Is the rumored refresh actually worth while for most users?

[oYx]

Whoa, hold on there Tonto.... Last I checked Ivy Bridge is only marginally faster than Sandy Bridge. I'm pretty sure if Sandy Bridge is no longer viable, then Ivy Bridge won't be far behind it. Using the Longevity argument is silly.

My 2007 17" MBP would have been switched out 18 months ago had it just been 10% slower. On my current project, even being 5% slower would mean an immediate iMac purchase. I am glad I have the opportunity to wait for the new iMac.

 

[LaCobra]

ya know. If had the money I would buy it right now.

 

[David085]

if it doesn't come with a Retina Display it isn't worth waiting.

 

[Mister Bumbo]

Amazing how Apple manages to convince people the latest gimmicks (Retina) are must-haves. ^^ Like the people saying "I won't buy until retina iMacs come..." actually have thought "Awh... I can see the pixels..., I'm losing my eyesight because I'm sitting to close... but I can see the pixels... this is SO last-season... *sigh*... ".

If you don't want pixels: go outside, it's nice there, there's flowers and trees.

 

[antidromic]

It's certainly worthwhile for us 2% of Steam gamers who use a Mac. The rumoured 7970M or the 680M which should be in the new iMac will be simply amazing in comparison to the current 6970M.

For example:

Max Payne 3: 6970M - 27fps; 7970M - 50fps; 680M - 42fps
Skyrim: 6970M - 30fps; 7970M - 56fps; 680M - 54fps
BF3: 6970M - 19fps; 7970M - 36fps; 680M - 34fps

Every modern game is playable on ultra! This is really exciting, especially for the iMac; the high end 27" is becoming viable as a gaming computer with a Windows dual-boot.

 

[Roller]

I need to replace my 2009 iMac, which is slow for some tasks (mostly working in Aperture) and will in turn be replacing a 2006 iMac that my family uses. I'm waiting for the 2012 iMac because I want to base my purchasing decision on what actually ships. But if it does have USB 3, as I hope it will, that'll help with image transfers from my next DSLR, which will have a USB 3 interface.

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

For however it applies to you personally---work...school...recreational, family, etc--whatever applies to you. How will the 2012 iMac improvements make a noticeable difference in however you use your computer?

Ivy Bridge runs much cooler (22 nm 3D Tri-Gate transistors), allows faster file transfers (USB 3.0), QuickTime under Mountain Lion supports Quick Sync H.264 encoding, which means realtime encoding of 1080p video, Quick Sync on the Ivy Bridge platform is ≈ 30 percent faster than on the Sandy Bridge platform, the IGP HD 4000 supports OpenCL and is 60 percent faster than the HD 3000, and so on. Higher RAM speed is good, but not really necessary.

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

Not even close to the same speed. USB 3 is only about two to three times fater than USB 2 in real world use. It is not even close to sata or esata speed.

No, USB 3.0 is much, much faster than USB 2.0. Here is the benchmark:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5997/ssd-and-usb-30-performance-of-the-retina-display-macbook-pro

.

 

[woodbine]

swap my MP for an iMac

I have a 2008 MP that will be slower than the next iMac. Since I only hammer the MP once a week or so (Compressor renders) I think it will be a welcome move. My MP is crammed full of drives, so I'll miss that, but I am already checking out RAID boxes for some of the drives. The MP + display sucks about 500w when its running on maximum and about 300w on idle, so an iMac will hopefully cut down on the bills.
Originally I used the MP for editing video, photoshop, compressor and motion, but over the years I use it less and less.