Thunderbolt iMac Torn Down and Benchmarked

[Umbongo]

Why won't they just give the cpu sku, it would make it much easier to compare than ghz values, with turbo, ht, vt enabled and what not.

Apple marketing don't think those things matter. You can find all the info easily at ark.intel.com and the information is in plenty of threads in the iMac subforum.

any care to fill out the rest?

21 inch base = Core i5 2400S
21 inch high = Core i5 2500S
21 inch bto = Core i7 2600S

27 inch base = Core i5 2500S
27 inch high = Core i5 2400
27 inch bto = Core i7 2600

Here is a link that compares all processors used: http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=52208,52211,52215,52207,52213

 

[uaecasher]

Just be sure to invest in anti-static screen roller. Once you've taken the glass off, it's almost impossible to get it back on without being left with a speck of dust trapped between the LCD and glass. 27 inch is twice as frustrating

Good point.

 

[silentnite]

Wow! Removable GPU, The message that I'm getting is it's clearly better to wait, that is if you can for the third or forth generation with anything apple does. It just keeps getting better with time. Removable GPU apple has come a long way.

 

[muffinss]

Wow! Removable GPU, The message that I'm getting is it's clearly better to wait, that is if you can for the third or forth generation with anything apple does. It just keeps getting better with time. Removable GPU apple has come a long way.

Apple has been using removable GPU'S for year's. This isn't anything new to the iMac line. Apple has been doing this since the 24 inch core/core2duos iMac models. You where able to swap out a 7300 for a 7600gt. Every model since then has had this ability, but no one has made new upgradeable cards for the iMacs.

 

[tdream]

Apple marketing don't think those things matter. You can find all the info easily at ark.intel.com and the information is in plenty of threads in the iMac subforum.



21 inch base = Core i5 2400S
21 inch high = Core i5 2500S
21 inch bto = Core i7 2600S

27 inch base = Core i5 2500S
27 inch high = Core i5 2400
27 inch bto = Core i7 2600

Here is a link that compares all processors used: http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=52208,52211,52215,52207,52213

Thanks. Interesting only the BTO cpus have hyperthreading.

 

[zivilist]

The difference compared to the old one is to small. I assume that many iMac users with an iMac 2007/2008/2009/2010 don't buy a new one.

 

[eawmp1]

The difference compared to the old one is to small. I assume that many iMac users with an iMac 2007/2008/2009/2010 don't buy a new one.

Then you've not been reading the latest benchmarks. The top of the line will outperform my 2009 quad MacPro.

However, I'll agree that of the years you listed, the age of your current iMac is likely directly related to the chances you will upgrade.

 

[muffinss]

The difference compared to the old one is to small. I assume that many iMac users with an iMac 2007/2008/2009/2010 don't buy a new one.

The only thing worth upgrading from the 11,3 generation is the video card if your a heavy gamer and if there's any games coming out in the near future for the Mac that can take the extra speed boost, unless you bootcamp. Besides that, maybe thunderbolt if someone actually has some use for it or really wants triple displays (which would be cool).

If your sitting on the core2quads/duo models, it would be worth the upgrade though. The processor upgrade in the new 27 inch line is just a marginal upgrade from the 27 inch core i7 2.93ghz 11,3 generation. Faster, but nothing major that warrants a $2,800 after tax/shipping/new apple care upgrade.

 

[milo]

The difference compared to the old one is to small. I assume that many iMac users with an iMac 2007/2008/2009/2010 don't buy a new one.

I assume you're reading the chart wrong. The new i5 is faster than the old i7, even though the i7 has hyperthreading but the i5 doesn't. That's pretty huge. It doesn't look like the new i7 has been benchmarked yet.

The processor upgrade in the new 27 inch line is just a marginal upgrade from the 27 inch core i7 2.93ghz 11,3 generation.

Based on what? Are there benchmarks out for the new i7 yet?

I do agree with you that it doesn't make sense for most people to upgrade from the previous generation, but I tend to feel that way about sequential updates in general. But this does look like it has the potential to be a nice improvement, and I think the TB ports allow the new machines to compete with the MPs in some ways they never have before.

