Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Should I wait until Skylake chipset or purchase now?

Chinese website:

http://fudzilla.com/news/processors/37822-intel-releases-skylake-schedule

sklake-schedule.jpg


Fall update for the 2013 & 2014 models with Skylake is still possible. Desktop = S models, K refers to locked or unlocked multiplier.
 
Wait or not wait is always the question. One thing I learned is I spend a month, or more deciding if I should wait. I then buy it and bam the new one comes up. If I am ready to buy now, I buy and do not look at what could have been. Wait a month, two months, etc and find out the CPU's are delayed as many of the last several series have generally been.

I am in the same boat. I am ready to buy and still mulling over a few spec upgrades.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewStart178 View Post
So can anyone advice on this question

if I assume the graphic card to make no difference to me with my basic computing need, will the Skylake a major breakthrough over and above the Haswell used at current max out level i7 4Ghz?
Would it be like 50% jump in performance with lots of new features with the new chip?

Or would it be an incremental change of around 10% overall improvement?
Thanks

I think we won't see a 50% increase in CPU speed for a long while. Intel is all about power efficiency and small, iterative improvements.
Big piece of info that aids in my decision process.

If you assume the graphic card will make no difference to you, than no, a new generation iMac won't be much faster. The only big difference will be the ability to use it in target display mode and use external single-stream 5K screens thanks to DP1.3

So, if you're asking should you buy the iMac now, I'd say the time is as good as any. If you want to wait, there will always be a better option down the road. Just my thoughts, could be wrong.


This is the type info I was originally looking for.
Thank you for all who have responded, I have been checking this posting every day and will continue.

I still haven't been 100% persuaded to go ahead and purchase but the info I have received from everyone is very valuable. I'm thinking i at least need to wait until WWDC is over in June before I make my final decision.
 
I agree, with this info Skylake or not is no longer a deal breaker for me. Thanks a lot

I actually don't mind the power of the GPU either for my basic computing needs.

The biggest concern for me now is the "noise" that everyone seems to complain about. I definitely have low tolerance for noise, and even worse when I notice it, it will be the only thing I notice, always there in my mind. I think i am better wait until apple sort this thing out before pulling the trigger.
 
nydennis said:
Wait or not wait is always the question. One thing I learned is I spend a month, or more deciding if I should wait. I then buy it and bam the new one comes up. If I am ready to buy now, I buy and do not look at what could have been. Wait a month, two months, etc and find out the CPU's are delayed as many of the last several series have generally been.

I am in the same boat. I am ready to buy and still mulling over a few spec upgrades.
Click to expand...
Skylake brings more than just a few spec bumps. The critical feature that everyone anticipates is Thunderbolt 3, and with it, DisplayPort 1.3 support. Among standard consumers, DisplayPort is the more critical upgrade. DisplayPort 1.2 doesn't have the bandwidth to drive a 5K monitor, which is thought to be the reason why the retina iMac doesn't have a target display mode (the ability to act as a stand-alone monitor) and why Apple hasn't updated its Cinema Display to include a 5K variant (or a 4K monitor, possibly). As far as I've seen, current 5K monitors take up two DisplayPort (Thunderbolt) ports in order to operate. Users with 4K monitors also encounter issues running at 60 hz under some setups, an issue that DisplayPort 1.3 will supposedly resolve.

That's a pretty major feature that could impact users in the near future, and it's the primary reason I'm waiting before getting a retina iMac. There are other features that are nice, like potential DDR4 RAM support, but Thunderbolt 3 and DisplayPort 1.3 support are the big features that I think are worth waiting for.

Edit: in the previous version of this post, I mistakenly wrote that DisplayPort 1.2 didn't support 4K monitors. This should have read 5K monitors. Thanks to Gurpartap Singh for the correction.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jordanz
Ledgem said:
Skylake brings more than just a few spec bumps. The critical feature that everyone anticipates is Thunderbolt 3, and with it, DisplayPort 1.3 support. Among standard consumers, DisplayPort is the more critical upgrade. DisplayPort 1.2 doesn't have the bandwidth to drive a 4K monitor, which is thought to be the reason why the retina iMac doesn't have a target display mode (the ability to act as a stand-alone monitor) and why Apple hasn't updated its Cinema Display to include a 4K variant. As far as I've seen, current 4K monitors either need to run at a lower refresh rate or take up two DisplayPort (Thunderbolt) ports in order to operate.

That's a pretty major feature that could impact users in the near future, and it's the primary reason I'm waiting before getting a retina iMac. There are other features that are nice, like potential DDR4 RAM support, but Thunderbolt 3 and DisplayPort 1.3 support are the big features that I think are worth waiting for.
Click to expand...

Oops, I think you meant 5K, which is what a DP1.2 cable cannot drive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ledgem
loekf said:
Alpine Ridge (- TB controller doing TB 3) only supports DP 1.2.... See Intel press conference.
Click to expand...

