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 NVIDIA-based iMacs Imminent? More Hints.
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Given Intel and NVidia are doning wigs and heading to court over nVidia Chipsets with Intel core i7 processors, I think it's safe to call this a fake.
Getting sick and tired of the waiting. Are setting 1st of april as last stand. If no new iMac at that time, I´ll just buy the current model.
Needs a bigger screen, so a new Mac Mini with a nice LCD is also an possibility for me.
Needs a bigger screen, so a new Mac Mini with a nice LCD is also an possibility for me.
I don't see the connection with "high performance Nvidia graphics" and the iMac containing the Nvidia chipset... Surely they won't (solely( use integrated graphics, and its not as if they benefit much from having switchable IGP/discrete graphics...
Well, it depends on the model. Some of the 8 series were 65nm compared to the newer 55nm generation of other 8 series and (i believe) all 9 series.
Well, it depends on the model. Some of the 8 series were 65nm compared to the newer 55nm generation of other 8 series and (i believe) all 9 series.
Waiting game is over - got a PC
Hi everyone!
Normally I don't post here, just reading the rumors.
Every post, like this one here about a possible new iMac, made me hope because I am waiting for the new iMac for some time now like many of you too. Untill I realized how stupid it was.
I am 40 years old and had several Mac Desktop Machines since I was 16. And had no reason to chance that. Untill now.
Professionally, I work with both, PC's and Mac's. At home I prefer Mac's, for several reasons, mainly because I got used to it and the machines look great.
But the waiting game made me think twice. I have enough money to buy whatever I want, so why care? But after some serious research I realized that I need to think twice what I want.
Went to a high end PC store, togehter with one of my best friends who is in the IT-industry himself (and he loves Macs but supported my idea to compare both Macs and PCs).
Long story short: I have a nice DELL PC at home now with all the features you guys dream of in a iMAC - but with the big difference that the PC I have costs me around 35 percent less than a MAC of this power will cost when it ever comes out. Even better: costs me much less than the old iMac right now. Apple mad me blind to realize that all I wanted already exists - just not in an Apple desktop machine. And if it will, it will costs far too much.
Now I am laughing at myself that I even considered to wait another week or so for the new iMac. And if none would have been out, wanted to buy the best they have right now (the old one). Imagine how much I would have overpaid this old Memory and Processor. For what you get right now, the machines should be half price.
Agree, don't have that great looking machine, but the PC's don't look that bad anymore and have more I would have seen with a iMac - and if it would have been in the new iMac, it would have been more expensive. And I am flexible to upgrade for little money.
Don't kill me. I did that with a broken Apple heart. Apple does great stuff like phones, ipods and other thinks, but when it comes to desktops the better look versus poor performance does not justify the high price.
Apple made me blind, I am happy that I woke up.
Hi everyone!
Normally I don't post here, just reading the rumors.
Every post, like this one here about a possible new iMac, made me hope because I am waiting for the new iMac for some time now like many of you too. Untill I realized how stupid it was.
I am 40 years old and had several Mac Desktop Machines since I was 16. And had no reason to chance that. Untill now.
Professionally, I work with both, PC's and Mac's. At home I prefer Mac's, for several reasons, mainly because I got used to it and the machines look great.
But the waiting game made me think twice. I have enough money to buy whatever I want, so why care? But after some serious research I realized that I need to think twice what I want.
Went to a high end PC store, togehter with one of my best friends who is in the IT-industry himself (and he loves Macs but supported my idea to compare both Macs and PCs).
Long story short: I have a nice DELL PC at home now with all the features you guys dream of in a iMAC - but with the big difference that the PC I have costs me around 35 percent less than a MAC of this power will cost when it ever comes out. Even better: costs me much less than the old iMac right now. Apple mad me blind to realize that all I wanted already exists - just not in an Apple desktop machine. And if it will, it will costs far too much.
Now I am laughing at myself that I even considered to wait another week or so for the new iMac. And if none would have been out, wanted to buy the best they have right now (the old one). Imagine how much I would have overpaid this old Memory and Processor. For what you get right now, the machines should be half price.
Agree, don't have that great looking machine, but the PC's don't look that bad anymore and have more I would have seen with a iMac - and if it would have been in the new iMac, it would have been more expensive. And I am flexible to upgrade for little money.
