New iMac G5 Announced

[~Shard~]

A lot of what you read in here is crap. Too many can't see beyond their own noses, needs and wants. And they surely don't understand sales and marketing. The new iMac can run Motion (will need more than the standard RAM) and the other Apple pro apps. Of course, they won't run as fast as a dual processor PowerMac.

The fact is, Apple put a G5 in their iMac line and lowered the prices over what the G4s cost. Many say the graphics card is weak but it will do the job for the vast majority of users - pro or consumer.

Thanks you rdowns, well put. Some people appear to be so narrow-minded: "If it doesn't play the leading edge games, it must be crap!" Yah because
that's solely what video cards are for... Some people need to take a step back and look at the big picture - and factor in things like sales, marketing, etc.

I agree that Apple could have put a better video card into the G5 iMac, or offered it as an option, but I don't think that the 5200 is the absolute crap many people here are declaring it is. The 5200 will be more than adequate for many people's (nay, the majority's) needs.

Apple comes up with an innovative design, slaps a G5 in that small enclosure, makes other significant upgrades, et.c etc. and people still complain. Some people are never happy....

 

[takao]

Thanks you rdowns, well put. Some people appear to be so narrow-minded: "If it doesn't play the leading edge games, it must be crap!" Yah because
that's solely what video cards are for...

actually i have problem finding graphics card who weren't designed _for games_ ... except those wicked expensive ones for absolute pro workstations or of course a few steam powered office workhorses from matrox ( G450 or something like that...still first class 2d performance)

I agree that Apple could have put a better video card into the G5 iMac, or offered it as an option, but I don't think that the 5200 is the absolute crap many people here are declaring it is. The 5200 will be more than adequate for many people's (nay, the majority's) needs.

of course it will be adequate..you know many people wouldn't mind about a geforce 1
you know it's hard to find graphics cards/chips who are available a lot slower...actually there are even intigrated chipsets out there from ati who are faster than the 5200 (IGP something...)

Apple comes up with an innovative design, slaps a G5 in that small enclosure, makes other significant upgrades, et.c etc. and people still complain. Some people are never happy....

people are demanding ... it could be worse .._nobody_ could care about it ...

(without games a lot of computer hardware wouldn't be affordable... especially those 5200 cards wouldn't be available)
edit: and just because people complain doesn't mean that they won't recommend it to those who don't need a better 3d graphic chip
heck i've already started talking my parents into one before i saw one in person

 

[slughead]

Thanks you rdowns, well put. Some people appear to be so narrow-minded: "If it doesn't play the leading edge games, it must be crap!" Yah because that's solely what video cards are for... Some people need to take a step back and look at the big picture - and factor in things like sales, marketing, etc.

How's this for a picture: Apple could've spent $50/unit more and doubled the speed of the video card. $7-10 more would've paid for double the video RAM.

And no, I cannot and will not accept that the 5200 will do motion in any usable way.

That's like saying the 5200 will run doom3.. no, seriously. Technically it will "run"--meaning it wont come up with an arbitrary message saying "we've detected you're using a worthless hunk of crap for a video card, and you should upgrade."

It's the same thing: doom3, motion, both can "run" on the g5 imac, neither will run in any kind of reasonable fashion.

I'm sure us "narrow minded" people will get a kick out of the benchmarks when people try motion on their iMacs.

Again, I see people using terms like "bleeding edge games" or "hardcore gamers".

Nice exaggeration there, the reality is this card has trouble with games from 2002 and 2003, as well as Doom3.

You're going to have this computer for 3 years, and you can't run games from 2 years ago? This hardly seems like a "bleeding edge" problem to me.

 

[macidiot]

Logic and a whole bunch of other pro- and semi pro-apps will, of course, run fine on this mac.... but you say you're aware of this, so.....?



The card really is such a side-issue for so many folk. It's my belief that the game-obsessed among us tend to wilfully ignore this; in much the same way that their chief pleasure exists in playing in a fantasy world, so does their ideal computer exist in a fantasy world, where the needs of the many are outweighed by the needs of the few [knew I could slip that in somewhere]


My 2¢ on this- I doubt that the new iMac is intended as a suicide note from Apple to the world at large. They're moderately smart at Apple, and we will see how it goes down over the next few quarters. Whatever, they've got two sales in this house already

Apparently you have poor reading comprehension skills. Photoshop and Logic are poor examples to use when discussing the ability of the 5200. That was my point. What part of that don't you understand? If you read the post properly then you wouldn't be throwing around baseless insults. Apparently you merely saw the word Logic and decided to cast aspersions without noting the context.

 

[macidiot]

I really just dont bye the number. Mainly because that last iMac was so damn quite and droping it anohter 25 would be well almost impostebile. so much as 1 fan would make it possible to hear it running. Basicly the current Computer on a stick out there dont make any noise.

Oops, well, I just read a BusinessWeek article about the iMac and it stated that the 25db is the noise level of the new iMac, not that it is 25db less than the old iMac.

 

[~Shard~]

I cannot and will not accept that the 5200 will do motion in any usable way.

Never said it would...

That's like saying the 5200 will run doom3.. no, seriously. Technically it will "run"--meaning it wont come up with an arbitrary message saying "we've detected you're using a worthless hunk of crap for a video card, and you should upgrade."

Ah yes, let's use the extreme example of Doom3 to make our point. Of course Doom3 won't run adequately on a 5200, but I never said it would. Because it won't play this game does that make it bad? I didn't hear you say anything about whether or not the 5200 would play SimCity poorly or not - that's just as valid. Of course if you use the extreme example of Doom3, the most graphically-demanding game out there, the 5200 is going to be crap.

I'm sure us "narrow minded" people will get a kick out of the benchmarks when people try motion on their iMacs.

Um, my narrow-minded reference was with reference to gaming. Since you obviously didn't read my comment, let me copy and paste it here for you:
"If it doesn't play the leading edge games, it must be crap!" Yah because
that's solely what video cards are for...
See how I was referencing leading edge games being used as the sole basis of evaluation for a video card? So now I ask you, what does this have to with Motion? I never mentioned Motion once, nor did I specially say that you were narrow-minded. Geez....

Again, I see people using terms like "bleeding edge games" or "hardcore gamers".

Nice exaggeration there, the reality is this card has trouble with games from 2002 and 2003, as well as Doom3.

Your statement would be more correct if you said some games from 2002 and 2003. I have a feeling Warcraft III and Civ III run just fine on the 5200. Just as is the case with 2004 - some games run well, some don't. Just because the 5200 can't handle your precious Doom3 does not automatically make it a crap video card...

Again, I would like to have seen a better video card in the iMac as well, but people are blowing this 5200 thing way out of proportion.

 

[afields]

Whats all the complaining about? According to the apple website the graphics card delivers "unparalleled 2D and 3D graphics performance" and a "standout gaming experience"!! It's its in print, so it gotta be true!

But seriously. I think people are misunderstanding something. Its NOT the graphics card thats bad, its the fact that theres no OPTION to upgrade thats upsetting people. Obviously, they're not going to have a better standard card than whats in the Powermac. The "option" should be available, people would be willing to pay extra and apple would profit from it. I love how peole call this "whining" and saying things like "well don't buy one then".


Having said all that, I personally couldn't care less about what card is in it. I have an xbox, so I play games on that.

 

[CholEoptera36]

But seriously. I think people are misunderstanding something. Its NOT the graphics card thats bad, its the fact that theres no OPTION to upgrade thats upsetting people. Obviously, they're not going to have a better standard card than whats in the Powermac. The "option" should be available, people would be willing to pay extra and apple would profit from it.

Having said all that, I personally couldn't care less about what card is in it. I have an xbox, so I play games on that.

Yeah that's the bottom line. No upgrade option... I think the card does just fine in almost every catagory except games (I still have a PC that has a TNT 2 card in it for that matter)... Hopefully we will see the option to upgrade, but maybe not. As a lot of people have talked about already it's probly because of how hard it was to engeneer the hardware setup inside. They might not be able to fit a lot of cards in the right way. I hope so though in the future, because maybe then everyone will be happy.

BTW I like my cube too Games like RE-4 comming out in January 05 easily compare to Doom 3, if not better. Consoles are just as good as any gaming PC.

 

[Bistroengine]

Ahh...feel the love.

Holy crap people, chill out and take some valium before the web community unanimously agrees to change the word 'for'ums to 'against'ums. What drives you people to throw your egos out there just to get it smashed to bits and why must you ego 'bit smashing' people be so mean? Everyone has an opinion. Just let them have it and freaking move on with your life. Ok everyone, do it with me now. Take a deep breath...Now let it out slow and relaaaaax. There, don't you feel better now dammit!

 

[gotmac1]

imac G5 Support Documents Posted

Several support documents have been posted on Apple's web site. http://search.info.apple.com/?search=Go&lr=lang_en&kword=&q=imac g5

Cool Stuff Including:

About iMac G5 external ports and connectors
... Title: About iMac G5 external ports and connectors, Article ID: 86813. Created: 2004-08-25. Modified: 2004-08-31. ...
Document No. 86813

About the iMac G5 Video Out port and video mirroring
... Title: About the iMac G5 Video Out port and video mirroring, Article ID: 86811. Created: 2004-08-25. Modified: 2004-08-31. ...
Document No. 86811

iMac G5: Memory specifications
... Title: iMac G5: Memory specifications, Article ID: 86814. Created: 2004-08-25. Modified: 2004-08-31. Topic Learn what kinds of memory you can use with your iMac G5. ...
Document No. 86814

iMac G5 parts you can install yourself
... Title: iMac G5 parts you can install yourself, ... Topic Think you need a new part? You can replace many of your iMac G5's parts yourself. ...
Document No. 86812

How to pick up and carry your iMac G5
... Title: How to pick up and carry your iMac G5, ... Topic Don't know how to pick up and carry your iMac G5? It's easy. ...
Document No. 86816

About the iMac G5 Sound Output port
... Title: About the iMac G5 Sound Output port, Article ID: 86810. Created: 2004-08-25. Modified: 2004-08-31. Topic Learn about the Sound Output port of your iMac G5. ...
Document No. 86810

About the iMac G5 diagnostic LEDs
... Title: About the iMac G5 diagnostic LEDs, ... Topic Learn about the diagnostic capabilities of your iMac G5. ...
Document No. 86815

 

[gotmac1]

"Easy to Install Replacement Parts"

One of the support documents on Apple's site (prior post) explains the do it yourself parts. I know it's not the GPU, but to be able to upgrade the hard drive and optical drive is cool!

iMac G5 parts you can install yourself
Think you need a new part? You can replace many of your iMac G5's parts yourself.

The iMac G5 is designed to make it easy for you to install replacement parts if you need to. The parts you can install yourself are:

* AirPort Extreme Card

* Memory - DDR 400 MHz (PC3200) SDRAM

* Hard drive

* Optical drive

* Power supply

* LCD display

* Modem card

* Mid-plane assembly (contains the main logic board, the G5 processor, fans, and so forth).

 

[Bistroengine]

Oh yeah...

The new iMac G5 gives me a warm fuzzy feeling inside. Love the new design even though it's not a removable display as I suggested it might be. If my trusty lime green 400MHz DV iMac that I bought for $240 bucks goes south then I'd buy (or at least try to buy) a G5 iMac right now, however it's still blissfully humming along just like an Apple product should. Damn Apple and their quality computers! Anyhow, I am somewhat relieved that I am NOT ready to buy a new Mac just yet, because what I REALLY would want is a 20", 2GHz G5 iMac with 512MB Ram STANDARD with a 128MB video card. Oh and a 200 Gig hard drive would be nice too. I know they're trying to keep the price down, but even cheapo PC's have 512MB of ram in them nowadays. I hate to be bitchy about this because everyone else is, but hey that's what I think. Did I mention I love the new design! My only question is, this new G5 iMac seems to take simplicity to the extreme. Where the heck can Apple go from here? What can they do besides make it thinner with bigger screen sizes? Something BIG and unimaginable will have to happen in the computer display market with Apple the first to implement it. Like a holographic display with 3D version of Mac OS XI. Ok, I am done being a huge geek for the day. Later.

