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

Think Secret Says iMac Updates Are Coming

Freg3000

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Sep 22, 2002
1,914
0
New York
Think Secret has confirmed that updated iMacs are coming. Although they are ready to go, TS says they might not be released until the Apple Expo in Paris in mid September. These are the reported specs:

1GHz PowerPC G4
15-inch LCD display
Combo drive
256K L2 Cache @ 1GHz
256MB DDR SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA drive
NVIDIA GeForce4 MX
32MB DDR video memory
FireWire 400 and USB 2.0
VGA/S-video/composite outputs
10/100BASE-T Ethernet
Built-in 56K V.92 modem
AirPort Extreme Ready

1.25GHz PowerPC G4
17-inch LCD display
SuperDrive
256K L2 Cache @ 1.25GHz
256MB DDR SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA Drive
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200
64MB DDR video memory
FireWire 400 and USB 2.0
VGA/S-video/composite outputs
10/100BASE-T Ethernet
Built-in 56K V.92 modem
AirPort Extreme Ready
 

Lanbrown

macrumors 6502a
Mar 20, 2003
893
0
If this is true, it really is disappointing not to see the 7457 in their lineup.

Apple has to have more planned then this. There are no changes to their systems other then the addition of the 1.25Ghz 7455 processor and the video. That is too small of a change to take this long. This is a processor swap and nothing more other then a video upgrade and USB 2.0, but rumors have stated that they have had the USB 2.0 chipset for sometime now. So really only two changes, simple ones at that.
 
Comment

cubist

macrumors 68020
Jul 4, 2002
2,075
0
Muncie, Indiana
Maybe the 1.25 is a 7457. I think it's odd that the two versions have different video chipsets. Maybe the 1G version is older parts stock.

Lanbrown is right, this is an odd update if it's true.

Now that the PowerMac is a G5, sales of iMacs will likely go into the toilet anyway.
 
Comment

Powerbook G5

macrumors 68040
Jun 23, 2003
3,974
0
St Augustine, FL
These updates do sound pretty pathetic...but with the G5 and iMacs both with nVidia FX5x00 cards, it seems likely that the PowerBooks will at least have an FX chip as well, which is at least better news than if they came with the miserable 4x0 Go chips. Also, how do you know it's a not a 7457 in the iMacs? I guess it could be because of the amount of L2 cache, but still, I dunno, it seems odd it's taken this long for Apple to release any updates if it's still the same lame processor.
 
Comment

Lanbrown

macrumors 6502a
Mar 20, 2003
893
0
Originally posted by cubist
Maybe the 1.25 is a 7457. I think it's odd that the two versions have different video chipsets. Maybe the 1G version is older parts stock.

Lanbrown is right, this is an odd update if it's true.

Now that the PowerMac is a G5, sales of iMacs will likely go into the toilet anyway.

No, the 7457 has 512k of cache onboard while the 7455 has 256k. Unless Motorola would specifically design a 7457 with half the cache for Apple, I would highly doubt it. Why would Apple want a chip with less cache? The associated costs would also be higher. 1.25 was one of the speeds the 7455 comes in, look at the PM G4.

The 1Ghz is the current iMac but with the 15" screen instead of the 17". So the current top of the line becomes the base with a 15" screen and a new top model is introduced. One rumor said the iMac had a USB 2.0 chipset but was throttled back to 1.1 speeds. So their new bottom offering is the same as the current top with only a screen size change and graphic memory reduction. They really do need the 7457 and other tweaks. A faster 7455 and graphic chipset just won't cut it. The 7457 at 1.3GHz+ is what is required at a minimum.

Here is the current 1GHz iMac:

17-inch widescreen LCD
1GHz PowerPC G4
NVIDIA GeForce4 MX
64MB DDR video memory
256MB DDR266 SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA hard drive
10/100BASE-T Ethernet
56K V.92 internal modem
Apple Pro Speakers
AirPort Extreme Ready
Bluetooth Ready

Here is the proposed new 1GHz iMac:
1GHz PowerPC G4
15-inch LCD display
Combo drive
256K L2 Cache @ 1GHz
256MB DDR SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA drive
NVIDIA GeForce4 MX
32MB DDR video memory
FireWire 400 and USB 2.0
VGA/S-video/composite outputs
10/100BASE-T Ethernet
Built-in 56K V.92 modem
AirPort Extreme Ready


The changes that are proposed would take no more then a month. It's the current G4 chip just faster, and a new GPU in the top of the line.

From the sounds of it, the PB and iBook lines will get the same treatment. All of the updates are taking too long for such trivial changes. Where is the FW800 support in the updates models? Another reason why I think there is much more then just these small changes.
 
Comment

whawho

macrumors regular
May 7, 2002
134
0
Columbus, OH
L3 Cache

Now that there are G5's, why doesn't Apple put L3 caches in all of their consumer machines. It would make the machines a bit "faster" and make iMacs/Emacs a better deal IMO.

My 2 cents.
 
Comment

bennetsaysargh

macrumors 68020
Jan 20, 2003
2,367
0
New York
i see the iMac as prosumer, and i think it should go G5. aren't there going to be 90mm chips at the fishkill plant? that should go in them ASAP. i don't want the iMac to be G4 anymore.
 
Comment

whawho

macrumors regular
May 7, 2002
134
0
Columbus, OH
Originally posted by Lanbrown
Simple, cache is expensive.

I don't really know how much more expensive it would be ... but it would be cool if it was an option. It'll probably never happen ... but it would be cool for consumers and make the machines a little faster and a better deal IMO.
 
Comment

whawho

macrumors regular
May 7, 2002
134
0
Columbus, OH
Originally posted by bennetsaysargh
i see the iMac as prosumer, and i think it should go G5. aren't there going to be 90mm chips at the fishkill plant? that should go in them ASAP. i don't want the iMac to be G4 anymore.

I completely agree with this. A G5 iMac/eMac would be sweet. But until that day (if it ever happens) they should make the iMac as fast as it can be... that's why I though L3 cache would be cool.
 
Comment

Rezet

macrumors 6502a
Originally posted by whawho
I completely agree with this. A G5 iMac/eMac would be sweet.

What? Why make everything G5 and jack up the price on all?
You may think imac should go G5, but why would you want to put a G5 in emac? That low costing machine is for people who don't need a whole lot power and for $799 it's a heck of a computer.
Imac will probably get G5 in about a year, maybe a little over a year.... I'd expect it to get there after POWERBOOK does....
 
Comment

Powerbook G5

macrumors 68040
Jun 23, 2003
3,974
0
St Augustine, FL
You can think of it as Apple buying more G5s to supply all these computers, thus, driving down the costs since they'd be buying them in a larger quantity, which would possibly drive down overall costs, not to mention lower R&D costs that having to design motherboards for multiple different processors.
 
Comment

Rezet

macrumors 6502a
Originally posted by Powerbook G5
You can think of it as Apple buying more G5s to supply all these computers, thus, driving down the costs since they'd be buying them in a larger quantity, which would possibly drive down overall costs, not to mention lower R&D costs that having to design motherboards for multiple different processors.

Well, that may sound good, but i don't think apple is really interested in upgrading EMAC too much at all. Most of the components they would be using will probably remain the same.
Even now, you'd expect them (when even crappiest PCs) use DDR memory.... BUt they are still on SDRAM 133.
G4 isn't that well designed for DDR, so they neglect that tech...

I don't think emac will get higher speeds than 1.25 - 1.33 Ghz G4 in a year from now... We'll see
 
Comment

Powerbook G5

macrumors 68040
Jun 23, 2003
3,974
0
St Augustine, FL
I doubt anyone cares about the eMac beyond the cheapest possible box, I was just refering to the gems that Apple has such as the iMac, which would make one kick ass Prosumer model with a low-mid level G5.
 
