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

iMac Shipments Running Low Ahead of Refresh?

Hmmm....

IndustrialSpace said:
Do you think that they will widen or deepen the depth so that the components are not so crunched up inside creating more heat and possibly having some affect on the yellow tint issue?
Click to expand...
]

The last few refreshes they've made them thinner and thinner - thinking out loud it would appear that they would try to go for an even thinner form factor.

However, it's possible they could do some sort of ventilation mod that helps
it vent heat outwards in an easier way. I'm not sure how, that's their job!
 
Reason077 said:
Reflection was a much bigger problem in the CRT days, because the glass was not flat.
Click to expand...

...but the area of todays average screen exceeds that from 10 years, when CRT's ruled. Since more area = more potential to see reflection, what advantage flatness provides is reduced somewhat by the area increase.
 
Ah

deafmute said:
is this thread is only for the 21.5" model only? i prefer to have the i7 quadcore configuration becus i do need high end processor and big screen as 27" is ideal for my rendering and graphic project.

actually today i just ordered the 27" imac. but the payment yet to be done so the purchased is still hold. but if apple does offer i7quad model same time as those 21.5" as mention above i surely choose the 27" machines if the price isnt much different..


post before:

Im a university student. I do architecture, graphic editing and rendering.

The question is i want to buy the latest 27" iMac i7, is it worth to wait for the latest release or just buy the current model?
I googled and the most said that Apple will released new model in fall, which is late September, or some said they will released maybe a months or two. I need a high end mac (processor n graphic), moreover i needed it urgently before my final project, but if i do purchased it now, the spec of the graphic is quite old 4850 512mb or worth waiting for the ddr5 5x 1g series?
The issues is apart from i7 4cores, i need a better graphic card for my 3d rendering and gaming experience.

Any advice is really appreciated. Thanks.
Click to expand...

My own experience: I ended up getting the 27" i7 iMac simply because it WAS the only way to get a i7 processor versus the "Welcome to 2008, it wants its processor back " Core2duo processors.

I needed something a quantum leap beyond my old G5. And a leap beyond the silly two-core core2duo.

My desk right now is absurdly packed with display hardware, that's the only problem: See:

studio.jpg



They may very well release a new model but I'm pretty much set with this setup for the next few years.
 
deconstruct60 said:
Not it hasn't. there is a Core i5 760 at a higher price and higher clock: $205 and 2.8 GHz respectively. It didn't replace. It is another similarly priced option.

Intel did not cut the price on the 750 when they introduced the 760. The public 1K unit price is still exactly the same as last year: $196. You'll see some on the net for a $4-5 of dollars less, but that would have zero impact on iMac price. Likewise the $9 differential Apple could drop in the 760 with probably no impact on the iMac price is shave a couple dollars on something else from last years bill of materials. So it is a natural candidate for a speed bump update if going that route (skipping Sandy Bridge).

It is not cost, but power that is the bigger blocker to moving it to the 21.5" iMacs. The C2D's were in the same general price zone, but weight in at 30 less Watts.
Click to expand...
The Core i7 860 and 870 share the same space at $284 and $294 respectively.

The Core i7 950 should be hitting $294 in August.

What is Intel doing with Lynnfield? They're still offering their older parts at their original prices.
 
meatballs said:
They're probably "upgrading" the graphics to 320M. I'm guessing no i5. So it's still going to be a weak ass computer, I love the size though.
Click to expand...

Err, the base 21.5" might get the 320m with the Core 2 Duo but I highly doubt Apple will do that with the higher end 21.5".

What I'm expecting processor wise:
Base 21.5": Wolfdale/Clarkdale i3
High-end 21.5": Clarkdale i3/i5
Base 27": Lynnfield i5
High-end 27": Lynnfield i7
 
aiqw9182 said:
Err, the base 21.5" might get the 320m with the Core 2 Duo but I highly doubt Apple will do that with the higher end 21.5".

