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
Any Mac is a poor choice for gaming, for the spec to pride ratio.
My 2011 27" iMac had to run games in 1080p windowed format because the graphics card couldn't handle them at 2k resolution in boot camp. And even then, performance was barely passable and this was after disabling a bunch of features.
If Apple decides to increase the 21.5" to 23-34" 4K, plus give at least the high end model a relatively beefy GPU as well as the same exact storage tiers as compared to it's bigger brother, I may opt to get the smaller iMac for my next Mac.
Last edited:
man, i feel like people have been talking about waiting for broadwell since 2010. i wouldn't wait years for intel to do anything - they've already displayed the fact that they're the slowest company on the planet. other than avid, maybe.
There's nothing confusing about it at all. The new resolution is 16:9 at 217 PPI on a 21.5 inch screen. The new retina iMac will be 21.5 inches with the same PPI as the 27 inch 5k. Makes perfect sense.
When thunderbolt 3 comes out they will more than likely introduce a 5k thunderbolt display. It's also possible you could see a 4k 21.5 inch display also.
Show me all Nvidia's mobile GPU's that do support 5k resolution!
There...
Last edited:
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.
Last edited:
Not like the r-iMac is marketed as a games machine. It does quite well at what it's actually intended for.
And? Unless you're legally blind, pretty much anyone would benefit from a retina display.
--Eric
Video editing (particularly 4k video). If you recall, they made a big deal how 5k allowed editing 4k without scaling while still showing controls and timeline. Also great for photoshop, etc.
And of course it easily handles typical productivity apps.
But anyone who buys any mac expecting good gaming performance is a bit loopy.
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.
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 should stop using ATI which are garbage, and stick with nVidia. Lots of people use Adobe products on Mac's and these have functions for CUDA Cores. CUDA cores only work on nVidia GPU's which are always better than ATI. They should not be using mobile GPUs either.
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.
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.
I didn't say Retina Display is a replacement for your eyeglasses, you basically just confirmed what I just said, it will look much shaper which also means less eyestrains on your eyes as well, something that is important for people with eyeglasses.
My mother has bad vision but she has less eye strains on her iPad with Retina display compared to her old iPad with no Retina.
I won't buy a 27" or a 21" retina iMac until they can be used as an external monitor like the non retina iMacs can. If I'm gonna plunk down that kinda money, I want to know that my iMac can be used as a monitor years down the road when it begins to not run programs. That's one benefit of the non retina iMacs. To be able to hook up future MacBooks to them is a real bonus when they no longer can keep up with technology.