Setup as new, so it shouldn't have happened in the first place..
And just to add, as I'm going about my day here, some of the sluggishness has come back. I have 7 App windows open.
This is definitely not normal.
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.
Test for someone with m295x, need to compare my m290x
- Thread starter rick987611
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Setup as new, so it shouldn't have happened in the first place..
And just to add, as I'm going about my day here, some of the sluggishness has come back. I have 7 App windows open.
This is definitely not normal.
I sincerely hope so...as a clean install of Yosemite I did today has not resolved it.
Someone else stated this, I also called in to express I'm receiving the same issue. The upper level support person called back and said they've seen this, it's a software issue and is in the next update.
We'll see.. my iMac runs 5k and 4k external on base model just fine, no stuttering except for mission control.
The engineer person said that the GPU should have no problem handling that many pixels in OSX. The issue will arise when things are being loaded into the VRAM and/or any heavy GPU things. I don't do much of any video editing, mainly photos / code heavy, but that's all. Haven't experienced any problems in MY workflow.. others may not be so lucky though.
Quick update. Got my iMac with the higher end GPU today. All the issues I was having with the base model are gone. Mission Control is smooth as butter when having multiple windows open. Same type of setup that would cause the base model to choke. So glad I swapped out.
As we've been saying all along the R9 290 is just too old for the 5k screen. Apple should have made the R9 295 standard as it will save them a lot of grief in the long run.
Wait six months when all those over-stressed 290's finally give up the ghost and people start returning to Apple for a fix.
The smart money is waiting until they finally see the light and stick in the 980M on the next refresh.
I have the base iMac 5k and I am not experiencing any stuttering when using mission control.
The whole experience has been silky smooth since turning it on a few days ago.
I totally get that the 290 is not as good as the 295 but I do wish people would stop analysing every small thing. Apple wouldn't purposely cripple the iMac by using a GPU that couldn't do the job well.
Mine works brilliantly and I am very happy with it. I use it mainly for photo editing and for editing GoPro footage which I take from my quadcopter.
The whole experience has been silky smooth since turning it on a few days ago.
I totally get that the 290 is not as good as the 295 but I do wish people would stop analysing every small thing. Apple wouldn't purposely cripple the iMac by using a GPU that couldn't do the job well.
Mine works brilliantly and I am very happy with it. I use it mainly for photo editing and for editing GoPro footage which I take from my quadcopter.
Did you go all "base" - meaning 1TB Fusion/i5/8GB RAM ?
What resolution GoPro footage are you editing? 4K? I currently am doing 1080p but want to know how well 4K editing on the all base would be. Upgrading to the i7/16GB/295/256 SSD is going to cost me near $4K in Canada (btw the aftermarket ram barely saves me anything)
Base as in all base - no upgrades. I am not using 4K as I have the Hero 3 and the fps is too low. I have used 2.7K as well as lots of 1080.
My main comment was in regards to the general choppiness in day to day usage of some iMacs - something I am not experiencing.
I also got the base, except I added the 512 GB flash storage. I mostly work in InDesign and Photoshop CC, and both are exceptional on the riMac. Being able to see the additional detail in both of these programs is well worth it, and it's more smooth and responsive than my 2012 rMBP. I navigate some pretty large documents, and some of my Photoshop files are over 1 GB. No issues whatsoever. I dabble in After Effects, and the upgrade from the 2012 rMBP is even more noticeable there. RAM previews are much quicker, and I know that is due more to the graphic card (m290x). I'm fine with the base graphic card. If it's really 2 years old, it sure blows away the 2-year old card in my laptop.
I do zero gaming, so can't comment on that. As a work machine it's really impressive. Granted, I'm probably the target market for this product.
I do zero gaming, so can't comment on that. As a work machine it's really impressive. Granted, I'm probably the target market for this product.
not even the mission control/launchpad stutter? what about scrolling in Safari/Preview? If not, I will say impressed.
not even the mission control/launchpad stutter? what about scrolling in Safari/Preview? If not, I will say impressed.
Mission Control does stutter a little bit for me, as it does on the other two Macs I own that are now running Yosemite (and were perfectly smooth before). It's definitely a Yosemite issue.
Edit: Ignore me! steve23094 pointed out that my information was outdated - the Retina iMac is indeed full 60 Hz at full resolution. The story claiming it is only 30 Hz that I was trusting was wrong.
Last edited:
Who said that? If you're talking about the Extremetech article, that has been largely discredited now.
Ah, just did some searching, and I see that now. Good to know! Going back to edit my post.
No. It has not. The display is always 60 Hz. People really need to stop saying this because its not true.
EDIT:
Thank you.
Haha. Over-stressed. It's the M295X that's running 20 degrees hotter...
More performance, more heat generally, it's always been this way...
There's too much speculation in this thread. No evidence to substantiate any of the claims either. No one here is doubting that the 295 is faster. I don't want to spend the money and upgrade to a 295 if the 290 does what I need it to do. I don't game or add special effects to my movies or anything like that. The most intense app that I use is probably Lightroom and that's not exactly an intensive app. If only people here would run benchmarks and post numbers then it would be much easier to figure out if the 290 is adequate or not. If not, then I'm thinking i5 +295 as the best compromise. I still see no need for the i7 especially for my usage pattern.
----------
That's pretty much what I want to hear! For me I'll be mostly using Safari, Mail, Calendar, Microsoft Office, and Adobe Lightroom. I'll Skype from time to time. That's pretty much what I do with my computers. I don't want to spend the money and get the i7 and 295 if I don't need to. I have no intentions of keeping the riMac for that long anyways. If next year's upgrade is significantly faster, then I'll upgrade to that. I don't want to future proof the machine as there's not a lot of performance headroom with this generation of riMac.
So I'm thinking of going base CPU, GPU, and upgrade to 512GB SSD. 256GB SSD may even work for me as I store all of my photos on external hard drives anyway. So storage aside, do you think the specs for the iMac 5K that I have in mind will easily handle the apps that I just listed?
As for RAM, I'll most likely buy aftermarket RAM and get it to 16GB.
----------
I hope you're right! The last thing that I want to do is to follow other people's unsubstantiated claims and spend money on additional capabilities that I don't need.
You should test by yourself, and probably, if you want a real answer, write a little mail to rob from barefeats.com.
Depending on the work you do with the imac, I would say that the i7 upgrade is more important than the GPU. If you are not interested in gaming, the 290x is a very capable GPU, more than enough to handle the OS and non GPU involved work. It's a 2TFlops GPU, it's a lot of computing power, and 2GB of ram is more than enough. (a 15M image weights in memory 45MB, so 2GB is waaaaaay more than enough for the OSX interface)
That's a pretty stupid comment. Obviously if I could, I would have done so by now.
That sounds great for the software you listed. If you go 256/i5/290, you've saved $800 toward the next model. Personally I'd rather buy a base model of something every couple years and sell the old one, than max everything out. It doesn't matter what you add, in two years you'll want whatever Apple comes up with.
I do think most of the speculation is anxiety-driven overanalysis. It crept its way into reviews like the Verge and Gizmodo too. Absolutely no facts, just a "feeling" that they were pushing its limits. It's all in your head. The base is a great machine.