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.
Retina iMac - GTX 980M
- Thread starter AsprineTm
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Haswell-E and Z99 chipset seems aimed to the next upcoming iMac Pro 27, are compatible with previous rumours, the new iMac Pro 27 surely will include a thermal redesign to handle the much higher TDP From cpu/gpu expect it to be much Thicker as the HP Z1 AIO workstation loaded with similar TDP cpu/gpu
I can't imagine Apple allowing the iMac chassis to become any thicker than it currently is, unless we're talking a few millimeters (think iPad mini to iPad mini with Retina).
An hypothetic iMac Pro as rumored need to handle 2 or 3 times the heat from cpu/gpu so some huge improvement on the cooling is required, how? No idea but maths imply bigger heath sink and fans, so at least some mod to the chassis is required.
Understood in regards to cooling (I've built several PCs and have no issues getting my "hands dirty" with computers, both Mac and PC).
I guess I missed the iMac Pro rumor. I find that to be unlikely too, given Apple's track record.
With a TDP for the CPU alone being 140W and another 120W+ for the GPU, I have my doubts Apple would do this.
HP did, but they go further and they Z1 AIO can be ordered with upto Xeon and dual GPU (like a nMacPro on an iMac body).
Apple as Hp is moving strong on the pro market, new studios handling 4K Video editing will push the workstation market demand, so I Don't see the hypothetic iMac Pro unlikely, actually it will drive good sales since fills the gap among the iMac 27" and the Mac Pro
The Xeons they use are simply reworked i7's (4C8T) with a TDP of 82W using the Z97 chipset, not Haswell-E. The top end GPU HP offers is a 100W K4100M and is only slightly faster than the 770M.
Last edited:
Ehh, sorry Sir, there is no comparision on XEON Architecture with Intel Core, those are just cousin, but completly different beast, just comapare performance on Xeon E5v2 4c o the nMac Pro with the I7 Family, no Haswell i7 outperforms the X-e5v2.
Same is about th GPU, you cant compare workstation GPU with "gaming" GPU, unless you only use it for gaming, a Workstation GPU works on ECC Memory, cant Compare nVidia QUADRO K4100M with an GForce 770MQ its like compare a 6 Wheel Tank with an Pickup With Dually rear axe, both may have 6 Wheel touching the land, but one is for fun, the other is for destruction. Sure you saw at ww.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-Quadro-K4100M.98852.0.html , this comparision its only for GAMING PERFORMANCE, a different task on what an Workstation Card is intended, among the Memory architecture there are 1152 Cuda cores vs 960, and a large etc f differences only matter on a Workstation.
Haswell-E (replaces Socked 2011) chips require Z9x Chipset, Xeon E5v2 can run on a Z79 as well on Z9X, but requires a Mother board based on C604/C602 to work properly at full capabilities.
Hasswell-E only runs on X99 (Socket 2011-3). The Xeon's HP offers are not Haswell-E but Haswell running on the same 1150 sockets as the i7's. They are essintial the same processors. The K4100M is only marginally faster than a 770M under ANY task, gaming or otherwise. Your comparisons with tanks and trucks are rather bizarre and pointless.
Cooling is an issue when the screen is a barrier in one direction. I wish Apple would return to the G4 style iMac. Having the components in the base allows much more flexiblity for cooling. There are other benefits such as not needing such a study arm as less weight is being carried, ergonomics because of a height adjustable screen, and imagine how thin the screen could be!
My point is that a retina iMac might have a new form factor. The Mac Pro has a shape built around cooling, so it wouldn't be the first time.
My point is that a retina iMac might have a new form factor. The Mac Pro has a shape built around cooling, so it wouldn't be the first time.
I didn't mention hp Z1 Run on Haswell?, but the hypothetical iMac Pro 27. What's pioneered HP is to deliver a real workstation in an AIO form factor.
HP Z1 G2 has a while on the market, maybe next to another update, about its *similar* performance at pc magazine there are some test where it compared to the base nMP.
Not the point, the thread is about an possible update to the iMac, and an hypothetic iMac Pro with real workstation guts driving a 4k panel.
FOR THE RECORDS, I DONT LIKE HP, I NAMED THE Z1 JUST AS A REFERENCE.
But you did.
Mago said:
No way the TDP can be similar. 160W GPU/CPU total vs 260W. I just don't see Apple doing this. If Apple wanted to do this before they could have with IB-E (X79) but chose not to for what are obvious reasons.
Workstation users generally like to pick their own screens as well. That is what the nMP is there for.
The GTX 980M is rumored to be 50% over 880M at 100W.
This would be sufficient to power a retina 27".
Don't see why there needs to be a MX version, or a iMac Pro.
The good thing is that there are more hardware rumors that support the plausibility of an retina imac 27".
This would be sufficient to power a retina 27".
Don't see why there needs to be a MX version, or a iMac Pro.
The good thing is that there are more hardware rumors that support the plausibility of an retina imac 27".
On the other hand already the 17" G4 iMac looked a bit awkward and the 20" was completely unbalanced from an aesthetical POV.
