70cm from a desktop)
http://isthisretina.com/ has a helpful calculator that you an use to see if a device fits apple's retina definition of being unable to discern an individual pixel
imac:
1920x1080 at 21.5" requires 86cm to be considered retina
2560x1440 at 27" requires 81cm to be considered retina
theoretical rimac:
3840x2160 at 21.5" requires 43cm to be considered retina
5120x2880 at 27" requires 41cm to be considered retina
mbp:
1280x800 at 13.3" requires 71cm to be considered retina
1440x900 at 15.4" requires 79cm to be considered retina
rmbp:
2560x1600 at 13.3" requires 38cm to be considered retina
2880x1800 at 15.4" requires 41cm to be considered retina
So a rmbp makes sense, however an rimac may be over the top, a slight resolution increase would be sufficient. (due to sitting further back when using a desktop)
But, this definition of retina is something apple came up with, "300ppi at 10-12 inches is retina", i believe if you do the math from an arc minute it is around 320-360ppi, which would increase those distances listed above.
furthermore these calculations are all based on 20/20 vision being normal, BUT studies have shown that normal vision is closer to 20/16 or 20/12, that would increase the distances listed above
additionally this paragraph from wikipedia:
Vernier acuity measures the ability to align two line segments. Humans can do this with remarkable accuracy, it is a hyperacuity. Under optimal conditions of good illumination, high contrast, and long line segments, the limit to vernier acuity is about 8 arc seconds or 0.13 arc minutes, compared to about 0.6 arc minutes (20/12) for normal visual acuity or the 0.4 arc minute diameter of a foveal cone. Because the limit of vernier acuity is well below that imposed on regular visual acuity by the "retinal grain" or size of the foveal cones, it is thought to be a process of the visual cortex rather than the retina. Supporting this idea, vernier acuity seems to correspond very closely (and may have the same underlying mechanism) enabling one to discern very slight differences in the orientations of two lines, where orientation is known to be processed in the visual cortex.
so if humans are super sensitive at noticing lines not aligning, aliasing is noticeable even past the point where you can't differentiate pixels
here is a post helping you to get a grasp on the sizes of arc seconds and arc minutes: http://darkskydiary.wordpress.com/2010/04/06/arcminutes-and-arcseconds/
(20/20 means: at 20feet you see what the 'average' person sees at 20feet)
Last edited:
It's nice to be surprised by an Apple announcement again Great update, but I rather see the Mac Pros.
Great update, but I rather see the Mac Pros.Since the iMac was updated without fanfare, I see two possible scenarios for the mini:
1) A significant redesign announced at a public press event
2) Same design, and a silent update in the future.
If the next mini keeps its current design, Apple is not going to make a big announcement, if they didn't make one for their flagship iMac.
Nice update. Sucks that there's no TBolt 2.0, but overall nice improvements to an already top notch Mac desktop.
If my Avid Media Composer needs die down next year, and I am not sitting in front of an NLE for hours a day, I may update my iMac to another iMac seeing that they are still very capable workstations with the right upgrades. Hell 4GB of VRAM . . . . FINALLY?
If not, then I may have to make the jump to the real workstation . . . and I don't mean the new MacPro.
If my Avid Media Composer needs die down next year, and I am not sitting in front of an NLE for hours a day, I may update my iMac to another iMac seeing that they are still very capable workstations with the right upgrades. Hell 4GB of VRAM . . . . FINALLY?
If not, then I may have to make the jump to the real workstation . . . and I don't mean the new MacPro.
This appears really similar to a new iMac config + 1TB fusion for $2199. Wondering what the extra $200 from buying new gets you? Specs looks very similar.
Could be for new monitors, especially considering they are promoting 4k support in the upcoming mac pro.
so what about ppl who bought recently launched imacs which is just 10months old.
apple think that it can silently refresh new imacs and people will easily accept the fact that they are fools.
not so cool stop fooling people apple
they should atleast replace processors for newly bought imacs
that is kind of silly. Apple has never really been on the leading edge of desktop hardware. Just look at the state of video cards on most Macs. The current Mac Pro has a years old solution, and the majority of the laptops and desktops use chipset video.
If you NEED razors edge performance there are always custom PC's for the gamers and such. You simply do not buy a Mac to have the latest, fastest processing power.
Apple tends to take the same approach as server manufacturers, they stick to a proven strategy of staying just behind the performance curve.
We passed the point where CPU bumps made a tangible difference to the user experience years ago. (though the guys that write the software we use keep eating our lunch in that regard). And face it, most Mac users are happily ignorant of the inner workings of their Mac.
Apple should of course take care of users that have been bitten by faulty GPUs such as with various iMacs and some of the Retina MBPs. But that is for something that does not work as advertised. The iMacs that they sold before this launch are perfectly valid boxes.
No i7 as a standard chip on the top of the line iMac. Only as an upgrade?? You tight fisted greedy bar stewards Apple. Hang your head in shame.
It gets you less. The refurb has the CPU, Fusion Drive, and graphics card upgrades (+ $200 + $200 + $150). The new only has the Fusion Drive (+ $200).
New has an i5 CPU, refurb an i7.
New has a much slower video card (775M new, 680MX refurb).
? Ahh you're right, I missed the i5 -> i7. Graphics card isn't important to me but see how it could be for others.
New also has the Haswell arc, and the 802.11ac. I'm pretty sure that's everything.. just trying to think if it's worth the $400 price difference, as the new machine I would want (27", i7, Fusion) would come to $2399 vs $1999 for the refurb. Decisions, decisions.