I'm saying that DP1.2 supports 4K displays already. Perhaps, @Ledgem was confused between 4K and 5K, where 5K is the one that cannot be run through single DP1.2 port. I offered the correction for brevity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: theSeb
I would wait unless you can't and the performance is costing you money in which point the price of the machine becomes irrelevant anyway. Like may others have said Skylake brings more than just a speed bump and with such a shift in technology (possible convergence of USB and Thunderbolt), I'd definitely wait.

I have a 512GB SSD in my nMP and it's big enough for a system drive with all my apps installed. I even run the odd VM from there too. I do however have to remember to clean out my downloads folder as I quickly fill it up with Linux ISO downloads, but your workload will be different to mine. Do I wish I'd gone for the 1TB SSD? Yes, but that's only because I'm lazy about purging stuff I no longer need.
 
I would wait, but not for yet another incremental CPU upgrade, but to see if Apple will use an Nvidia Maxwell-based GPU in the next iMac release. The iMacs have become really expensive in Europe now, and personally I'm simply not buying a new model untill there have been some SERIOUS performance upgrades (late 2012 iMac here).
 
Last edited:
I'm in a similar position.

I am running a 2008 Macbook Pro and it's struggling to even play a full screen 720p movie 🙁😡.

I also do security so I need VMs, and I recently spun up a Win8 VM and it's literally unusable and its pushed back my studies a lot.

My predicament is buy now as it is, or wait until October or futher. Since Apple have upgraded the riMac in the past few weeks, I doubt it will be in October and more likely in 2016. I do not think I can really even wait until October to start studying again so I think when I get paid at the end of this month I will need to bite the bullet and just get the current one.

Skylake isn't a specific upgrade for me, I just need something faster, ability to add more RAM and just more generally up-to-date. I don't plan to use the screen in target mode/as another screen, but will be interested in buying another 27" screen as a second display, and I am aware thats what the current iMac can't do?

In addition, I am a console gamer, so I don't really need a souped up graphics card, but is there any value to me getting the best one for just normal use? Not sure if this will help the performance of the retina screen

The plan is:

-Highest CPU available (currently 4GHz)
-8GB RAM (Upgrade to 32GB via Crucial)
-512 SSD (Upgrade via Apple)
-Graphics card = ?

Anyway, going to take the next few weeks and WWDC to consider what to do.
 
Gurpartap Singh said:
Oops, I think you meant 5K, which is what a DP1.2 cable cannot drive.
Click to expand...
Indeed, this seems to be correct. Looking into it a bit further, DisplayPort 1.2 does have support for 4K monitors, although it seems that people have many issues trying to use a 4K monitor at 60 hz. DisplayPort 1.3 will supposedly make this easier while also adding support for running 4K monitors at 120 hz. However, support for 5K monitors is the big thing.

I appreciate the correction and will edit my post so as to avoid confusion.
 
Gurpartap Singh said:
I'm saying that DP1.2 supports 4K displays already. Perhaps, @Ledgem was confused between 4K and 5K, where 5K is the one that cannot be run through single DP1.2 port. I offered the correction for brevity.
Click to expand...

http://arstechnica.co.uk/gadgets/20...type-c-connector-doubles-bandwidth-to-40gbps/

With the increase in max bandwidth, Thunderbolt 3 now supports up to two 4K @ 60Hz displays or a single 5K @ 60Hz display running off a single cable. The official Intel slide deck says that Thunderbolt 3 supports DisplayPort 1.2 (not 1.3), but there's no mention of HDMI. The Alpine Ridge leak back in April 2014 suggested that HDMI 2.0 would be supported, but Intel today says that DisplayPort 1.2 is "the native standard" for display over Thunderbolt 3, though HDMI 2.0 monitors will be supported with an "adapter."
 
I wrote about this a while back, cant seem to find my post 🙁
loekf said:
Alpine Ridge (- TB controller doing TB 3) only supports DP 1.2.... See Intel press conference.
Click to expand...

Here are some recent updates:
{From an anadtech review}
"Along with the change to using the USB Type-C port, the big news here is that Thunderbolt 3 is doubling the amount of bandwidth available to Thunderbolt devices. With Thunderbolt 2 topping out at a single full duplex 20Gbps channel, Thunderbolt 3 is increasing that to 40Gbps. Compared to DisplayPort 1.3 and USB 3.1, this is 1.5 to 4 times the available bandwidth, with DisplayPort 1.3 topping out at 25.9Gbps (after overhead), and USB 3.1 topping out at 10Gbps per channel (with Type-C carrying 2 such channels)".