 

[solvs]

Over 1300 posts and you people are still talking about the video card. This is why I stopped reading after page 16 (and I have no life ). It's not for hardcore gamers, deal with it. And 256 MB of RAM isn't that bad. It really isn't.

That being said: it's ugly, power switch and ports are hard to get to on the back, and that big iMac on the back looks tacky. From the makers of iPod...

Now, when are they going to be available? Because I want one.

 

[alexf]

But seriously. I think people are misunderstanding something. Its NOT the graphics card thats bad, its the fact that theres no OPTION to upgrade thats upsetting people. Obviously, they're not going to have a better standard card than whats in the Powermac. The "option" should be available, people would be willing to pay extra and apple would profit from it.

Exactly! I couldn't have stated it better...

On the 20" model, I think there shoud be the option to upgrade to a 128MB graphics card, but to make a 128MB card standard wouldn't make much sense, as many people (including even I, who work professionally as a designer but play no games) would have no use for it.

Has anybody already speculated that the 5200 may be the only card that can work within the tight design of the new iMac at this point? I don't know enough about graphics card size/heat, etc. to know for myself...

I will say one thing about the G5 iMac: it's not the prettiest thing to look at IMO, but nobody can deny that creating a G5 package that tight (power supply, G5 processor, 160GB HD, speakers, everything in the "box"!) is one beautiful feat of engineering. Very nicely done.

P.S. Has anything new been said in this thread since page 43?

 

[kjgnola]

wow, I can't keep up

This board explodes everyday.

Anyway I didn't read through to see if anyone helped me with my "I can't configure a mac problem" Thanks to anyone that did.

Apparently, what I did wrong was that you do not need to select BT if you select the wireless bundle. So anyway I called today got it all straightened out.

I asked when they expect these to start shipping and the best she could say was on or before October 1st. We'll see...

The "good" news is my Applecare has already shipped, yippee... I can stare at the box for a month.

 

[kugino]

One of the support documents on Apple's site (prior post) explains the do it yourself parts. I know it's not the GPU, but to be able to upgrade the hard drive and optical drive is cool!

iMac G5 parts you can install yourself
Think you need a new part? You can replace many of your iMac G5's parts yourself.

The iMac G5 is designed to make it easy for you to install replacement parts if you need to. The parts you can install yourself are:

* AirPort Extreme Card

* Memory - DDR 400 MHz (PC3200) SDRAM

* Hard drive

* Optical drive

* Power supply

* LCD display

* Modem card

* Mid-plane assembly (contains the main logic board, the G5 processor, fans, and so forth).

basically, everything BUT the graphics card...that's funny.

the interesting ones to me are the optical drive and the LCD display...if you're opting for the 17", just get the cd-rw one and order the newest pioneer dvr-108 for a faster and better superdrive...of course, you're giving up the faster processor...

so apple will also be selling replacement LCDs? or is it possible to buy them without cases?
in any case, more user-serviceable parts is nice to have...but that damn graphics card!!

 

[alexf]

basically, everything BUT the graphics card...that's funny.

the interesting ones to me are the optical drive and the LCD display...if you're opting for the 17", just get the cd-rw one and order the newest pioneer dvr-108 for a faster and better superdrive...of course, you're giving up the faster processor...

so apple will also be selling replacement LCDs? or is it possible to buy them without cases?
in any case, more user-serviceable parts is nice to have...but that damn graphics card!!