Comment

whawho

macrumors regular
May 7, 2002
134
0
Columbus, OH
Originally posted by Rezet
What? Why make everything G5 and jack up the price on all?
You may think imac should go G5, but why would you want to put a G5 in emac? That low costing machine is for people who don't need a whole lot power and for $799 it's a heck of a computer.
Imac will probably get G5 in about a year, maybe a little over a year.... I'd expect it to get there after POWERBOOK does....

I'd want to put the G5 in an eMac because it's a better processor. I wouldn't want them put in the machines if it was to jack up the price. I think a good solution might be in about 6-12 months put like the 1.6 ghz G5 in the eMac and iMac by then the the powermac would be 2.5-3 ghz or something.

Originally posted by Rezet

That low costing machine is for people who don't need a whole lot power and for $799 it's a heck of a computer.

I don't know, some people that work for non-profits and are in the graphics dept. (er, like me :)) and have the choice for either an eMac or Dell might choose an eMac. I also feel that newbies to Mac or switchers would be bummed to find that when they bought their new eMac that it can't really do anything unless you buy more ram. I think the eEmac IS a good deal, but not the $799 model. It definitely should have more RAM.
 
Comment

evolu

macrumors regular
Dec 10, 2002
232
0
LA la land...
chip price is not the major factor in cost: it's all the support for the chip...

A G5 iMac will not be released before a revB Powermac is. After the bugs have been debugged - then you put G5s in an iMac.

I don't think the G5 will go into the iMac in the current design. There's probably a couple more small revisions in store before an upgraded chip and redesign will arrive.

All speculation though.
 
Comment

whawho

macrumors regular
May 7, 2002
134
0
Columbus, OH
Originally posted by Powerbook G5
I doubt anyone cares about the eMac beyond the cheapest possible box, I was just refering to the gems that Apple has such as the iMac, which would make one kick ass Prosumer model with a low-mid level G5.

Why not make all the machines fast? I don't know, the eMacs were designed originally for schools why sell them crap? I agree with you about the iMac being a gem but why not make all the models gems and good deals to increase sales.
 
Comment

Lanbrown

macrumors 6502a
Mar 20, 2003
893
0
At onetime, it's hard to tell now, but the cache was more then the processor itself, much more.

Powerbook G5,

They 7457 allows them to reuse existing designs, compared to the G5 would need a new design. So to save money, they can use the 7457 and drive down costs by using existing technology. Also, the Fishkill plant is not operational right now, but will be back online soon. The 970 is probably in short supply right now. I expect Apple to put the 970 or it's successor in everything down the road. The PB, iBook and iMac will probably see it all about the same time. The 7457 also runs cooler then the 970, so they save that (cooling) expense as well.
 
Comment

Rezet

macrumors 6502a
Originally posted by whawho
Why not make all the machines fast? I don't know, the eMacs were designed originally for schools why sell them crap? I agree with you about the iMac being a gem but why not make all the models gems and good deals to increase sales.

And what's gonan be the difference between them then (outside of a name)? It's obvious that some computers must be faster, other's slower...
eMac is designed for people who don't need power at all. Say what you want but emac is probably is slower than current 15" powerbook.
Emac is for people like my dad, who just use internet, trade stocks etc. He uses 900Mhz Duron with 384Mbs of ram and is very happy with it. He just doesn't need more...

And cmon man, ram costs like 30 bucks for 256 mbs of sdram now.... it's not a big deal...

And as for graphic department... Well, you can't get a supercomputer for like 799... If you need a good computer, you are gonn ahave to cash out a bit more money and get imac. atleast...
It's like me complaining that my major is Digital Arts, but 799 emac isn't powerful enough, and blaing it on apple...
 
