Next-Generation iMac: Quad-Core Processors? No Blu-Ray?

[aygie]

They've got to sort out the BD situation, I mean even player only companies are dropping DVD support for Blu-ray only! (Oppo)

http://www.homecinemachoice.com/blo...+ray+base+pulls+plug+dvd+development+15+10+09

 

[johnrs]

Blu-ray would be nice but I think a i5 or i7 would be much better.

heres to hoping

 

[NeverhadaPC]

LED BL display and i am sold!

 

[Stately]

Personally I could care less about Blu-Ray. The superdrive as-is works for the majority of consumers. Professionals in the video production industry are those who would benefit from such an inclusion.

Yeah, I was wondering. Is there really any difference at all in the visual quality from what we have now, compared to blue ray? I don't see one. If there is it must not be that drastic of a change.

 

[baryon]

Quad core would be interesting in an iMac, I don't think it's impossible. It's quite possible for Apple to do it, they often take high end stuff and put it in consumer level devices, I wouldn't be surprised. That won't mean that the iMac would become a Mac Pro: The Mac Pro might as well get 6 core processors, as we heard in a previous rumour.

As for Blu-ray, I really don't care for it, I always think that in the future we will abolish mechanical storage in favour of solid-state storage as it gets cheaper. Disks are loud, take up lots of space and battery power (laptops). But they're cheap...

What would be interesting in the iMac though is a newer design: I think that the bottom thick part could disappear, making the iMac basically a cinema display with a computer inside, but without making it much bigger. I don't know whether that's possible, but I'm pretty sure they'll do it as soon as they can.

And I'm sure Apple wants to put multi touch into everything, so the iMac has go get multi touch somehow, probably through the new Mighty Mouse and/or the keyboard.

 

[Ambrose Chapel]

Not really no, they could bump it up to maybe ~3.2 Ghz.

Honestly though if you look at intel's roadmap if Apple does not add Clarksfield to the iMac they will be stuck at dual core for the next 2 years. There is no other quad-core mobile processor in intel's roadmap for a long time.

Arrandale will be released in 2010 and only ever be dual-core and include integrated graphics. That is just not an improvement for the iMac.

agreed.

so, if they do move from a 2.9xGHz dual core Penryn to a 1.7xGHz quad Clarksfield, will the additional cores compensate for the loss in clockspeed? has Clarksfield been benchmarked?

 

[SirOmega]

What about us consumers who have Blu-ray movies? Ever since I got a Playstation 3, I have been buying all my movies in the Blu-ray format. I have no (simple, quick, and easy) way to rip the Blu-rays to my iPhone or iMac.

Don't most of the BR movies out there now come with a digital copy for iTunes?

That said, unless Slysoft makes AnyDVD HD for the Mac (unlikely) we wont be seeing any way to rip BR movies on the mac without a windows VM.

 

[ValSalva]

Great if true

Great news on quad core if true. Quad core is great for multi-tasking.

I can see Apple releasing Quad core iMacs next week to try and rain crap on the Windows 7 parade.

 

[125037]

Trying not to get my self all pissed off but I will be VERY upset if this is not offered as an option. (Blu Ray)

 

[blizaine]

If I had to choose, I'd definitely go for Quad over BR.

 

[danielwsmithee]

I don't really see how a quad 1.66 Ghz can eat into a quad 2.66 Ghz lineup.

I agree, not to mention the MP will likely be able to be configured with more RAM, 4 Hard Drives ...

If the rumor hold true that the MP will go 6-core in early 2010 it makes perfect sense. It is not like the holiday season is a huge season for MP sales, but it will be for the iMac.

 

[silentnite]

If I had to without the Blu-ray I could live. I have a blu-ray player and I don't use it as much for one reason or another. However, a processor upgrade is a deal breaker for me, it's about time apple delivers a quad core in the Imac line & while their at it, give us a break with these 9400M. Standard should be GT-120 by now.

 

[NeverhadaPC]

Every major computer manufacturer except Apple at least offers Blu-Ray as an option.

I am the only person to offer full white dirty thrash-bags with a purchase of my computers.... does not make them any better.

Blu-Ray belongs with TVs until we can rip BluRay movies at 32x. Use external hard drives if you need to back up (they are cheaper too)!

 

[LagunaSol]

I'd rather see video-in on the iMacs than Blu-Ray. Mac gaming is going nowhere fast, but I'd love to connect my PS3 to my 24" iMac display for some quality gaming time when the wife is watching the TV. How about an HDMI input on the iMac, Apple?

 

[zedsdead]

agreed.

so, if they do move from a 2.9xGHz dual core Penryn to a 1.7xGHz quad Clarksfield, will the additional cores compensate for the loss in clockspeed? has Clarksfield been benchmarked?

