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

New iMacs Offer 25% Performance Improvement Over Previous Generation

Ochyandkaren said:
:): Me too!
My 2006 20" can handle Maya 2011 for rigging, but it is monoCore.
With a 27", 3.4GHz, Quad-Core Intel Core i7 i will be able to sculpt with Blender/ZBrush and do animation.
Click to expand...

Aye, I'm able to develop HD, console-quality games with my 2006 model. I just can't test out the high quality display options on my personal machine (for now!). They are fairly capable machines aren't they?

For all the negatives against Apple... they sure do make a long-lasting computer.
 
Whut? My MacBookPro 2011 17" (2.3GHz) is faster than the new 27" iMac w/3.4GHz Core i7??

Whut?? How is that possible?

I knew my MBP was awesome, but dayum...

BTW I sold my 8-core 2009 MacPro, which scores about 14000 on geekbench compared to my 2011 MBP which scores 11000. The portability tradeoff was so worth it.
 
mozumder said:
Whut? My MacBookPro 2011 17" (2.3GHz) is faster than the new 27" iMac w/3.4GHz Core i7??

Whut?? How is that possible?

I knew my MBP was awesome, but dayum...

BTW I sold my 8-core 2009 MacPro, which scores about 14000 on geekbench compared to my 2011 MBP which scores 11000. The portability tradeoff was so worth it.
Click to expand...

The iMac still has an edge of up to 1000pts (or slightly more) on the MBPs. Those tests look like they were ran in 32-bit mode and yours in 64. But yeah, the gap is very narrow.

World Citizen said:
I guess a bigger screen will lower the score, but even than its damn fast.
Click to expand...

Probably wouldn't affect scores since Geekbench focuses on RAM/CPU.
 
Last edited:
High resale value.

Old Muley said:
I'm only allowed one new computer every five years, so I will have to pass on these for now. Can't wait to see what's available in the spring of 2014 though.
Click to expand...
I have found the resale value of any Apple product is ridiculously high. I sold my late 2009 27 inch iMac with i7 chip for $2000 , meaning I paid only couple hundred dollars more plus tax to get a brand-new i7 27 inch iMac. You might want check the resale value of yours through eBay and craigslist.
 
mozumder said:
BTW I sold my 8-core 2009 MacPro, which scores about 14000 on geekbench compared to my 2011 MBP which scores 11000.
Click to expand...

Considering the price different, that is amazing. I've been wanting a Mac Pro ever since the switch to Intel, but price keeps be buying iMacs all the time. Maybe I should just stick with them?
 
I've been very happy with my purchase of an i7 2.93 (USA manufactured model) from last year and I've recommended the same model to 3 friends, all of whom do animation and use their machines to make a living. We're all happy with the performance of the imacs and with the 500+ bucks extra we each have in the bank because we DIDN'T buy the entry level Mac Pro instead! The nice monitor is a nice extra sweetener on the deal.

I'm sure the new I7 will be an amazing machine and a great value.
 
I'm still not impressed? I can't understand why the 2.3 2011 MacBook Pro scores a high of around 11390 and the latest iMac core i7 3.4 hits around 12700?? It's not that much of a jump for 1ghz extra speed on 4 cores?
 
apolloa said:
I'm still not impressed? I can't understand why the 2.3 2011 MacBook Pro scores a high of around 11390 and the latest iMac core i7 3.4 hits around 12700?? It's not that much of a jump for 1ghz extra speed on 4 cores?
Click to expand...

Turboboost

The mobiles turbo up to 3.4 GHZ (i7 2820m)when needed. The desktop model (i7 2600k) turbos to 3.8 GHZ. The reason for this is to cut back on power consumption especially for the mobile devices.

Apple never seems to mention this.
 
cirus said:
Turboboost

The mobiles turbo up to 3.4 GHZ (i7 2820m)when needed. The desktop model (i7 2600k) turbos to 3.8 GHZ. The reason for this is to cut back on power consumption especially for the mobile devices.

Apple never seems to mention this.
Click to expand...

T, of course!! :rolleyes::rolleyes: should have thought of that, thanks for pointing it out. So I guess the geekbench uses the one core then and it turbo boosts to the speeds you mentioned.
 
I don't play games, don't make movies or make music.

I do use it a lot for iTunes, iPhoto and Aperture and internet browsing.
(I've a huge photo and music library)

I think the perfomance improvements are great, but would I see any difference in performance?

My current iMac is a 3.06 27" with 13 GB ram and I just ordered from the refurbished store a 3.2 i3 27"
 
taxiapple said:
I don't play games, don't make movies or make music.

I do use it a lot for iTunes, iPhoto and Aperture and internet browsing.
(I've a huge photo and music library)

I think the perfomance improvements are great, but would I see any difference in performance?

My current iMac is a 3.06 27" with 13 GB ram and I just ordered from the refurbished store a 3.2 i3 27"
Click to expand...

Not really. You'd benefit more from an SSD.
 
Apple should really overclock these sandybridge cpus they can run at 4.5 ghz just being air cooled. Leaving them at there stock frequency just seems like such waisted potential
 
ref: max performance in Wireless

Apple Insider reports wireless N technology in the new iMacs exceeds the 300 mbps ... now 450 mbps. Wow...uses the 5 GHz band that has less traffic. The higher freq band is a little less wall penetrating.

Apple is on a roll for outstanding performance in computers. With Thunderbolt data transfer will be awesome. Look to sync and backup to be super fast. Here comes 'Lion" .... FWIW
 
finding the new system to be about 16% faster than the high-end standard configuration of the previous generation overall.

The late 2009 iMac i7 holds up pretty well against the new generation. Thunderbolt seems to be the real gain.
 
will see 2012 Imacs faster and better

Man in 10 months I will see what they come out with, I just got the 27 i3 four weeks ago but it looks like it will have to do, I am glad that we will be getting our new HP's next month. I replace our company machines every year or two We use both Apple and Windows and I have no problems with either one except for the keys came off the new Imac keyboards. They replaced it with a wired full aluminum keyboard, I like it better. We are daily users 10-12 hours a day and its so hard to believe the problems people have with computers. We never download any trial or free software so it sure keeps our computers running like they are new. I donate the old computers to schools etc and they are still like new. Apple computers are just not cost effective even though they are pretty good and we still buy a few for those who want to use them. 3 out of 50 maybe?
 
madhatter61 said:
Apple is on a roll for outstanding performance in computers. With Thunderbolt data transfer will be awesome. Look to sync and backup to be super fast. Here comes 'Lion" .... FWIW
Click to expand...

At least for a few months before TBolt equipped PCs hit the market ;) .

But, many PCs already have eSATA for super-speed data transfer - TBolt won't add any value to eSATA for many external disk applications.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have to assume these benchmarks don't take hyperthreading into account. Otherwise the top 4 results make very little sense to me.
 
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