Don't kill me. I did that with a broken Apple heart. Apple does great stuff like phones, ipods and other thinks, but when it comes to desktops the better look versus poor performance does not justify the high price.
Apple made me blind, I am happy that I woke up.
Interesting, so what was your problem? You said you use your mac at home and it doesn't have enough performance for you?
Anyway i have a MBP Late 2007 and waiting for the new iMac 24" so it isn't that much urgent. Oh and i love my MBP even if i'd get more "paper" performance with an IBM/Lenovo.
Anyway i have a MBP Late 2007 and waiting for the new iMac 24" so it isn't that much urgent. Oh and i love my MBP even if i'd get more "paper" performance with an IBM/Lenovo.
It is looking like GT200(b) is just too big and too power hungry to scale down in any normal fashion. It is pretty rare for a graphics company to hold on to old cores for so long after releasing the new hotness.
This rumor deserves to be on page 3. There is absolutely nothing to it as is. There may be an iMac for imminent release, but this was not the rumor that told us anything first.
And a moral story: I sold my MacBook pro in November 2008 fully confident that there would be a new iMac in january 2009. I have been without a computer for that long now
And a moral story: I sold my MacBook pro in November 2008 fully confident that there would be a new iMac in january 2009. I have been without a computer for that long now
Oh please, don't give me that Apple made me blind crap. You made yourself blind to the outside world. Apple didn't force you at gunpoint to buy those machines. Anybody who used Macs most of their life would already know about the high cost of Apple machines and how PC would be 1/4 of the cost, and 5x faster, more powerful and so on. They chose to stick with Macs.
Except for laptops, people don't buy macs for the hardware, they buy them for the OS. For them, the money is worth it.
If people don't care much for the OS X, they'll be happy sticking with linux or windows on any PC they can buy. PCs will always be faster, more powerful and less costly than Macs. That's just the way it is.
For people who can't afford Macs but REALLY want OSX, there's always that Hackintosh.
I am with you, I totally agree! Consider it "crap" - but therefore consider 90 percent of all posts here - about what great great great stuff the next iMac should/could have in the next upgrade - as crap as well. The next upgrade will be less than todays PC World already offers. And no OSX is that outstanding to justify the totally overprized machine. But Apple makes you believe it is. And it seems to work when I read most of the posts here.
As stated, I had Mac desktops for decades and their higher prices were ok for me for the extra benefit for this plattform - but it is not anymore. That's why they had to address other fields with that concept in order to survive.
It is interesting that you say that Windows is faster than Mac.
My Hackintosh is 13% faster running Leopard than Windows XP Professional according to Geekbench. Both Leopard and XP boot from the same HD.
No big whoop since 13% is not that big a deal.
My Hackintosh is 13% faster running Leopard than Windows XP Professional according to Geekbench. Both Leopard and XP boot from the same HD.
No big whoop since 13% is not that big a deal.
thomasthompson, I totally disagree. OS X totally justify the difference to me. Because nr.1 do you really need all that extra horsepower a pc can offer for a smaller price? -most people really don´t. I personally work with 3d software and Photoshop and I look forward to play Starcraft 2...3 things that actually sucks up computer power in various ways, but still if I choose pc, the 3d experience will not be that much faster, really, and the games, well maybe I can increase the texture size a notch if the game has that feature and a couple of other things, but other than that there´s really nothing the pc can give me which the mac cannot.
I work on a pc at work with an expensive Nvidia Quadro graphics card based Dimension Precision, but still my MacBook Pro at home with OS X gives me a smoother experience on EVERYTHING else than the fps in my 3d program. But still framerate is more than decent on the MBP and nothing on the mac annoys me nearly as much as staying in Windows XP at work.
So, then if you can see my point, OS X is actually worth the difference, it boots fast, all programs starts fast, the machine doesn´t clog up and get slow over time, it´s simply delightful to work on. And then don´t forget the looks and simply the whole quality impression of an Mac in general (which no pc can compete against), the machine actually fits into a house (that is if you have any esthetic value to your house interior)...
So 40 year or not, you point doesn´t make sense to me. Unless you care more about spec as in numbers rather than what they do for you. Maybe you need all the horsepower, but 99% of us don´t.
