New iMac G5 Announced

[AidenShaw]

what "speed bump"

1. "Matched = same capacity AND speed": I'm not sure it's confirmed that a CL-2 512KB stick plus a CL-3 512KB stick would not in fact run dual channel at the slower CL-3 speed.

True, it hasn't been confirmed - I only quoted what Apple is saying in its tech note on iMac G5 memory specs....

However, Apple never mentions "dual channel", do they?

2. I gotta think that 2x512KB will be faster. By how much we will know in a few weeks. If your RAM "sweet spot", given what you do, is near 1GB, the dual channel speed bump might favor 2x512.

It's not dual channel - it will run with 1 DIMM !

If matching memory DIMM sizes improved performance, wouldn't you expect the Apple tech note to say so?

Please correct me if I missed some statement that "the iMac G5 will switch to 128-bit dual-channel mode if identically spec'd DIMMs are in both slots, otherwise it runs in 64-bit single channel mode".

 

[KeareB]

If matching memory DIMM sizes improved performance, wouldn't you expect the Apple tech note to say so?

Please correct me if I missed some statement that "the iMac G5 will switch to 128-bit dual-channel mode if identically spec'd DIMMs are in both slots, otherwise it runs in 64-bit single channel mode".

I'm no expert, but it definitely does say that matching memory DIMM sizes improves performance. Maybe those more in the know can help. Here's what it does say:

"Additional DIMMs can be installed. The combined memory of all of the DIMMs installed is configured as a contiguous array of memory. The throughput of the 400 MHz memory bus is dependent on the DIMMs installed. If only one DIMM is installed, the memory bus is 64-bit. If two non-identical DIMMs are installed, there are two 64–bit memory buses. If two identical DIMMs are installed, the memory bus is 128-bit. Identical DIMM pairs have the same size and composition and provide the fastest and most efficient throughput."

And I have no clue about the tables that follow, preceded by this:

"...The device configurations include three specifications: address range, word size, and number of banks...."

http://developer.apple.com/document...//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40001433-CH208-BBCJADAF

 

[AidenShaw]

thank you

I'm no expert, but it definitely does say that matching memory DIMM sizes improves performance. Maybe those more in the know can help. Here's what it does say:

"Additional DIMMs can be installed. The combined memory of all of the DIMMs installed is configured as a contiguous array of memory. The throughput of the 400 MHz memory bus is dependent on the DIMMs installed. If only one DIMM is installed, the memory bus is 64-bit. If two non-identical DIMMs are installed, there are two 64–bit memory buses. If two identical DIMMs are installed, the memory bus is 128-bit. Identical DIMM pairs have the same size and composition and provide the fastest and most efficient throughput."

Thank you for finding that info.... I'm surprised that Apple doesn't make it more prominent (unless "more efficient" is really "slightly more efficient").

As another poster said, we'll have to wait for tests to show how significant the effect of matched memory actually is...

In particular, it will be interesting to find out if the advantage of matched 1 GiB (2x512MiB) is better than the advantage of more memory (1 GiB + 256 MiB)....

 

[egor]

The fifth thing missing, and I consider this to be a big one, you're assuming that the person building the system actually knows how to do it. Quite frankly, few people do, even though I feel that it is at least 10 times easier to do now than it was to do 15 years ago. Are you going to build in some price for the labor? What if the person builds it wrong and destroys a power supply or motherboard? Even if everything goes well and there is no cost involved in getting it together, what percentage of the population do you think is able to do this? My guess (and this is being VERY generous) is that no more than 5% of people can do this... a more likely number is somewhere between 1 to 2%.

I'd say most people know how to build a PC whether they know that they know it or not, its ridiculously easy, easier than putting up a shelf, how could they build it wrong and destroy the power supply or motherboard? Thats preposterous, I can't get my head around how anyone could physically manage to do that with a hammer being involved.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

I'd say most people know how to build a PC whether they know that they know it or not, its ridiculously easy, easier than putting up a shelf, how could they build it wrong and destroy the power supply or motherboard? Thats preposterous, I can't get my head around how anyone could physically manage to do that with a hammer being involved.

Static can be an issue for some. Forcing a CPU into a socket, which leads to damaged pins. Tightening down the motherboard screws. Any host of other stupid mistakes.

 

[Timelessblur]

well the truth is it is amazmaing easy to build your own computer. Most people are just afraid to do it because it seem so scarying putting in all those parts and knowing how much each part cost. I built my own. Before I did it I though it was pretty hard but after I got it done I found it was really easier to do. Plus it makes it a lot easier to figure out what is wrong and how to fix stuff.

I think the real count is around 5% of the desktops out home built
It also really nice not having to deal with any of the extra crap that gets installed when you buy a computer off the shelf (including Apples computers) I know exactly what has been installed.

As for the ram the poeple who home build know about it. You general always want to install ram in pairs and you always want to be same brand same type. Also you want to buy it in packs of 2 so there are the few diffences bettween the 2 since they are made from the same silicon plate and what not.

 

[egor]

Static can be an issue for some. Forcing a CPU into a socket, which leads to damaged pins. Tightening down the motherboard screws. Any host of other stupid mistakes.

Well, I don't recall ever having to force the cpu into its socket, it just drops in... and you'd have to be an idiot to tighten the screws too hard, as for static, thats just common sense, you ground the case and touch a metal part of it every now and again... sorry, but maybe some really really thick people could make a mistake, I can't see it happening to the majority tho...

 

[zelmo]

I think the new iMac is a "fair" value for the money, and that it is equipped adequately for the majority of the targeted market [as long as they don't want to play the latest top end games], but I have no real desire to purchase one. Our 800 MHz iLamp is still adequate for my wife and daughter, who mainly surf the 'net, use Office, and mess with iTunes. A basic PC would be just as functional, but wouldn't be as easy to maintain for me. My new PB is fine for the stuff I do.

Looking down the road a bit, I think we'll make the move to small screen laptops for ultimate portability, keeping a decent sized (23") LCD for when we need more screen real estate. I would likely add a PC laptop into the mix, or even build a desktop, although I've never done anything more challenging that replace the optical drive and hard drive in my old beige G3 desktop.
If I decided to build a PC and hook it up to that LCD, would it be possible (i.e. convenient) to use that same LCD with a Mac 'Book?

 

[AidenShaw]

You general always want to install ram in pairs....

Hmmm. This is mainly true because almost all the higher performance Pentium 4 chipsets are dual channel (128-bit), and have been. All the RDRAM chipsets were dual channel as well. Many of the high performance Pentium III chipsets were dual channel also.

So, unless someone decided to home-build a low end shared graphics Celeron, you'd need pairs of DIMMs just to make it work.

On single channel controllers, however, there shouldn't be any benefit of putting two DIMMs instead of one DIMM that's twice the size.

On a mixed controller like the iMac G5, you get a single channel controller when you have one DIMM, and a dual channel if you install a second.

...you always want to be same brand same type.

Also you want to buy it in packs of 2 so there are the few diffences bettween the 2 since they are made from the same silicon plate and what not.

Good advice, except that the "2 packs from the same silicon wafer" is not likely. A 2-pack should be more likely to be from manufacturing runs that are the same or close - but the memory companies don't guarantee that all 36 of the chips are from the same wafer. (Consider that often the chips are not made by the company that assembles the DIMMs....)

In theory, "same spec" DIMMs from different manufacturers should not be a problem. In practice, however, minor speed and timing deviations from the specs can cause problems. (I've even seen this with single channel controllers when mixing brands.)

Probably the best reason for selling 2-packs is that too many people wouldn't see the notice that you need to buy them in pairs. By creating a SKU with 2 DIMMs, it's easier to order, and the customer is happier (less confusion, won't be upset because he ordered 1 GiB and got a single 1 GiB DIMM that he can't install).

 

[zelmo]

Well, I don't recall ever having to force the cpu into its socket, it just drops in... and you'd have to be an idiot to tighten the screws too hard, as for static, thats just common sense, you ground the case and touch a metal part of it every now and again... sorry, but maybe some really really thick people could make a mistake, I can't see it happening to the majority tho...

