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

More Quad-Core iMac Benchmarks Show Substantial Performance Gains

stagi said:
The only thing I don't think is good for professional users (at least creatives) is the monitor. At least the last time I looked into them they weren't the best compared to having a decent external monitor.
Click to expand...

Or for those who already have a high-end external (matte) screen and don't want to pay for the lack of hardware expansion and an lcd we don't need.

Also I know it's apples fault for the 3GB in the Quad MP but how is it reasonable to compare the i7 iMac with 4GB vs MP with 3GB?
 
RE: all the complaints about the glossy display:

Can't you just replace the glass with a non-glossy piece, or place a non-reflective film over it? Or position your computer so that the window isn't directly behind you?

Seems kinda like a non-issue.
 
RebootD said:
...Also I know it's apples fault for the 3GB in the Quad MP but how is it reasonable to compare the i7 iMac with 4GB vs MP with 3GB?
Click to expand...

This is pretty usual for MacWorld - if you look at the speedtests/benchmarks when it last reviewed the MPs, the iMac memory configuration was 2GB (if I remember rightly!) - the results for older machines are from when those units were actually reviewed. Kinda annoying, but par for the course...
 
RebootD said:
Also I know it's apples fault for the 3GB in the Quad MP but how is it reasonable to compare the i7 iMac with 4GB vs MP with 3GB?
Click to expand...

It's reasonable if either
  • You want to compare standard configs (and in your article you clearly mention that the 3 GiB system is at a disadvantage)
  • Your benchmarks don't come close to using the 3 GiB in the smaller system (including any effects from file caching)

Otherwise you are right, it would be more fair to bump both systems to 6 GiB and adjust the pricing.
 
robby818 said:
30" was the limit for me. I went back to a 24" because the 30" was really too big. I found myself moving my head a lot just to see what was on different parts of the screen.

I like the 27" screen because it like a 30" in width with a bit of the vertical height chopped off. I like the width because I can now put two browser windows side by side (can't do that on a 24"), and I don't need all the height that the 30" has....27" might be perfect.
Click to expand...

Robby,

If I was to open a window (ex: word document) the full width of a 30" screen, I would agree with you that 30" is too wide for exactly the reasons that you describe.

OTOH... if I place a few windows side by side, then my focus is generally within a single window and the monitor is not too wide... and in fact offers a substantial benefit... as I can have supplemental information in the adjacent windows.

/Jim
 
AidenShaw said:
Drobo announced the "Drobo S" today with eSATA (plus 1394b and USB) and "RAID 6" equivalence.

http://drobo.com/products/drobo-s.php

$799 for the 0 TB model.
Click to expand...

1 extra drive slot plus eSATA definitely isn't worth $400, but it'd be interesting to see if the newer ARM processor offers that much over the original. It would also have been nice if that included iSCSI, which would personally be more useful to me.
 
polaris20 said:
1 extra drive slot plus eSATA definitely isn't worth $400, but it'd be interesting to see if the newer ARM processor offers that much over the original. It would also have been nice if that included iSCSI, which would personally be more useful to me.
Click to expand...

Drobo Elite also announced today - 8 drives (16 TB today), with iSCSI over dual GbE.

Drobo isn't cheap, but now with eSATA/iSCSI it's interesting for a simple (as in simple enough for your grandmother to use a RAID drive) reliable file store. You're paying for the fool-proof simplicity.

"RAID-6"-like functionality is a great feature.
 
I wonder....

...if there will now be a decent glut of the older DROBO's on the market now, cheap and second-hand... hmmmmmm.
 
knewsom said:
Can't you just replace the glass with a non-glossy piece, or place a non-reflective film over it? Or position your computer so that the window isn't directly behind you?

Seems kinda like a non-issue.
Click to expand...
Positioning isn't always an option for everyone. It would be nice if Apple included a nice set of large black drapes in the box (along with mounting hardware) to attach to the wall behind the user. ;)

I would have figured by now some enterprising individual would have started a business making "non-glare/anti-reflective art glass" replacements for iMac's, but it hasn't happened. Any glass makers out there want to start one? :D

My beef with the 27" is it's too big if you absolutely need to have a second monitor, which photographers like me, who need a more accurate matte display (IMO), do. Then you need a larger desk, blah, blah, blah. That's not a huge deal, but the primary display in my case probably wouldn't be the iMac's. The 21.5" would be ideal, but is limited to C2D at the moment which makes it less appealing.
 
eelpout said:
Positioning isn't always an option for everyone. It would be nice if Apple included a nice set of large black drapes in the box (along with mounting hardware) to attach to the wall behind the user. ;)

I would have figured by now some enterprising individual would have started a business making "non-glare/anti-reflective art glass" replacements for iMac's, but it hasn't happened. Any glass makers out there want to start one? :D
Click to expand...

http://www.nushield.com/antiglare_screen_protector_film.php

Haven't seen any actual replacement GLASS, but something like this should do the trick.
 
AidenShaw said:
Drobo Elite also announced today - 8 drives (16 TB today), with iSCSI over dual GbE.

Drobo isn't cheap, but now with eSATA/iSCSI it's interesting for a simple (as in simple enough for your grandmother to use a RAID drive) reliable file store. You're paying for the fool-proof simplicity.

"RAID-6"-like functionality is a great feature.
Click to expand...

Yeah I saw that. We've got two Drobos (regular ones) connected via DroboShare for backing up daily diff snapshots of ESX backups, and we're getting a third for connection via iSCSI. We're going to go Pro at least, not sure if the Elite is worth it for our use. In terms of speed even the plain old Drobo is fast enough.
 
A bit late but the results on those tests are pretty amazing for Imac. They will definitely have to make a very significant jump for the next MacPros. I'm looking forward to next year.
 
Accurate Matte Display??

eelpout said:
My beef with the 27" is it's too big if you absolutely need to have a second monitor, which photographers like me, who need a more accurate matte display (IMO), do.
Click to expand...

I Just purchased the i7 27" iMac but am also on the market for a second matte display that is more accurate for printing. I'm a photographer and would love to get some advice on a second monitor from you! Price and size doesn't matter to me.... any ideas?

Chris
 
griz said:
Unfortunately the RAM on the iMac caps out at 16GB and will run you a premium. $600 for 16GB on a MacPro, Just under $1000 for 16GB on the iMac.
Click to expand...

Well, actually slightly under $900 if you order your memory from OWC, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the cost of memory comes down in due time. And you’re comparing one model at the beginning of its life cycle with another nearing its end. The current MacPro has been around a while, how much would 16 gb. have cost when it was new on the marke
 
Nice to hear it's got good performance. I wonder how it is noise wize ?

Any worse than previous imacs ?
 
Also, Apple should put in two firewire ports instead of just one when next updated. They should also put in a esata port.
 
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