What I'm expecting processor wise:
Base 21.5": Wolfdale/Clarkdale i3
High-end 21.5": Clarkdale i3/i5
Base 27": Lynnfield i5
High-end 27": Lynnfield i7
Click to expand...

High end? The 27" i5/i7 is the high-end. The 21.5" will continue to use the ancient Core 2 Duo processors. :apple:s got an entire warehouse full of them.
 
aiqw9182 said:
Err, the base 21.5" might get the 320m with the Core 2 Duo but I highly doubt Apple will do that with the higher end 21.5".

What I'm expecting processor wise:
Base 21.5": Wolfdale/Clarkdale i3
High-end 21.5": Clarkdale i3/i5
Base 27": Lynnfield i5
High-end 27": Lynnfield i7
Click to expand...

Base 21.5": i3 540 w/ CTO i3 550
High End 21.5": i3 550 w/ CTO i5 660

Base 27": i5 750 w/ CTO i5 760
High End 27" i7 920 w/ CTO i7 930

The quad core i5's and i7's are tricky because there's a huge price gap once you get beyond 2.8Ghz.
 
meatballs said:
High end? The 27" i5/i7 is the high-end. The 21.5" will continue to use the ancient Core 2 Duo processors. :apple:s got an entire warehouse full of them.
Click to expand...

You seem to have no idea that there are different processors in the i3/i5/i7 spectrum. The dual core Clarkdale i3 and i5's are suitable for the 21.5". The quad core Lynnfield i5/i7 are not.
 
swissmann said:
I can offer my opinion. I am a photographer/videographer. I use Final Cut Studio and Adobe CS5 suite. Sounds like our needs are very similar. I was comparing GeekBench results today to try to answer the same kind of questions (I know not by any means an inclusive answer but hopefully helpful data). My 2006 Mac Pro has an ATI Radeon 4870 graphics card, 4 GB of RAM, and I have about 1.5 TB of hard drive space. The GeekBench for my system came in around 5500. The average for the 8 core current Mac Pro is 11,735, whereas the current Quad Core Mac Pro is 8216. The score for the i5 (might be the i7) is 8237. I also use a an older 2.16 Core 2 Due 20" iMac which scores 2842.

I think the old iMac (2842 score) is capable and my Mac Pro (5500) is comfortable. By that I mean I kind of wait from time to time with the iMac but only wait for the Mac Pro when I'm doing a final render or video coding. I can use Motion quite fluidly and the actual editing of video is mostly in real time. Aperture hogs Memory and the graphics card but processors usually aren't strained and Photoshop is usually pretty instantaneous. In my opinion if the computer is waiting for me it is fast enough, anything more than that is overkill not being utilized. So basically with my current workload I want something as fast as my Mac Pro.

So in short I've decided that the iMac and the Mac Pro (current models) are both luxury (more than what I'm comfortable with and slightly overkill that will be used with really intense things from time to time). The question comes down to do I want things internal or external - like hard drives, blu-ray drives, etc. and how much do I want to spend.

I'm definitely waiting for a refresh in hopes that a 2 TB drive option is cheaper, that the overall configuration is cheaper, and the graphics card update to the 5800 line. It's not really about the processor now as it is the video card and amount of RAM.

My dream configuration is a 27" iMac i5 (or i7) with 4-8 GB RAM stock and another 4-8 GB RAM 3rd party, 2 TB HD, ATI Radeon 5870 graphics card for about $2,500 ($2,000 would be nice).

Given what the current iMacs are configured as I don't think this is out of the realm of possibility. The big thing that keeps me away from the Mac Pro is for a similar configuration I calculate it will be somewhere between $1,200 and $2,200 more depending on if you get the 24" display or the 30" display. It is just way more money.

So answering your questions:
1 - I think the 27" with a graphics update is good enough.
2 - I think the quad core is worth it.
3 - I'd wait for an update.
4 - I doubt prices will be more - I'd guess about the same or maybe a bit less.

A long winded answer but hopefully it helps you in your decision.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that in depth reply!

