I did too. 24" seems to be my favorite display size. I just picked up a Dell P2415Q 24" 4k display for my MacBook Pro. Not a bad price (around $437 on Amazon).
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.
OS X El Capitan Code Hints at 4K 21.5-inch Retina iMac
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This site will help: isthisretina.com
What about it? There are no Macs or even PCs on the market that supports TB3. Makes zero sense to release that display until next year when Macs with TB3/USB-C comes out.
Skylake's biggest promise is in mobile. It does have advantages for the desktop, but not much. DDR4 support, even though DDR3 has no bottleneck. The gig wifi sounds good but that would mean new routers for everyone, no?
Skylake is lower power consumption and a small, very small, bump in power. Bettery battery life in mobile is the biggest draw from what I read. Also, wireless charging capability?.? Something like that. This is all just off the top of my head, which has it's share of senior moments.
http://www.storagenewsletter.com/ru...tb-record-for-2-5-inch-hdd-by-samsungseagate/
Worth mention Toshiba is one of Apple' historic suppiers.
No it doesn't. Retina has been here for several years. They treat their consumer product lines differently from the professional lines.
I just (literally 3 hours ago) purchased a 2013 Refurbished 21.5-inch 2.9GHz quad i5 with 8GB and 1TB Fusion Drive. Price was just over $200 less than new.
This is more than enough computer for my needs (family machine). I can't imagine the new model would be worth the wait, then paying full price for brand new.
Am I crazy to not wait?
This is more than enough computer for my needs (family machine). I can't imagine the new model would be worth the wait, then paying full price for brand new.
Am I crazy to not wait?
My guess: $1499-$1699 starting 4K 21.5" with M380X, 8GB of RAM, Fusion drive, i5.
New low end $1799 iMac 27 5K with M390, M395 takes $1999 spot, with M395X as a BTO with extra VRAM.
Last edited:
In the same code there were hints at unreleased mobile GPUs from AMD, the R9-M380, M390, M395, M395X, and an Intel Iris Pro 6200 which is already on the market.
Why Apple is still doing business with AMD is beyond me. nVidia's GPUs are so much more powerful while operating at a lower TDP, and Apple's terrible cooling design in the iMac isn't helping either. Both the CPU and GPU are known to thermal throttle themselves before they overheat and shut down because of Apple's desire to make a thinner desktop. IT'S A DESKTOP YOU WANKERS. IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE THIN OR CARRIED AROUND. PLEASE. STOP IT.
Holy ****. This times 1000.
Just sold my Retina 5K because it was the biggest piece of garbage I've ever owned. 3.5 thousand dollar computer couldn't even run games at scaled 1440p on maximum without overheating. My $600 980ti in my gaming PC that I built would run circles around it. Maybe next time, Apple.
It's about time if not already late,there was no excuse for the 21.5 inch iMacs too have non-retina low res screens.
It's for the 17" retina MacBook Pro!!!! I refuse to accept its gone and not returning! (The classic iPod will also be back)
This. If Apple still releases a 2GB VRAM option on ANY GPU in their iMacs they'll be welcomed to 2012. It's already ridiculous Apple offers a meager 2GB of VRAM in their R9-M290X model.
Or, a 64" 64K machine.....
Can anyone really tell between 1k and 4k outside the commercial realm?
What makes you say that? They didn't use readily available ones for pretty much any other retina product.
24 inches is too close to 27. It makes the most sense to stay at 21.5 inches with the same PPI as the 27 inch.
I have no clue how that related to what I posted?
yes. Going to a display with less than 200ppi is harsh on my eyes now.
Yeah, I don't get this at all. It makes it seem like it is for a new Cinema display rather than a 21.5" iMac, because that would be 16:10 right? But then again, the PPI doesn't seem high enough for a Cinema display, you'd have thought they would go 5K at 27-30"? Actually seriously confused. Really don't see Apple releasing a 16:9 iMac though.
The only thing that does make sense here is the 217-218 PPI, which matches the 27" iMac retina. That is a totally Apple move.
What do you mean by overheated? People overuse that word. Did you mean it throttles? Regardless, it's not a gaming machine, expecting it to act like a dedicated gaming machine is silly.
Apple's GPU buying criteria probably consists more than just maximum gaming throughput. Apple probably wants some other attributes with about as much weighting as just raw performance.
1. Price. If AMD is offering better deals then Apple will take them. Nvidia may or may not be offering the same kinds of discounts as AMD is. Apple isn't trying to buy the most expensive part possible that fits insides of some thermal limit.
2. OpenCL. Nvidia actions over last couple of years have reflected a "For CUDA to win, OpenCL has to loose" policy. They have dragged their feet getting to OpenCL 1.2. OpenCL 2.0 is where? Meanwhile Intel/AMD/ImagTech have all relatively quickly supported it.
3. Potential ease of MST DisplayPort. Eyefinity foundation may work better than Nvidia's solutions with the OS X graphics stack. Right now need bounded DPv1.2 streams to drive 5K displays. Early in 4K monitor release needed MST within DPv1.2 stream to do 4K. There is no indication Nvidia has a superior ability here. Single stream probably on better parity but multistream there is little indication they are competitive.
[ this 4K 21.5-23 inch monitor may be single stream but the 5K probably aren't going to be for a while longer. The choice has to cover the whole line up. ]
iMacs aren't particuarly thinner in the middle where the fans/thermal system is. The fans are a bit undersized than necessary in the current 27" model. ( there is room for a bigger fan). The internal layout isn't quite optimized. More vents/inlets at the top and back could help without changing the thickness at all.
The bigger problem with the current iMac design is not the "thin" aspect but the desire to hide the vents from plain view. Have to be down facing or placed behind the pedastal arm so that normal viewing angles they can't be seen. It is OCD driven "super clean"design that is the major blocker here.