All one need do is go to your local CompUSA to see that building a PC is no longer the realm of hobbyists. The first thing I see when I walk through the turnstile is a long shelf full of cases, fans, and power supplies. Clearly, there are a lot of folks doing this, either for fun, to save money, and/or to get exactly the config they want. This is still not a prospect that the vast majority would ever consider, however achievable it may be for them.
I manage a decent-sized prepress department (25 people). Virtually all of these folks have at least one computer at home. These are people who depend on computer technology for their livelihood, more so than the average office worker - they are surrounded by, and interact daily with, workstations, file servers, tape libraries, wide format plotters, and computer-to-plate systems. Our particular area of the printing industry is in a constant state of change and advancement, technologically speaking. While most of these people are quite comfortable with computer technology, I bet there are perhaps only a half dozen who have even upgraded or added memory to a box, and only 1 or 2 who would even consider building their own box. This is certainly not for a lack of technical ability to do it. They would just never think that way.
Most people want a cheap, fast, and hassle-free computing experience. Apple gives them 2/3 of what they want. So does Windows. Most people choose cheap over hassle-free, which is why Apple has a 3% market share.

 

[Phobophobia]

Something to think about...

While building your own computer will pretty much always save you money if you are making a high-end tower, if you are going low-end it can be more cost-effective to buy from Dell or another company. Most people don't factor in the software, let alone the OS when they are considering costs. A disturbing percentage of people who build their own computers also pirate software for it. Software has value, too, people.

 

[turbojugend]

I'm sorry if this got posted already ... 66 pages is quite a lot. This document page from apple states what's upgradable, and what's not on the new iMac. But I still cant understand if you can upgrade the 5200 Nvida abomination ...

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=86812

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

I'm sorry if this got posted already ... 66 pages is quite a lot. This document page from apple states what's upgradable, and what's not on the new iMac. But I still cant understand if you can upgrade the 5200 Nvida abomination ...

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=86812

But it looks like it is part of a major board with other components:

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

 

[BigEvan23]

My 20 inch iMac Shipped TODAY!!!

Well the rumors about shipping this week it turned out to be true after all, my iMac shipped today and should be here Tuesday or Wednesday. I couldn't be any more excited. Check out the order status!!!

-Evan

 

[NusuniAdmin]

cool, make sure you leave a review of it

 

[paulsecic]

Given that products need to be revised every few months or so to keep them fresh and that CPU speeds are hitting brick walls and yield issues it becomes clear what apple have done here. They have launched a form factor that will appeal but specifications that the may leave mac / gaming addicts questioning the need to buy. This helps to keep demand down to a manageable level. In 6 months time, what gets revised. Maybe a small CPU speed bump (assuming that Power Macs get a bump). Definately a bigger GPU bump. Another 6 months, another GPU bump. As SJ said during the WWDC - the GPU is where the performance gains are to be made.

Apple won't upgrade the Imac for a year, at which time I'll buy a 20" model.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Apple won't upgrade the Imac for a year, at which time I'll buy a 20" model.

In my short time back with the Mac, it would be the first time I can think of there wasn't a refresh of a product within 6 to 9 months.

 

[rdowns]

Well the rumors about shipping this week it turned out to be true after all, my iMac shipped today and should be here Tuesday or Wednesday. I couldn't be any more excited. Check out the order status!!!

-Evan

Happy for you dude, not as happy as I would be if I were receiving my shipping confirmation. Sorry to call your other post BS.

Maybe we'll cross paths in the Roosevelt Field store sometime.

 

[salmon]

GPU Heat Problems?

I just saw over at MOSR that GPU heating (bottom of the page) is the reason the iMacs have that video card.

Interesting. I wonder if that is the reason, because I'm sure Apple knew people wouldn't be happy with it, and it makes more sense than simply to cut costs by $50 or so...

 

[BuckWright]

help me out folks

ok, this is a first post from a guy planning to buy a mac.

Everyone keeps insisting that the VC is too weak, but what does that mean for actual use (non-gaming) like:
-On a 20", will a DVD look clear, or will it be blurry, etc?
-will imovie work properly?
-will it slow down the transistion between users b/c of that whole animated switch thingy?