I guess it boils down to this:
- Todays 27" quad core will handle the projects I plan on doing.
- I could wait for the refresh, but it probably won't be so far ahead of the current system that I would feel foolish if I don't wait.
 
I predict Clarkdales for the 21.5" and Lynnfields (i5-760, i7-875) for the 27". However, I could still see a 3.06 Ghz C2D + 320M on the lowest end machine.

I'm more excited about the GPU updates and improved quality control...
 
I just check TechData and Ingrammicro and both distributers are showing me negative quantities in most warehouses.

-Patrick
 
ouimetnick said:
He was being sarcastic. There is almost no Mac news anymore.:(



Yes. This article is about the base model 21.5" iMac. So if they refresh the entry level 21.5" iMac, I want an Core i5 CPU or better.
Click to expand...

Actually, I'd like to see a 24" iMac with core i5/i7 quad core processors. If Apple and other software vendors actually write applications to GCD (Final Cut Express 5 for example) then such a machine would fit a great niche for consumer video producers. The 27" could remain the flagship while a 24" would make a great baseline for non-professional power users of apps like Final Cut Express and Aperture.
 
Just my dang luck.
I had a 2006 iMac that had the faulty graphics card issue. So I sorta got forced into buying a new one about 3-4 weeks ago. Now a new one is gunna come out and I bet they will not swap it for me.


Rrgggghhhh
 
meatballs said:
Meh, you're argument is void. Mark my words: the new 21.5"s will have Core 2 Duos.

:)
Click to expand...
I lol'd.

The only one in this thread who thinks that both 21.5" models will continue to use the Core 2 Duo is you. The ONLY reason for Apple to use the Core 2 Duo is for the 320m. The current 4670 in the high end 21.5" is superior to the 320m. So you are expecting Apple to downgrade the performance over the previous model? Lol. Just, lol.
 
Seems to be a LOT of people wanting an AG option in their iMac's and MacBook's.


I hope Apple will listen and make it an option across the board ... highly unlikely.

Why does Apple seem to push the glossy so much, who cares if the customer wants glossy or matte/AG it's not that difficult to offer options ...

Other pc manufacturers do, and we're paying a premium for Apple products as it is.
 
aiqw9182 said:
I lol'd.

The only one in this thread who thinks that both 21.5" models will continue to use the Core 2 Duo is you. The ONLY reason for Apple to use the Core 2 Duo is for the 320m. The current 4670 in the high end 21.5" is superior to the 320m. So you are expecting Apple to downgrade the performance over the previous model? Lol. Just, lol.
Click to expand...

lol all you want but the Core 2s are cost effective.

@seanozz: that's :apple: for ya.

@entatlrg: glossy looks good at the :apple: store.
 
meatballs said:
lol all you want but the Core 2s are cost effective.

@seanozz: that's :apple: for ya.

@entatlrg: glossy looks good at the :apple: store.
Click to expand...

Either you are a troll or you really are clueless. The Clarkdale Core i3/i5 chips cost less than the Wolfdale Core 2 Duo's. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
 
entatlrg said:
Seems to be a LOT of people wanting an AG option in their iMac's and MacBook's.


I hope Apple will listen and make it an option across the board ... highly unlikely.

Why does Apple seem to push the glossy so much, who cares if the customer wants glossy or matte/AG it's not that difficult to offer options ...

Other pc manufacturers do, and we're paying a premium for Apple products as it is.
Click to expand...

Still working on my matte 24" white iMac ;)

A couple issues with the iMacs that are present revision after revision it seems:

1) Lacklustre graphics card
2) No matte option
3) Poor quality control on screens.

I took back a 27" iMac after the yellow tinge issue. My iPad has a yellow tinge as well but I'm too busy right now to deal with it.

From a business perspective you can't argue with the way they build them.

1) Cheap graphics card
2) Shinny products sell
3) Savings on quality control!

And they sell- so why make them better? Seriously!
 
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