The 1.73 Clarksfield will operate at 2.8 in Dual-Core mode, and 3.06 in single-Core mode, and 2.0 in quad-core mode. This is possible via Turbo boost.

The 2.0 Extreme chip has speeds up to 3.2 in single, 3.06 in dual, and 2.26 in quad.

The Clarksfield chips are perfect for the iMac and will bring either the same performance or better for multi-core tasks (like video encoding).

 

[ChrisA]

Personally I could care less about Blu-Ray. The superdrive as-is works for the majority of consumers. Professionals in the video production industry are those who would benefit from such an inclusion.

Many consumers are buying HD cameras now. iMovie can handle HD content. How does Apple expect consumers to ever move their finished videos off the Mac? The Mac has become an HD video "black hole".

About the only option is to buy a third party blu-ray burner

 

[Essefgy]

What about us consumers who have Blu-ray movies?

Yes. Exactly. I really don't think it's too much to ask for my Macbook to do what so many Windows laptops can do. Play Blu-Ray discs.

To put it simply, it's embarrassing to me that my coworker's laptop can play Blu-Ray movies but my MacBook Pro, which cost over twice as much, cannot.

 

[danielwsmithee]

agreed.

so, if they do move from a 2.9xGHz dual core Penryn to a 1.7xGHz quad Clarksfield, will the additional cores compensate for the loss in clockspeed? has Clarksfield been benchmarked?

Yes because of TurboBoost. If you are not using some of your cores in the Clarksfield they get turned off and the remaining cores get overclocked. In the case of the 1.7 it turboboosts to 3.06 Ghz. So you have a faster dual core processor and a quad core processor built into one with Clarksfield.

Plus there are numerous other architecture improvements in Clarksfield. You can expect about a 20-30% boost in CPU processing power. The Northbridge is now integrated in Clarksfield which means IO between the processor, memory, and video card will be much less of a bottle neck.

 

[SirOmega]

agreed.

so, if they do move from a 2.9xGHz dual core Penryn to a 1.7xGHz quad Clarksfield, will the additional cores compensate for the loss in clockspeed? has Clarksfield been benchmarked?

As long as the iMac can keep the CPU cool enough to let Turbo Boost work, then the single/dual core usage speeds will be up around 2.8-3.0GHz.

Plus, thats 3GHz of Nehalem architecture, which is another 10-25% boost depending on workload type over Penryn at the same clock speeds.

 

[Umbongo]

The 1.73 Clarksfield will operate at 2.8 in Dual-Core mode, and 3.06 in single-Core mode, and 2.0 in quad-core mode. This is possible via Turbo boost.

The 2.0 Extreme chip has speeds up to 3.2 in single, 3.06 in dual, and 2.26 in quad.

The Clarksfield chips are perfect for the iMac and will bring either the same performance or better for multi-core tasks (like video encoding).

Perfect in so much as Apple want thin thin thin. With the 2GHz being a $1000 processor it's not great for consumers. That clock speed probably isn't a favorite of Apple's marketing department either.

 

[NeverhadaPC]

I'd rather see video-in on the iMacs than Blu-Ray. Mac gaming is going nowhere fast, but I'd love to connect my PS3 to my 24" iMac display for some quality gaming time when the wife is watching the TV. How about an HDMI input on the iMac, Apple?

Interesting concept albeit a niche customer base... is iMac display HD resolution?

 

[NT1440]

How does Apple expect consumers to ever move their finished videos off the Mac?

I move massive files all the time, and I don't use disks.....

 

[kingtj]

re: Blu-Ray

I just don't see why this would affect sales for Apple?
For starters, nobody I know cares a bit about *recording* onto Blu-Ray media, because the blank media is still so expensive. The few who would, have probably already purchased an EXTERNAL Blu-Ray burner so they can use it with any machine they like.

If you simply want to watch Blu-Ray disc movies? Yeah, I could see why iMac owners (especially of 24" versions) might find that convenient, if they're using their iMac doubled up as a TV set and maybe PVR.... But really, Blu-Ray discs look best on much bigger screens. I only watch those on my 50" plasma at home, myself, and I have a PS3 console to play them on.

Adoption of Blu-Ray disc titles is SLOW still, so I'd imagine most people don't even own any of the things yet.

If you own a Mac Pro, there's nothing stopping you from buying a Blu-Ray disc compatible drive right now and installing it in place of the stock burner. No need to wait on Apple to sell you one of theirs.....

Every major computer manufacturer except Apple at least offers Blu-Ray as an option.

 

[aygie]

Yeah, I was wondering. Is there really any difference at all in the visual quality from what we have now, compared to blue ray? I don't see one. If there is it must not be that drastic of a change.

Are you serious!

 

[tailgate1234]

Blu Ray is a must

For me and every other owner of an HD camcorder who wants to be able to edit and play back their HD movies from a disk, it is about time that Apple support Blu Ray.