Another thing, I'm buying mainly for audio production. I don't need a whole lot, but I would like to know exactly how this puppy handles garageband. I've read complaints about the G4 being too weak for multiple tracks, but I've never seen any actual numbers. Will the new Imac slow down with 5 tracks? 10? 100? Does the recording sound accurate to real life? I've used programs in the past that distort my guitar and vocals. I'd hope that the iMac won't do that.

my last problem, is that there aren't really any places around where I can go check one of these things out. There's a compUSA about 100 miles away that I could drive to whenever the imacs are stocked. So having never used OSX (did play around with OS9 before in a computer lab), I don't know how the performance. Is it quicker than XP? Because XP is pretty zippy even with little RAM and processor. I'm just getting real sick of running adaware everyday. I'd like to have some great software like imovie and garageband and such. and, the Mac just looks cool.

 

[Daveway]

The VC mainly limits the fps in games and graphically intensive tasks. For instance if you are using a very graphicaly intensive program like Motion the cpu will direct the load to the VC which could pose some slow downs. For general use like movie editing, dvds, and your uses you will not notice the fact that it is a sub par VC compared to other computers.

OSX Panther & soon Tiger are far>>>> superior to XPwill ever be. Some would say that OSX is less "zippier" than XP but i have not noticed a visible slowness and each release of osx is faster. For more on this visit: www.xvsxp.com , it is very indepth on an OSX vs. XP basis.

 

[bb0ys]

2D vs. 3D

The VC mainly limits the fps in games and graphically intensive tasks. For instance if you are using a very graphicaly intensive program like Motion the cpu will direct the load to the VC which could pose some slow downs. For general use like movie editing, dvds, and your uses you will not notice the fact that it is a sub par VC compared to other computers.

OSX Panther & soon Tiger are far>>>> superior to XPwill ever be. Some would say that OSX is less "zippier" than XP but i have not noticed a visible slowness and each release of osx is faster. For more on this visit: www.xvsxp.com , it is very indepth on an OSX vs. XP basis.

Another way of saying it:

The most complex 2-dimensional rendering at the highest video resolution can be done by some of the cheapest graphics cards on the market today; and they don't even flinch. 3-dimensional rendering is far from that. It takes a powerful processor and accompanying components (read RAM, bus, etc. on video card) to quickly render 3D material. Add high resolution to an already complex 3D rendering and you need some serious graphics card power.

 

[Fukui]

ok, this is a first post from a guy planning to buy a mac.

Everyone keeps insisting that the VC is too weak, but what does that mean for actual use (non-gaming) like:
-On a 20", will a DVD look clear, or will it be blurry, etc?
-will imovie work properly?
-will it slow down the transistion between users b/c of that whole animated switch thingy?

Another thing, I'm buying mainly for audio production. I don't need a whole lot, but I would like to know exactly how this puppy handles garageband. I've read complaints about the G4 being too weak for multiple tracks, but I've never seen any actual numbers. Will the new Imac slow down with 5 tracks? 10? 100? Does the recording sound accurate to real life? I've used programs in the past that distort my guitar and vocals. I'd hope that the iMac won't do that.

My G4 (cube) at 400Mhz can pull about 4~5 tracks in garage band before stuttering. I would think that a G5 with a vastly superior floating point (dual) unit, on-die L2 (mine is off chip!!) and a bus speed that is 6x to 8x faster than mine should at least have a linear performance boost by MHZ. So if the new iMac couldn't handle say at least 4x as many tracks as mine (20+) then there's something wrong...

Is it quicker than XP? Because XP is pretty zippy even with little RAM and processor. I'm just getting real sick of running adaware everyday. I'd like to have some great software like imovie and garageband and such. and, the Mac just looks cool.

Remember X is doing A LOT more than XP is (FSAA, Interpolation, PerPixel Transparency, etc etc) all on the CPU (except for window compositing), and it manages to be pretty close to the speed of XP. In the future, if Tiger offloads coregraphics to the GPU, expect that to be inversed. One thing you'll notice, is that OS X would handle multiple apps running and processing at the same time much better than XP would... at least in my experience.

 

[macridah]

imagine if this was available in the summer ... i'm sure these would of sold like hot cakes for the back to school sale.

If apple only had better third party partners (cough, IBM) or project management ...

 

[edesignuk]

Now I've ordered mine I suppose it's my duty to post in this thread. Yay iMac!