Today's screen sizes would require a much bigger base (both optically and as counterweight) than with the G4, so I'm not sure this will ever happen. That is - unless Apple would go a different route and offer a "G4 design reloaded": iMacs with 4k screens in sizes 15" through 20".
In the past you usually had to go for bigger screen sizes to get higher resolutions, but with today's technology this isn't mandatory anymore. A G4-iMac-like construction would allow to get the display closer to your eyes while still occupying less space on your desk (27" monitors are on the brink of what many users accept/can accommodate on their desks).
And with a smaller 4k monitor closer to your eyes you would still have a better resolution than today's 27" iMacs, while perceiving the desktop not being (significantly) smaller than on - say - a 2x" monitor.
It may require some time to get used to such a paradigm change, but it could be done eventually. Honestly, though, I feel this is just wishful thinking based on the still appealing design of the G4 iMac...
Last edited:
50% gain isn't enough to achieve the same performance. If the screen res is true retina, it will be 4x the pixels, so you would need a 300% gain in GPU performance. If it is not true retina and only double the pixels, then you'll "only" need a 100% gain.
Now, that's if you're expecting 880M level performance on your 3D games and such at native res. If you just want to drive the screen at 2D for desktop apps, the bar is far lower. After all, Apple fits the base 27" with a 755M today. Looking at available benchmarks, the 880M has around 3x the performance of the 755M. If the 980M has a 50% gain on top of that, then the 980M will be around 4.5x the performance of the 755M.
So, yes, it would be enough to drive 4x the pixels, but at the performance level slightly above a 755M. If only double the pixels, it would perform much better, but still not at the level of a current iMac with a 880M.
All this is considering the 27" screen. If they only offer the 21" screen in retina, then it becomes much more reasonable. But it's hard to imagine them offering that without a 27" option.
This has been the debate around a such a large retina screen forever. What kind of GPU will it take to drive it, what will the thermal requirements be, and what will the price be?
I'd love for them to debut a retina imac this fall, but I think it's more likely to come in the spring. But the sooner they do it, the sooner I'll be in the market for it. I'll buy on the 2nd or 3rd revision, thank you.
I think thats what all of the arguments about Retina/4K screens are missing......they could release an iMac with Retina/4K screen and of course for 2D desktop apps a 980M could easily drive it at full resolution.....but for games you would probably have to revert down to 1080p res, which you do on the current 27" iMac anyway today(to get decent frame rates). Nobody is saying the GPU will be powerful enough to run Crysis type FPS games at native 4K/Retina resolution, they havent been able to do that in the past and it would need a desktop GPU to do that anyway.....
I personally would not be surprised to see an iMac with TB2, 980M GPU and 4K screen (called Retina or not) this fall.....with the broadwell refresh being the same time next year...if they did the former it would be pointless to release the latter anytime before Q4 2015....
I still can't see a retina iMac happening just yet. Aren't the smallest 4k monitors around 28''? That's not anywhere near Apple's usual resolution doubling scheme.. Maybe Apple will release a 24'' 4k retina display first? But a retina 27'' with 1440p resolution (retina style), I just can't see the technology being available anytime soon...
On the other hand already the 17" G4 iMac looked a bit awkward and the 20" was completely unbalanced from an aesthetical POV.
Today's screen sizes would require a much bigger base (both optically and as counterweight) than with the G4, so I'm not sure this will ever happen. That is - unless Apple would go a different route and offer a "G4 design reloaded": iMacs with 4k screens in sizes 15" through 20".
In the past you usually had to go for bigger screen sizes to get higher resolutions, but with today's technology this isn't mandatory anymore. A G4-iMac-like construction would allow to get the display closer to your eyes while still occupying less space on your desk (27" monitors are on the brink of what many users accept/can accommodate on their desks).
And with a smaller 4k monitor closer to your eyes you would still have a better resolution than today's 27" iMacs, while perceiving the desktop not being (significantly) smaller than on - say - a 2x" monitor.
It may require some time to get used to such a paradigm change, but it could be done eventually. Honestly, though, I feel this is just wishful thinking based on the still appealing design of the G4 iMac...
Yes, it is wishful thinking. But I don't agree on the unbalanced aesthetics. Looking at the monitor in front of me and I can imagine a computer base with a similar footprint to the stand.
The G4 iMac is my favourite design, but it is the layout that I would like to see return rather than the exact look. I would guess that the screen would look like an oversized MacBook Pro screen, complete with glowing Apple logo on the back. and the base to share a look with the Mac Pro, or Mac Mini, or maybe even a MacBook Pro without the keyboard and trackpad.
There are 24" 4K monitors. Dell do one.
OK, there it is.
A 1080p-retina 24'' iMac.. I think it's reasonable to expect a retina version in 24'' this autumn then, as an addition to the regular iMac line.
There are even 15" displays at 4k, e.g. in the Toshiba P50(t)-B or the Asus NX500/GX500. Can't judge the quality of those, but the fundamental technology for 4k-screens smaller than 27"/24" is available today.
In reverse that means that a Retina iMac is technologically already possible as well.
Last edited: