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

The *Rumored* iMac G5 specs are the most exciting, yes? :)

S

SteveC

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jul 7, 2003
438
0
Now that that the new Power Macs have been announced, and a considerable number of MR members are disappointed, I'd like to start a POSITIVE thread. :D

Even though many people are disappointed about the PM G5 updates, Apple hasn't dropped the ball on iMac updates, and Mac fans who are interested in the iMac should be very happy. :) People were asking for 512 RAM, faster processors, and most of all a better graphics card, and Apple is rumored to be delivering on all of those. :) I think the Rev B iMac G5 will be a VERY nice computer. Plus, there's *hope* that this model of the iMac G5, the Rev. B, will address the fan noise issues infamous in the Rev. A.

Personally, I am very happy about the rumored iMac G5 specs. :cool: In fact, I think the rumored upgrades to the iMac G5 are at least tied as the best upgrades among the eMac, iMac, and PMG5 updates. That's not saying it's the best computer is the lineup. ;) The PM is clearly the best. I'm stating that the value of the update is decent-to-strong. The keyword in this is that the iMac specs are "rumored," so we're not positive that they're official yet, but it's likely the specs are true. :)

The rumored specs of the new iMac G5 will take the $1299 model from:
80GB HDD to 160GB HDD
256MB RAM to 512MB RAM
64MB NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra to 128MB ATI Radeon 9600
1.6GHz G5 processor to 1.8GHz
533MHz frontside bus to 600MHz
Tiger instead of Panther (minor, but still a nice bonus)
iLife 05 instead if '04 (minor, but still a nice bonus)
and rumored Bluetooth 2.0 standard, as TS states.

If you were to order a BTO iMac with those hardware specs today (double RAM, double HD space, double video RAM/better graphics card, and faster processor), it would cost $1624 and the price of the new system is expected to stay at $1299.

This is not a computer improvement miracle :p but it's a NICE update and should result in happiness among Mac fans...
 
You're right, that is exciting. A good computer for the money, for sure. I would be very happy to buy one of those, or the 20" model that I'm pining for with some updated specs. What are the chances, though, that this will all happen in time for the Tiger launch?
 
SOLD

If that happens I am buying a 20" as soon as 10.4.1 ships. Just want to give it time to go through the first round of updates.
 
sorryiwasdreami said:
If that really happens, I'll be ticked I spent so much on my BTO.
Click to expand...
Cheer up. :p 'Cause if that's the line of thinking, I could say I'm ticked I spent $1100 on an eMac and upgrades a few years ago. ;) or that I spent $1300 on a Performa 10 years ago. :p Anytime you buy a computer, something "better" will be out a few months to a year after you buy it. You just have to buy what you need when you need it and be happy with it, not worrying about differences with the "latest and greatest." :) Obviously you thought what you bought (nice rhyme!) was worth the money you invested in it. Therefore, be happy. :)
 
jayb2000 said:
If that happens I am buying a 20" as soon as 10.4.1 ships. Just want to give it time to go through the first round of updates.
Click to expand...
You could always buy it before 10.4.1 ships and run Panther on it until 10.4.1 is ready and available. :)

Mr. Anderson said:
Well, these things will probably happen, but the big question is when?
Click to expand...
This week. :cool: I'm being optimistic. ;) TS says this week for iMacs and eMacs, and they *do* have 5-7 day delays on them.
 
SteveC said:
This week. :cool: I'm being optimistic. ;) TS says this week for iMacs and eMacs, and they *do* have 5-7 day delays on them.
Click to expand...

Well, that also happened back in February, and nothing happened. *sigh* I would like this one:

"Best" 20-inch, 2GHz
* 512K L2 cache
* 512MB DDR SDRAM
* 250GB Serial ATA Hard Drive
* SuperDrive (supporting dual-layer as well as DVD±RW/CD-RW burning)

Whenever Apple decides to make it happen, I'll go with it.
 
It's true - I'm still pretty excited about the iMac updates, even if they aren't going to dual-core chips. Later this year when I get enough money together, I'll probably spring for an improved iMac. I was originally thinking of getting a Mini, though if the iMacs are updated the distance between a top-flight Mini and a entry-level iMac in terms of overall power will be much greater than it already is.
 
I would like to believe that iMacs are coming soon, but considering they are still offering the 1.8Ghz Single PowerMac, it is hard to believe that the iMac will be more powerful then even the base PowerMac. If the PowerMac single would have went to 2Ghz then I would say they are coming very soon, but since it has not, I think updates are awhile off still. Of course, none of this really matters personally to me since I just got a new iMac G5 in February. Still it is nice to see the progress.
 
NewtypeCJ said:
Well, that also happened back in February, and nothing happened. *sigh* I would like this one...
Click to expand...
Actually, and I say this just to correct a fact, not to correct *you*... ;) hehe, but it *didn't* happen back in February.

Shipping dates were increased, yes, but ThinkSecret was NOT saying they'd be out during that week back in Feb. :) Now the shipping dates are bumped plus TS is saying we'll see updates this week, PLUS we have specific rumored specs on the new models, which we had none of back in Feb., obviously because there were no updates scheduled to happen back in Feb. Three big hints.
 
Abercrombieboy said:
I would like to believe that iMacs are coming soon, but considering they are still offering the 1.8Ghz Single PowerMac, it is hard to believe that the iMac will be more powerful then even the base PowerMac. If the PowerMac single would have went to 2Ghz then I would say they are coming very soon, but since it has not, I think updates are awhile off still. Of course, none of this really matters personally to me since I just got a new iMac G5 in February. Still it is nice to see the progress.
Click to expand...
While I respect your opinion, many people will cite many points to prove that the "iMac power vs. PowerMac power" concept isn't a factor, including:
1. The 1.42 Mac mini is "more powerful" than the eMac (a higher priced system and the "next step up" from the mini). That alone is enough reason to discount the power-based update myth.
2. A 1.8GHz iMac G5 already exists, which equals the single PM. However, the single PM is an old system. You have to go by the new PMs that were released today to draw a comparison.
3. Using the reasoning in #2, look at the PMs: 2.0-2.7 DUAL G5s. Much faster than a potential 1.8 and 2.0 single G5 in the iMac. Therefore, there's no reason iMacs can't go to 2.0 NOW. :)
4. Apple doesn't operate based on a "we can't update the iMac now because the processor speed will equal the low-end Power Mac" philosophy.

We're going to see iMac updates this week. *VISA ready* ;)
 
Imac desire

In Japan this week- Yodobashi - has pulled all current iMacs off the internet buying shelf (usually happens when products get updated at yodobashi)... Hope upgrade is soon.
 
Now I am waiting for the Rev. B iMac and it does look promising.

However, vRam aside, is the ATI 9600 really any better than the 5200 Ultra?

Looking at Toms Hardware Guide I see that depending on which game or test, one sometimes outdoes the other, but not by any amazing amount.

In fact just looking at the specs, the 9600 only has a slower memory clock than does the 5200 ultra.

Is the 9600 really a better card than the 5200 Ultra?
 
Do you still really think that Apple holds off updates to the iMac so that they don't compete with PMs? Come on. This argument is so old. Didn't we throw this one out when the iMac went G5 before the PowerBook?

I don't buy this for a minute. Apple doesn't sell that many Power Macs to begin with. So how many people that need a new machine go back and forth from a PowerMac to an iMac? I don't think it is many at all. These are totally different machines that servetotally different markets.

The only reason they may be holding off on the updates is because they still have Rev A iMacs in the sales channel. Just look at the Special Deals page--there have been Rev A iMacs--all 3 models--on that page every day for months now.

They are just waiting until the Rev A iMacs are all gone, then they'll update them. It has nothing to do with the single processor PM, or what is on the Apple.com homepage.
 
Well I for one am waiting with reneued interest in the imac line. Im traditionaly a portable person. But ive been shopping around for a new mac and had decided on getting an iMac instead of a PB. But then the new PM's were announced and now im not so sure. I dunno which G5 i want now. If these imac updates are as is rumored. I think I'm getting a new imac. But still drawn to that expandability factor of a PM even if it 1.8Ghz single. Hmmm decisions decisons...
 
SteveC said:
While I respect your opinion, many people will cite many points to prove that the "iMac power vs. PowerMac power" concept isn't a factor, including:
1. The 1.42 Mac mini is "more powerful" than the eMac (a higher priced system and the "next step up" from the mini). That alone is enough reason to discount the power-based update myth.
Click to expand...

That brings up a great point though. Where is the eMac update? Honestly it would take an engineer 10 minutes to take out the 1.25 chip and install a 1.5Ghz chip along with a new graphics card. All it would be is a simple "plugging-in" updated equipment.

You probably have a point, it just seems silly to me that they did not update the single PowerMac. It might not be a great seller, but gives people a more affordable tower with upgrade potential. Possibly they have a lot of back-stock of 1.8 PowerMacs and are trying to sell them before an update.
 
McMac said:
Now I am waiting for the Rev. B iMac and it does look promising.

However, vRam aside, is the ATI 9600 really any better than the 5200 Ultra?

Looking at Toms Hardware Guide I see that depending on which game or test, one sometimes outdoes the other, but not by any amazing amount.

In fact just looking at the specs, the 9600 only has a slower memory clock than does the 5200 ultra.

Is the 9600 really a better card than the 5200 Ultra?
Click to expand...

my guess is that many people think of the 9600XT when they hear 9600. in my limited knowledge the 9600XT is quite ok but the 9600 is quite c@#$.

andi
 
I would be very happy with the above iMac G5 Rev B. Still hoping that it will be available at the "Tiger World Premiere."
 
The G5 iMacs haven't moved in price or features since it's introduction. Is Apple having problems in fitting in a hotter processor?
 
I agree with SteveC

The Single 1.8G5 PM is available for two reasons.

1. to get rid of current stock and 2. for the person that wants to upgrade more RAM, and choose a graphics card, and maybe have two HD's etc.

The iMacG5 can definately go to 2.0G5, and it should.

my .02

trout
 
I think the rumors of dual-core are even more exsiting, but between the Power Mac, iMac, and eMac, yeah I guess the iMac is the best. Still kinda boring IMO.
 
andiwm2003 said:
my guess is that many people think of the 9600XT when they hear 9600. in my limited knowledge the 9600XT is quite ok but the 9600 is quite c@#$.

andi
Click to expand...

if you look at barefeats.com's comparisons of G5 systems, they highly recommended the old upgrade from the 5200 to the radeon 9600, their benchmarks should a very noticeable improvement in many tasks, so I say, yes, it is a better GPU
 
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