Any Mac is a poor choice for gaming, for the spec to pride ratio.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.
For the love of god, please put GPUs back in Macs. Integrated graphics aren't worth jack.
I'm totally confused with the iMac. Don't know whether to buy now, wait for new Broadwell models or wait for Skylake models. Used to be so simple with Intel now I'm lost.
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.
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.
Why is Apple running on AMD gpus? Performance-per-watt from them is absolutely dreadful. I've got a Geforce GTX 960 and at load it draws only 120 watts. AMD's similar performer takes about 230 watts. Pathetic....
If you can, wait until the release of El Capitan. Because Skylake desktop chip, that'll replace current 27" iMac Haswell processors, will run at 65W TDP. (Haswell runs now at 88W TDP). That improves the current, bad thermal situation a lot.I'm totally confused with the iMac. Don't know whether to buy now, wait for new Broadwell models or wait for Skylake models. Used to be so simple with Intel now I'm lost.
I still wish they would bring back the 24" iMac (but with a retina display). I found 24" perfect for my needs.
It Proves only an 4K iMac comes, not an 21.5" iMac, I bet the new iMac will be bigger than 23" and smaller than 24.5"
Eyes don't improve with age.Why?
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.
Praytell, what was that?Not like the r-iMac is marketed as a games machine. It does quite well at what it's actually intended for.
Eyes don't improve with age.
Praytell, what was that?
And? Unless you're legally blind, pretty much anyone would benefit from a retina display.
--Eric
Apple's newest OS X El Capitan beta, released on Tuesday, contains code that may hint at some upcoming Apple product updates. Shared by Pierre Dandumont (via 9to5Mac), the code references a Retina display with a 4096 x 2304 resolution, potentially referring to a future 21.5-inch Retina iMac with a 4K resolution.
There's also a mention of Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200, the graphics chipset that accompanies Intel's newest line of Broadwell processors. Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 and a Broadwell/Skylake processor could potentially be destined for a 4K 21.5-inch Retina iMac, but the chipset is also suitable for a number of notebooks. There's a further mention of AMD Radeon M380 - M395X graphics, which could be used in high-end iMac models.
Apple actually does not have other choices since they won't choose NVidiaIn 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.
Not really. Beyond a certain age, eyes lose their ability to discern resolution beyond a certain level. Smaller text would mean having to lower the resolution, to increase font size, negating any 'benefit" from higher resolutions.
And, trust me, glasses can never replace 20/20 vision.
I would rather want a 32" 8k iMac
You're misunderstanding what Retina Display is about. Apple does not use the native resolution as the default resolution, it will use the HiDPI resolution (2x) by default.
The font size stays exactly the same except it will be twice as sharp, it will actually look like you got a new pair of eyeglasses.
The native resolution of the panel will be at 4096 x 2304 but the default HiDPI/scaled resolution will be 2048 x 1152 (4096/2 x 2304/2).
People with worse eye vision will actually benefit more from Retina displays.
When not wearing my glasses I can't tell the difference between my 15" MBP and 15" rMBP screen. When wearing glasses I can clearly see that the rMBP is much sharper.
When you are farsighted it all looks fuzzy, and the extra sharp dots don't help.