Yes, very cool indeed - this is a first to have an iMac that's so upgradeable.

The fact that the graphics card is one of the only non-user serviceable parts only adds to my suspicion that a better graphics card might be limited by the tight design itself.

I know virtually nothing about graphics cards, so can anyone tell me: does a 128MB card produce a lot more heat than a 64MB, is it bigger, etc.?

If yes, then perhaps the design of the new computer itself is the reason that Apple offers no option to upgrade.

 

[~Shard~]

Has anybody already speculated that the 5200 may be the only card that can work within the tight design of the new iMac at this point? I don't know enough about graphics card size/heat, etc. to know for myself...

I thought of this myself, and I believe someone mentioned it way back in page 4 or something - in other words, it is completely lost in this thread never to be found again.

Apple is not stupid, (contrary to what some people are implying here), and they obviously considered every single component carefully and no doubt spent hundreds of hours in multiple meetings crafting this thing, from a marketing point of view, from a design point of view, from an engineering point of view, etc. etc. One would think there must be some reason why Apple didn't offer an upgradeable video card at least in the high-end model.

P.S. Has anything new been said in this thread since page 43?

Not really. Half the people keep re-stating the same tired arguments and the other half keep posting the same old responses...

 

[gotmac1]

Could you replace with a faster dual layer DVD?

basically, everything BUT the graphics card...that's funny.

the interesting ones to me are the optical drive and the LCD display...if you're opting for the 17", just get the cd-rw one and order the newest pioneer dvr-108 for a faster and better superdrive...of course, you're giving up the faster processor...

so apple will also be selling replacement LCDs? or is it possible to buy them without cases?
in any case, more user-serviceable parts is nice to have...but that damn graphics card!!

Could you replace with a faster dual layer DVD? Would the system recognize it? That would be a great mod!

 

[DrGruv1]

IMAC Cool - But not for me, I will definitely send my friends for one that do word, and surf.

I need a tower with (listen in apple):

MORE PCI SLOTS!

TWO OPTICAL DRIVE BAYS

BETTER HARD DRIVE EXPANSION (without buying product mods)

You Know... A PRO MACHINE

I can hear the responses, dude the hard drives can get boxed and added through firewire, and so can DVD-r, and why would you need more than three PCI slots?

Because of ProAudio Cards...

NOW here's the rub, IF they had made a headless IMAC mini tower with pci slots, I MIGHT have gone for it for the short run use...

The IMAC doesn't cut it (FOR ME)

My hope is that they make a quad 970mp monster with a larger case, 2 optical drives and 4 dare I say 5 PCI slots...

I'll still bite on the 970mp, and firewire the extras.. (if needed) I guess that when your spending $3000+ or more on the cutting edge computer - you'd get the extra optical, PCI and hard drive slots... my 2¢

 

[slughead]

Your statement would be more correct if you said some games from 2002 and 2003. I have a feeling Warcraft III and Civ III run just fine on the 5200. Just as is the case with 2004 - some games run well, some don't. Just because the 5200 can't handle your precious Doom3 does not automatically make it a crap video card...

Obviously I meant "some" games, I think anyone could make that distinction.

I compared Motion to doom3 as far as specs to prove a point: that motion will run INTOLERABLY slow on a 5200 64mb. I said that because people wouldn't get it if I used an example like FarCry or UT2004.. Mainly because most mac users have no idea what the heck farcry is, and nobody seems to care about UT04.

You say Ah yes, let's use the extreme example of Doom3 to make our point. Then you turn around and say Just because the 5200 can't handle your precious Doom3.. woops you did it again!

I had my reasons for using Doom3 as an example: it fit the comparison. Implying that the 5200 64mb's INcapabilities are limited to doom3 is a FAR larger stretch.

Again, I would like to have seen a better video card in the iMac as well, but people are blowing this 5200 thing way out of proportion.