I work on a pc at work with an expensive Nvidia Quadro graphics card based Dimension Precision, but still my MacBook Pro at home with OS X gives me a smoother experience on EVERYTHING else than the fps in my 3d program. But still framerate is more than decent on the MBP and nothing on the mac annoys me nearly as much as staying in Windows XP at work.
So, then if you can see my point, OS X is actually worth the difference, it boots fast, all programs starts fast, the machine doesn´t clog up and get slow over time, it´s simply delightful to work on. And then don´t forget the looks and simply the whole quality impression of an Mac in general (which no pc can compete against), the machine actually fits into a house (that is if you have any esthetic value to your house interior)...
So 40 year or not, you point doesn´t make sense to me
. Unless you care more about spec as in numbers rather than what they do for you. Maybe you need all the horsepower, but 99% of us don´t.
Horsepower is a very misunderstood concept.
For example:
I have 2 old Blue & White G3 towers, 350 and 400 MHz respectively running Panther. One has 768MB RAM, the other 448MB RAM. They run Photoshop CS (8) decently, considering their age. I can take any size JPG and crop it instantly. I rarely use these computers now, but they are still very functional.
To contrast, I have a Compaq with a 2.41GHz Athlon 64 processor running Windows XP Home. It has 1.5GB RAM. That same JPG that can be instantly cropped on the above ancient Macs does not fare so well on my Compaq. When I invoke the CROP command in Photoshop, the Compaq churns along until it runs out of memory, and then it locks up. Very frustrating!
To make this post perfectly clear, I am not bashing Windows. I like Windows, but sometimes it is frustrating to use.
I cannot figure out why a 350MHz Mac beats my 2.41GHz Compaq.
For example:
I have 2 old Blue & White G3 towers, 350 and 400 MHz respectively running Panther. One has 768MB RAM, the other 448MB RAM. They run Photoshop CS (8) decently, considering their age. I can take any size JPG and crop it instantly. I rarely use these computers now, but they are still very functional.
To contrast, I have a Compaq with a 2.41GHz Athlon 64 processor running Windows XP Home. It has 1.5GB RAM. That same JPG that can be instantly cropped on the above ancient Macs does not fare so well on my Compaq. When I invoke the CROP command in Photoshop, the Compaq churns along until it runs out of memory, and then it locks up. Very frustrating!
To make this post perfectly clear, I am not bashing Windows. I like Windows, but sometimes it is frustrating to use.
I cannot figure out why a 350MHz Mac beats my 2.41GHz Compaq.
I never said that Windows is faster than OS X. I used the word, PC and Macs which is not the same thing as Windows and Macintosh OS X. Macs are PCs as well just the only ones that can run OS X. So PC != Microsoft Windows. I was talking about the hardware, nothing else and which your post just proved all my points.
Off the topic: does it piss anybody off when seeing the word "Wintel" in some of the IT job postings?
I'll admit that nVidia does have the performance crown with the GT200 but at the cost of performance per watt. Go lord those cards are nuclear piles and need just as much power.
Why use Nvidia chipset if you are going to use ATI video? Losing hybrid sli and gaining extra headaches in bootcamp doesn't seem very Apple-like.
Basically what does Apple gain going with nvidia chipsets versus Intel when they are going to use non-nvidia gps?
I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say my post proved all your points. All I said was that my PC runs faster with Leopard than it does with Windows.
As far as non-Mac PCs running faster than Mac PCs, they all use pretty much the same hardware. That the Mac PCs cost more than other PCs is accurate.
Release date for new iMacs...
The new iMacs are coming out on March 17. How do I know this? Because I am backed into a corner and the 16th is last day I can possibly wait to get a new machine and the new ones will come out the next day. It happens every f'in' time!
The new iMacs are coming out on March 17. How do I know this? Because I am backed into a corner and the 16th is last day I can possibly wait to get a new machine and the new ones will come out the next day. It happens every f'in' time!
I'm getting iMac for the speed and easy use of OSX, the ability for it to work as soon as it comes out of the box, an inbuilt camera that works just like that, quality software, a machine that will last, but most of all I want to play Starcraft II and Diablo III on it ...
I'm getting iMac for the speed and easy use of OSX, the ability for it to work as soon as it comes out of the box, an inbuilt camera that works just like that, quality software, a machine that will last, but most of all I want to play Starcraft II and Diablo III on it ...
Buy the highest end one you can get then.