"Speaking of encapsulation, Thunderbolt 3 also includes an update to the DisplayPort side of matters, though likely not what everyone has been expecting. With the increase in bandwidth, Thunderbolt 3 is able to carry twice as much video data as before. However Intel is not implementing the latest version of DisplayPort – DisplayPort 1.3 – in to the Thunderbolt 3 standard. Instead they are doubling up on DisplayPort 1.2, expanding the number of equivalent DisplayPort lanes carried from 4 to 8, essentially allowing one Thunderbolt 3 cable to carry 2 full DisplayPort 1.2 connections. The end result is that Thunderbolt 3 will not be able to drive the kind of next-generation displays DisplayPort 1.3 is geared towards – things like 8K displays and 5K single-tile displays – but it will be able to drive anything 1 or 2 DisplayPort 1.2 connections can drive today, including multiple 4K@60Hz monitors or 5K multi-tile displays."
​
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9331/intel-announces-thunderbolt-3
 
Last edited:
Hmmm, kind of disappointing really...no DisplayPort 1.3...so how will the 5K displays be connected again? It says in one of the slides "Single Cable", did they mean single cable from your laptop, but then it goes via a hub, and two cables for 5K?
 
Looks like one other thing that has been overlooked here is Intels blessing for egpu support in thunderbolt 3.

Not sure OSX will ever support it. But perhaps there could be a hack to get it properly working.

It would be great for someone who plays games using boot camp and doesn't need much gpu power for OSX.

Probalbly wouldn't do much good for an iMac, but for the mini or MacBooks it'd be pretty cool to hookup the latest powerful gpu and to an external monitor or TV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ledgem
If it has the bandwidth for it, isn't DisplayPort 1.3 support something that could be added in via a firmware update? Or is it something implemented at the hardware level?
 
EnesM said:
Hmmm, kind of disappointing really...no DisplayPort 1.3...so how will the 5K displays be connected again? It says in one of the slides "Single Cable", did they mean single cable from your laptop, but then it goes via a hub, and two cables for 5K?
Click to expand...
Why should this be disappointing? 5K is not an international standard, like 4K. If it is no standard, then why should the industry support 5K? The industry consists of more than Apple and iMac 5K displays. 4K video formats for example. Or graphics cards. Or 4K displays. They must support a standard resolution, and AFAIK 5K is not an international standard. I see only 4K and 8K as recommendations (not even standards):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._2020
 
Mr. Retrofire said:
Why should this be disappointing? 5K is not an international standard, like 4K. If it is no standard, then why should the industry support 5K? The industry consists of more than Apple and iMac 5K displays. 4K video formats for example. Or graphics cards. Or 4K displays. They must support a standard resolution, and AFAIK 5K is not an international standard. I see only 4K and 8K as recommendations (not even standards):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._2020
Click to expand...

4K is a standard for Video resolution, not monitor. Monitors rarely followed the standards of content resolutions. Were all monitors 1080p in the past? Nope, actually a minority. There was 1200p, and what not. And before that, the DVD resolution was 480p, but monitors were 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x960 at that time.

So 4K is not a STANDARD monitor resolution, it's just ONE of the resolutions

P.S. You are mixing up TV standards and monitor standards. For TVs, I agree, it's 2K, 4K, 8K which are connected to by HDMI. But the subject here is monitors connected by DisplayPort.
 
Last edited:
I need to get an iMac for my son. I can wait until school comes back in early September. Does anybody think we might see an update for the iMac by then? I am just a regular iMac, not the 5k retina.
 
gugy said:
I need to get an iMac for my son. I can wait until school comes back in early September. Does anybody think we might see an update for the iMac by then? I am just a regular iMac, not the 5k retina.
Click to expand...
According to the Macrumors' Buying Guide, it may be worth waiting. The last major refresh was in September 2013. What makes it a bit unpredictable is that Apple seems to be phasing out the standard iMacs in favor of retina variants, so even if the hardware is updated it may not be available in the configuration that you want (assuming you want a more powerful configuration with regard to graphics and processor options).

However, whether or not the line is updated, waiting does offer some other benefits. You can keep an eye on the refurbished iMacs sold by Apple, and if one appears with the configuration and price point that you want, then you can get some savings that way.
 
Ledgem said:
According to the Macrumors' Buying Guide, it may be worth waiting. The last major refresh was in September 2013. What makes it a bit unpredictable is that Apple seems to be phasing out the standard iMacs in favor of retina variants, so even if the hardware is updated it may not be available in the configuration that you want (assuming you want a more powerful configuration with regard to graphics and processor options).

However, whether or not the line is updated, waiting does offer some other benefits. You can keep an eye on the refurbished iMacs sold by Apple, and if one appears with the configuration and price point that you want, then you can get some savings that way.
Click to expand...

Thanks, yeah, I can wait I guess a bit beyond September. I don't need a top of the line machine but I don't want to get an iMac and few weeks later there is a new one. I was just curious about the update cycle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back