Loving the new ULV iMac as a super energy efficient complete desktop

[giggles]

Think about it.
Would be nice to see someone do some kill-a-watt tests on it.
Guess the whole thing draws less than a 40W incandescent bulb in light usage at mid brightness.

If only RAM was at least CTO-able to 16Gb...

 

[thejadedmonkey]

Think about it.
Would be nice to see someone do some kill-a-watt tests on it.
Guess the whole thing draws less than a 40W incandescent bulb in light usage at mid brightness.

If only RAM was at least CTO-able to 16Gb...

The difference is power draw between an ULV CPU and a high end i7 at rest is negligible. And under load, you want the CPU that is going to finish the computation the quickest. There's no reason to buy one of these "new" iMacs if you're looking for energy efficiency.

 

[giggles]

What about light load or leaving it on to download stuff?

 

[taelan28]

Its a desktop, its plugged in, so power doesn't matter. Im not expert on watts these CPUs use, but like the person above mentioned its pretty damn negligible in the grand scheme of things.

 

[chrfr]

Its a desktop, its plugged in, so power doesn't matter.

That's not true, especially with more than one computer in a house or an office building.
With the iMac the screen is a significant portion of the power draw so it's unlikely that the low end model will be significantly more efficient than the quad-core i5 model.
I would assume that Apple will be updating this document but hasn't done so for the 2014 yet: http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3559

 

[Puonti]

Its a desktop, its plugged in, so power doesn't matter

Saving energy matters to some of us, so it's good that Apple's showing interest in it. Not every product they create need fit everyone's needs, and those who are more interested in processing power than saving energy are already well catered to (and will continue to be, I have no doubt about that).

I for one welcome cooler desktop machines. More heat is the last thing I need during summer and AC is not an option (when talking about energy use). Will this iMac solve that problem? No, because I need a bigger display. But it confirms Apple's continued interest in energy-efficiency.

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

The higher end 21.5" iMacs (like the one I have) consume 0.9 watts when in sleep, 30-35 watts idle and 70-90 watts maxed out. I expect the new cheap model to be very good when running idle as well as when doing video and photo editing.

 

[BJonson]

The only benefit to this model that I can see is less heat generated and that is all I can think of but that said I don't know how hot a new imac gets as I gave up on them. All my imacs get way to hot.

 

[Zellio]

Think about it.
Would be nice to see someone do some kill-a-watt tests on it.
Guess the whole thing draws less than a 40W incandescent bulb in light usage at mid brightness.

If only RAM was at least CTO-able to 16Gb...

Somebody could see right now by using a new macbook air, turning off the monitor, and attaching a 21.5 inch IPS screen to it...

And then they can disconnect and run their 'complete desktop' on the go where as you can't with this wannabe desktop that's really a laptop.

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

Somebody could see right now by using a new macbook air, turning off the monitor, and attaching a 21.5 inch IPS screen to it...

And then they can disconnect and run their 'complete desktop' on the go where as you can't with this wannabe desktop that's really a laptop.

But that would cost more money -_-
And the monitor would be of less quality -_-

 

[Truthfulie]

It's nice for people to check email, web surf, YouTube, Facebook, etc...but people use even lower powered devices (and much more convenient) such as iPad for those things now days. Anything else that requires a decent amount of computing power, you probably save more power and time by having powerful hardware such as i5 or i7 and getting the job done quickly therefore more efficient. Idle power draw isn't that big even with an i7. I see very small group of people who would purchase this product, really.

You could buy a Mac mini base model and hook up an IPS display, which would total about the same as ULV iMac. But Mac mini gives you expandability, more bang for the buck and be just as power efficient.

 

[deconstruct60]

It's nice for people to check email, web surf, YouTube, Facebook, etc...but people use even lower powered devices (and much more convenient) such as iPad for those things now days.

But you can't back-up your iPad (or iPhone) to another iPad. The 500GB vs 64GB storage is a significant use case difference. Likewise keeping collection of photos local. The iOS devices are rather poor at that for long term archival storage.

The "Cloud"? Not everyone wants to store their personal data out onto Apple's website.

Email? .... similar issue of not only the new email but the email from way back also. Going to find folks who want that local rather than off on some remote server.

Anything else that requires a decent amount of computing power, you probably save more power and time by having powerful hardware.... I see very small group of people who would purchase this product, really.

There are far more people who are budget constrained than have hard above average computational horsepower requirements. The semi regular retail price at the larger volume 3rd party Mac retailers is probably going to drop below $1000 on a regular basis. Apple sales force to institutions/businesses are also going to likely often push these machines sub $,1000. Passing that "mental block barrier" is going to push this out of the "very small group" zone. I probably won't be the best selling configuration, but it isn't going to be "so small it doesn't make a difference" either.

You could buy a Mac mini base model and hook up an IPS display, which would total about the same as ULV iMac. But Mac mini gives you expandability, more bang for the buck and be just as power efficient.

There is a large group of folks who just want to buy it , plug it in , and it works. That is why iMac sales highly dominate Mac Mini sales.

Sure the builder/tweaker crowd will be happier with an Mac Mini but as long as it is 'same price', the much larger market is going to skip the 'buy from multiple vendors and build" phase. The submarket that is highly fixated on "expandability , tweaking, and building" aren't going to buy many Macs anyway. Mac have 6-7% of the market.... 90+% of folks don't buy them and Apple doesn't loose tons of sleep over that over that split.

 

[ncbill]

I assume another reason for the switch is to minimize the heat issues that have plagued many of the aluminum iMac models in the past.

IIRC with at least one recent model the display could be permanently damaged.

 

[Lankyman]

I had the worst nightmare last night, I actually dreamed I had bought one of these lemons and woke up in a right sweat...phew! 😱