How's this for blowing it out of proportion:

Here is a list of some Mac-released games from 2002/2003 that will have problems with a 64mb 5200 (ie, they'll run like crap):

Call of duty
Medal of Honor
Medal of Honor: Allied assault
Medal of Honor: Spearhead
Unreal Tournament 2003
Red Orchestra
Halo

I'm not sure when these games were released for mac, but the PC versions fit within the timeframe. These are all REALLY good games, and I'd highly recommend them, with the exception of Halo (which I think is far more popular than it is good).

That list doesn't even include the AMAZING and innovative games released in 2004 that WONT run on a G5 iMac:

Unreal Tournament 2004***
Red Orchestra 2.0 + 3.0*****
Frag Ops****
Alien Swarm****
Car Ball*****
Clone bandits***
Doom III****

The stars are my personal rating for the games. Many of these games are UT04 mods, but all the best multiplayer games started out as mods.

So, again, I say to all of you "well occasional gamers won't mind" people: Have fun with Quake III. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to go play Frag Ops: A UT 2004 mod.

 

[kugino]

Could you replace with a faster dual layer DVD? Would the system recognize it? That would be a great mod!

you know, i don't see why not. iDVD probably wouldn't be able to make use of the dual layer (i'm guessing on this...i don't use iDVD) but if you're using toast, why not? good idea...hmmm...

 

[beatle888]

yeah it CAN run motion but it will run it like crap. When ones hardware barely makes the system requirements then it means that it barely will run.

your so wrong. you are 100% BS.

think of photoshop. you can run it with very little ram but you'll just have to use lower rez images. in motion it means not as intense of a composition.

start thinking people. i cant believe this BS. the iMac is fine and a great deal. Buy a PowerMac or a freaken PC if your panny's are so far up they make you scream like a school girl.

sorry...had to say it. this thread is so negative for no GOOD reason.

 

[one3]

NON GRAPHICS CARD QUESTION ... YES REALLY...

I hate to break up the onslaught of graphics card messages, BUT..... does anyone know if the 20" LCD display panel in the G5 iMac is exactly the same as the one in Apple's new standalone 20" LCD Displays (ie: same manufacturer, same specs...) ??

Thank you ... now please continue with the the graphics card war ... who's winning anyways? Maybe you guys could continue the war in a Doom 3 deathmatch ... oh wait ... can't on the new iMac right?

 

[thatwendigo]

the interesting ones to me are the optical drive and the LCD display...if you're opting for the 17", just get the cd-rw one and order the newest pioneer dvr-108 for a faster and better superdrive...of course, you're giving up the faster processor...

Unless the DVR-108 is a slot-loading laptop drive, I don't think you're going to be fitting it into the iMac without serious case modding. Preliminary information on the iMac (or at least the little I've heard) places the optical slot as laptop-class, which was done for reasons of power, heat, and size.

That's why it's only a 4x drive.

WAAAAAH, I WANT GAMES! (edited for brevity)

Then buy a console or a gaming PC, because it will be ridiculously expensive and time consuming to play the most modern games on a mac. The game war is over and DirectX won, at least on the computer battlefield, and that's something that Apple just can't use.

The iMac is a consumer computer, not a gaming rig. Get used to the idea.

Here is a list of some Mac-released games from 2002/2003 that will have problems with a 64mb 5200 (ie, they'll run like crap):

I don't really see numbers out there for other games yet, but lets pick on Halo. The portable GeForce 5200 gets:

800x600 - 32.1 FPS
1024x768 - 34.2 FPS
1280x1024 - not tested

The iMac G5 is 189% faster (FPS) than the previous generation on Halo

This gives us:
800x600 - 60.67 FPS
1024x768 - 64.64 FPS

Or, if Apple meant that the performance has been boosted by a full 189% above the previous:
800x600 - 92.77 FPS
1024x768 - 98.83 FPS

I find the second case less likely, but I suppose it's still possible. In any case, the human eye perceives 24 FPS, with most of the extra frames in computer simulation going to smoothing, not actual motion. Either of the results above are well above the point we can easily distinguish. What was your point again?