Comment

Powerbook G5

macrumors 68040
Jun 23, 2003
3,974
0
St Augustine, FL
Well I'd love for all of Apple's products to be speed demons, but the arguement was about the cost being raised, and if you put a G5 into the eMac, it may cause it to lose the one real thing that the eMac has going for it, which is the low price. I'd love to see a time when the G5 is considered the "low end" chip and even on Apple's cheapest products a G5 would be the standard, but until then, we have to deal with G3s and G4s still being the norm and G5s being the premium.
 
Comment

Rezet

macrumors 6502a
Originally posted by Powerbook G5
Well I'd love for all of Apple's products to be speed demons, but the arguement was about the cost being raised, and if you put a G5 into the eMac, it may cause it to lose the one real thing that the eMac has going for it, which is the low price. I'd love to see a time when the G5 is considered the "low end" chip and even on Apple's cheapest products a G5 would be the standard, but until then, we have to deal with G3s and G4s still being the norm and G5s being the premium.

Heh... Yeah would be nice to have a PALM running on cool G5 hehe
 
Comment

bennetsaysargh

macrumors 68020
Jan 20, 2003
2,367
0
New York
the iMacs will go G5 and the eMacs will stay G4. that's the way it will be. maybe IBM will start making G4s and drop the G3 once the powerbooks go G5 and the imacs go G5.n in about 2 years, here is what i see.


Consumer
G4 iBook
G4 eMac

Prosumer
iMac

Pro
PowerMac
Powerbook

maybe a prosumer laptop too. maybe the iBooks will be moved to prosumer and then there will be an eBook.
why not? have a desktop and a laptop for each division.
the e could stand for economic too
 
Comment

Lanbrown

macrumors 6502a
Mar 20, 2003
893
0
Originally posted by Powerbook G5
Well I'd love for all of Apple's products to be speed demons, but the arguement was about the cost being raised, and if you put a G5 into the eMac, it may cause it to lose the one real thing that the eMac has going for it, which is the low price. I'd love to see a time when the G5 is considered the "low end" chip and even on Apple's cheapest products a G5 would be the standard, but until then, we have to deal with G3s and G4s still being the norm and G5s being the premium.

We are also on the first version of the G5, when we get to V2 or V3, I would expect to see it in everything.
 
Comment

whawho

macrumors regular
May 7, 2002
134
0
Columbus, OH
Originally posted by Rezet
And what's gonan be the difference between them then (outside of a name)? It's obvious that some computers must be faster, other's slower...
eMac is designed for people who don't need power at all. Say what you want but emac is probably is slower than current 15" powerbook.
Emac is for people like my dad, who just use internet, trade stocks etc. He uses 900Mhz Duron with 384Mbs of ram and is very happy with it. He just doesn't need more...

And cmon man, ram costs like 30 bucks for 256 mbs of sdram now.... it's not a big deal...

And as for graphic department... Well, you can't get a supercomputer for like 799... If you need a good computer, you are gonn ahave to cash out a bit more money and get imac. atleast...
It's like me complaining that my major is Digital Arts, but 799 emac isn't powerful enough, and blaing it on apple...

Outside the name, one difference would be speed. If you have a eMac at 1.6ghz and and Dual Processer 3 Ghz Power Mac... Then you would understand why the eMac was less money and the Power Mac was more but both would be great computers.

I'm totally cool with the eMacs staying with a G4 chip and the iMac staying with the G4 I just wish they could be the best G4... meaning add L3 cache.

I not blaming Apple for anything not trying to anyways. I researched it and at the time the iMac only had a 15" screen with 1024 X 768 resolution (this was before Apple introduced the 17" imac) and the eMac had a 17" screen with 1280 X 960 resolution.. that's why I went with the eMac... If it was today I'd would have bought an iMac... but if you do DTP every pixel of screen more you can get is better. I loaded the eMac up with ram (a gigs worth) so this eMac is a champ... Just because you use an eMac doesn't mean you can't be a Pro ;)

As for Ram costs...if it's only 38 bucks to add 256 then why doesn't Apple do it? OS X needs more ram than 128 to run good... Why not make it run good out of the box.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.