Some reason, I'm thinking of a lump of butter in a big bowl of water...
Me? I had turkey that tasted exactly like ham. Totally blew my mind, man. It was turkey, but not...
Also made me realized how easily impressed I am.
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.
New iMac Benchmarks Show 10-25% Improvement Over Previous Generation
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Some reason, I'm thinking of a lump of butter in a big bowl of water...
Me? I had turkey that tasted exactly like ham. Totally blew my mind, man. It was turkey, but not...
Also made me realized how easily impressed I am.
So is turtlenecked overlord. But that doesnt stop you from using it. What comes around goes around I guess?
When did I last say "turtlenecked overlord"? (Hint - it was quite some time ago when an over-zealous moderator decided that after years of my saying "turtlenecked overlord" it was suddenly an offense that deserved a timeout.)
And, of course, "turtlenecked overlord" was a specific jab at the sartorial leaning of a certain over-bearing manager.
On the other hand, "limp-wristed pansy" plays against a perceived stereotype that offends many.
Would you drop the "N-bomb" in conversation? If the answer is "No", then how can you defend "limp-wristed pansy"?
How can you defend "limp-wristed pansy"?
Waited for 7 months, relying on this site that the new iMac was "just around the corner" and finally gave up in late July. Now looking at these benchmarks, I'm glad I did - no regrets with my 2011.
The platform's features are what I want more than the nothing to write home about year to year gains.
Looking at the refurbished section, the old 2011 one is offerd for $1,359.
I think that the new base 27" is a better deal.
For $440 you get New vs Refurbished, better CPU (2.9 vs 2.7), 8GB ram vs 4GM, GTX660M vs 6770. Most importatnly less glare on the screen. You'd also make at least 50% of the differnce when selling it. Personally, I don't see why anyone would buy the refurbished one (unless you need that DVD drive, and external won't do).
Speaking about the screen. I don't know how many here actually saw the difference, but after seeing both at the apple store today, the difference is massive. The old imac is no longer an option for me.
I think that the new base 27" is a better deal.
For $440 you get New vs Refurbished, better CPU (2.9 vs 2.7), 8GB ram vs 4GM, GTX660M vs 6770. Most importatnly less glare on the screen. You'd also make at least 50% of the differnce when selling it. Personally, I don't see why anyone would buy the refurbished one (unless you need that DVD drive, and external won't do).
Speaking about the screen. I don't know how many here actually saw the difference, but after seeing both at the apple store today, the difference is massive. The old imac is no longer an option for me.
I would like to know the score for the following configuration:
- 27" iMac late 2012
- 3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz
- 32GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 4x8GB
- 3TB Fusion Drive
- NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5
This is what my configuration will look like. However, I will order only with 8GB RAM and upgrade myself later.
What will be the difference between the above with 8GB RAM and 32GB RAM?
Thanks!
- 27" iMac late 2012
- 3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz
- 32GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 4x8GB
- 3TB Fusion Drive
- NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5
This is what my configuration will look like. However, I will order only with 8GB RAM and upgrade myself later.
What will be the difference between the above with 8GB RAM and 32GB RAM?
Thanks!
But how much less electricity does it use?
As a user within an off-grid solar office, I need to know how much less power these pups use in real life. Currently, my older iMacs are the biggest hogs, and I would replace just for a reduction in power used...
As a user within an off-grid solar office, I need to know how much less power these pups use in real life. Currently, my older iMacs are the biggest hogs, and I would replace just for a reduction in power used...
Don't expect much reduction in power consumption. Although the new i7 may have 10% power reduction compared to Sandy, the new iMac now uses a more powerful GPU which is still very power hungry.
When I switch the GPU to GT650M on my MacBook, it only top 4 hours of battery life, compared to up to eight hours when running on HD4000.
thx for that... guess i will have to continue to look at alternatives (less hungry all-in-ones, if they exist).
I will summarize this thread so everyone doesn't have to read the 10 pages. Now that Apple is the most successful company in world it is now the cool thing to hate them and complain and nit pick about every little thing they do. If I don't like a product I buy something else I don't troll forums and bitch and complain about it. I know it is human nature to be jealous of people/companies that are successful but seriously get over it, move on, get a life, buy something else.
That is one way to look at it. The other would be that many people like their products and really want to see Apple continue to make great products and it is frustrating to see them not meeting expectations. Many people see Apple as dropping the ball lately, perhaps because they have become too big. I agree, complaining wont help, but it is unfair to assume Apple are beyond any form of criticism.
I don't see people being jealous, that is your own emotional projection.
What? My MBP has got higher Geekbench Score than a new i7 iMac
I believe you are refering to the 21.5" iMac with i7, not the maxed out 27" iMac i7 with Fusion Drive and 2GB grahics card. The SSD maxed out iMac should be even faster.
We have to wait for the scores of the maxed out 27" i7!
With computers and electronic devices, users have expectations that the new model will offer significant improvements in terms of performance, features, etc... independently of what they're actually using these products for.
With that in mind, a 10% improvement over last year's model is very underwhelming.
My 2009 Mac Pro single 6-core scored 15695 on Geekbench, but with the old quad core I had, I was only 11,000-something, so it looks like the iMac is finally catching up to the Mac Pro.
Now if only they worked on the airflow for the iMac. *That* would be something!
Now if only they worked on the airflow for the iMac. *That* would be something!
Long term Mac mini user here (still have the first generation release), but for me the lack of discrete GPU in this year's release pushed me to the iMac for the first time in my life. Because real world performance is not just about the CPU.
----------
If you don't need USB3 and have managed to get SSD in your 2011 machine, then you did well. Some people (of the gaming variety) will also say GPU but I won't split hair. The 2011 machine with SSD is an awesome machine...
Who's expectations? The 0.00000001% of whingers on here that makes up Apple's global customer base? Do you expect Apple to release a revolutionary new model each and every year? Did you expect a retina display that would cost more for the display than the whole Mac itself for under 2k? Twice the processor performance when Apple don't even design/manufacture the CPU's, a DVD drive that the majority of people don't use anymore, but they should include one so the majority pays for something they don't use while the minority can have a drive? A iMac that allows you to upgrade every conceivable part inside it even though it is a AIO?
Apple is not dropping the ball peoples expectations are way too high, I don't even own a Mac just iPhones/iPads because I don't personally like OSX but I don't come on here and complain about it I buy a Windows machine instead because that is my personal preference. If I was in the market for a AIO I would more than likely buy the new iMac and run Windows on it, I occasionally use a DVD drive to burn stuff but I would make the sacrifice and just use an external one when needed.
I wonder how many of these whingers are going to end up buying a new iMac. my guess is a lot of them.
Apple isn't above criticism but complaining about every little thing is stupid and no company can ever cater for each and every person.
Speaking of the new 27", both 2.6 and 2.7 MBP and even the new i7 Mac Mini have still beaten it in 64 bit tests.
And as far as I know Geekbench scores don't involve SSD scores.
Attachments
Huh?
I'm talking about stock ram because its cheaper to buy third party. But ordering from store.apple.com on the 2011 was well around $3400 for the 3.4 i7, 2GB GPU, 2TB HDD AND 256GB SSD
the current config is a 3.4 i7, 2GB GPU and a 3TB/128GB FUSION
the 2011 is not maxed with a 1TB....2TB+256GB however are maxed out storage capacities.
So in comparison you're getting a substantial amount of tech for cheaper that will allow it to perform a little bit better.
So overall not a bad deal.