Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

So who wants a retina iMac?

  • Yes, certainly! Retina is awesome!

    Votes: 139 45.4%
  • Meh, I want to see how its implemented and tested first.

    Votes: 104 34.0%
  • OMG WHO THE HELL WANTS A FREAKING RETINA DISPLAY ON A DESKTOP? Of course I don't want one!

    Votes: 58 19.0%
  • what's a retina display?

    Votes: 5 1.6%

  • Total voters
    306

David085

macrumors 6502a
Nov 9, 2009
811
3
I want one But in the future since I already spend enough money for the computers.
 
Comment

Nermal

Moderator
Staff member
Dec 7, 2002
19,055
1,520
New Zealand
If I was in the market for an iMac then I'd be happy with a HiDPI display if it doesn't add to the price of the computer (i.e. Apple would need to eat into the margins).
 
Comment

Mr Rogers

macrumors regular
Oct 24, 2003
225
3
Hong Kong
No to 'Retina'

A retina display on a 27in iMac makes no sense - indeed, they's have to deploy a desktop GPU to drive this - the AMD 7980M certainly would be wasted with Retina - leave display alone and benefit from better graphics is best policy for 2012.
 
Comment

adildacoolset

macrumors 65816
Original poster
A retina display on a 27in iMac makes no sense - indeed, they's have to deploy a desktop GPU to drive this - the AMD 7980M certainly would be wasted with Retina - leave display alone and benefit from better graphics is best policy for 2012.

same here, just stick to 2560x1440 and good things will happen. That coupled with a 7980M can actually become a really good machine for rendering/editing/programming/gaming etc.
 
Comment

Ashok0

macrumors regular
Jul 27, 2010
131
1
I would be first in line to buy one. And for the record, the new ZOTAC cards can do 3840x2160 over DisplayPort 1.2. All we need is the monitor. I can still see a minor screen door effect on my ACD27", more resolution please. :)
 
Comment

Cygnus311

macrumors regular
May 6, 2006
175
0
No. I don't plan to sit 8 inches from a 27 inch screen so it's pointless. It would also basically require dual desktop GPUs.
 
Comment

Apple fanboy

macrumors Westmere
Feb 21, 2012
42,865
33,844
Behind the Lens, UK
I Would rather the matt finish or anti glare finish than Retina. Also if the cost of a Retina screen is higher (which it will be) and apple like to keep the price points about the same, retina will mean I don't get something else for my money. I would rather an SSD as standard.
 
Comment

Matador Red

macrumors member
Apr 28, 2012
69
0
For the cost of doing retina on iMac, I would rather have other upgrades. Retina is about 75% marketing hype and from the looks of it a bunch of you are buying into it.
 
Comment

The "Dude"

macrumors regular
Sep 29, 2011
120
0
A retina display on a 27in iMac makes no sense - indeed, they's have to deploy a desktop GPU to drive this - the AMD 7980M certainly would be wasted with Retina - leave display alone and benefit from better graphics is best policy for 2012.

Agreed. The current generation iMac screens are gorgeous at their current resolution. I just hope that they do indeed use the 7980M and not the rumored Nvidia card.
 
Comment

beosound3200

macrumors 6502a
Nov 23, 2010
684
0
The "Dude";14910059 said:
Agreed. The current generation iMac screens are gorgeous at their current resolution. I just hope that they do indeed use the 7980M and not the rumored Nvidia card.

latest info (taken with a grain of salt) says gtx 680M breaks p6000 3dmark11 with 75-85watt which is mind-blowing. in any case, i hardly believe that gtx680m will be more than 5% worse than 7970m, probably 10% better but twice as expensive (as usual). so im kinda hoping for nvidia.
 
Comment

forty2j

macrumors 68030
Jul 11, 2008
2,585
2
NJ
I don't think I'd trust any of this year's mobile card offerings (spectacular though they may be) to push around Retina pixels on a 27" screen. Especially if gaming is large part of what you use an iMac for.
 
Comment

The "Dude"

macrumors regular
Sep 29, 2011
120
0
latest info (taken with a grain of salt) says gtx 680M breaks p6000 3dmark11 with 75-85watt which is mind-blowing. in any case, i hardly believe that gtx680m will be more than 5% worse than 7970m, probably 10% better but twice as expensive (as usual). so im kinda hoping for nvidia.

Good call. They would both be fine for what I intend to use them for. But regardless, they would both be wasted on a retina display.
 
Comment

Ashok0

macrumors regular
Jul 27, 2010
131
1
For the cost of doing retina on iMac, I would rather have other upgrades. Retina is about 75% marketing hype and from the looks of it a bunch of you are buying into it.

How is higher resolution "hype"? I set a foot away from my ACD27" and it doesn't look as "crisp" as my phone. Granted a 'Retina' desktop display would be ~166ppi and not 324ppi but still, if Apple builds it I will start throwing money at my local Apple store. :D
 
Comment

beosound3200

macrumors 6502a
Nov 23, 2010
684
0
I don't think I'd trust any of this year's mobile card offerings (spectacular though they may be) to push around Retina pixels on a 27" screen. Especially if gaming is large part of what you use an iMac for.

retina is out of the question for any gpu few years down the road, its just not good enough, so it would be good to erase it from your mind. the thing you will do is lower the resolution (3840x2160 -> 1920x1080) it will still look near-perfect and perform better than todays 2560x1440

7970m has pixel fillrate of 27.2 GP/s
 
Comment

cocky jeremy

Cancelled
Jul 12, 2008
4,671
2,509
For the cost of doing retina on iMac, I would rather have other upgrades. Retina is about 75% marketing hype and from the looks of it a bunch of you are buying into it.

Same here. I'd take a 128 or 256 GB over retina in a heartbeat. Same for 30" or 32" screen, or 16 GB of RAM standard. Any of those appeal to me more than "retina" when the iMac is already basically "retina" as is from where i sit.
 
Comment

Matador Red

macrumors member
Apr 28, 2012
69
0
How is higher resolution "hype"? I set a foot away from my ACD27" and it doesn't look as "crisp" as my phone. Granted a 'Retina' desktop display would be ~166ppi and not 324ppi but still, if Apple builds it I will start throwing money at my local Apple store. :D

Someone has convinced you that you need the ultimate clarity at a 12" viewing distance. Thats the hype. Do you regularly sit with your eyes 12" from the screen? If not, then your argument is invalid. If you do, you probably need your eyes checked. Retina makes sence in a portable product such as the iPad or iPhone with a highly variable viewing distance and a small screen but not so much in a 27"iMac which is already relatively close to retina at normal viewing distances.

Same here. I'd take a 128 or 256 GB over retina in a heartbeat. Same for 30" or 32" screen, or 16 GB of RAM standard. Any of those appeal to me more than "retina" when the iMac is already basically "retina" as is from where i sit.

I personally think that 27 is the sweet spot for me but I agree completely with the SSD.
 
Comment

kitsunestudios

macrumors regular
Apr 10, 2012
226
0
I would like one, as long as it's 3840x2160, so I can play games at 1920x1080 with no jagged blurriness.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.