 

[zivilist]

Then you've not been reading the latest benchmarks. The top of the line will outperform my 2009 quad MacPro.

However, I'll agree that of the years you listed, the age of your current iMac is likely directly related to the chances you will upgrade.

I will upgrade if the bottom line of the new generation will outperform the iMac of the top line of the series I have (mid 2010).

 

[Uragon]

She is brilliant. Funny, cute and with clever hands.

..and we can't wait to see the inside of toddybody.

 

[oldwatery]

So where is the mythical 70% speed increase over the last model.....and the whopping 300% video increase?
Apple at their deceptive best as usual

 

[eawmp1]

I will upgrade if the bottom line of the new generation will outperform the iMac of the top line of the series I have (mid 2010).

Yes, upgrading for anyone with a 2010 makes little sense. You, however, you listed computers all the way back to 2007.

 

[muffinss]

I assume you're reading the chart wrong. The new i5 is faster than the old i7, even though the i7 has hyperthreading but the i5 doesn't. That's pretty huge. It doesn't look like the new i7 has been benchmarked yet.



Based on what? Are there benchmarks out for the new i7 yet?

I do agree with you that it doesn't make sense for most people to upgrade from the previous generation, but I tend to feel that way about sequential updates in general. But this does look like it has the potential to be a nice improvement, and I think the TB ports allow the new machines to compete with the MPs in some ways they never have before.

The processor in the latest 27 inch iMac is the same sandy bridge 2400 core i5/ 2600 locked i7 that's been out for awhile now. There are tons of benchmarks all over the net.

Edit:
Heres a link comparing gaming performance:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/...core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/20

It is faster, but nothing explosive that deems the first generation of core i5 / i7 out-of-date / they can't compete. Its just a marginal increase in speed. So it comes down to are you happy with 100 fps, or do you really want 120 fps? Is it worth a $2,800 upgrade to replace the former top of the line iMac for the new top of the line iMac.

Really, I only see it worth it for those on the former Core2Quads/Duo's.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Graphics board and heat sink from new 21.5-inch iMac
- The AMD graphics chip is located on a separate board from the main logic board, allowing for replacement of the GPU without the need for an entirely new logic board. Apple of course doesn't make the GPU board particularly easy to access, as it is not considered a user-replaceable part, but it can be done.-The new iMac features the same LG display found in the previous generation.

By the way, guys, the iMacs have had separate mobile graphics boards since the first aluminium models from August 2007. The fact that you can replace these boards without replacing the logic board is OLD NEWS. These boards are the same that you'd find in super-thick, high-end gaming PC laptops. It also explains why you're not seeing any higher than a 6750M in a MacBook Pro.

 

[AidenShaw]

not all 1333MHz memory is the same speed

Mobile DDR3 1.3ghz is the same speed, and will bench the same as Desktop DDR3 1.3ghz. The only difference between desktop ram and mobile ram is that desktop ram can reach speeds higher than 1.3ghz and can be over clocked. While Mobile ram takes awhile to reach higher speeds (It wasn't until 2010 where mobile DDR3 reached 1.3ghz) and the dimms are smaller, and cost more for their smaller size. Speed wise, if they are listed the same speed, both will bench the same.

Memory DIMMs come in different latencies at the same clock rate - often called "CL".

A quick check of Newegg showed CL9 to be the overwhelming rating of SO-DIMM DDR3 modules, with a few at the faster CL7. (CL9 has a latency of 9 cycles, CL7 has a latency of 7 cycles.)

For standard 240 pin DDR3 DIMMs, CL9 was the most common, but lots of CL8 and CL7 DIMMs were listed.

By the way, guys, the iMacs have had separate mobile graphics boards since the first aluminium models from August 2007.

It's a standard: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MXM

 

[diamond.g]

Memory DIMMs come in different latencies at the same clock rate - often called "CL".

A quick check of Newegg showed CL9 to be the overwhelming rating of SO-DIMM DDR3 modules, with a few at the faster CL7. (CL9 has a latency of 9 cycles, CL7 has a latency of 7 cycles.)

For standard 240 pin DDR3 DIMMs, CL9 was the most common, but lots of CL8 and CL7 DIMMs were listed.




It's a standard: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MXM

I remember looking for tight/low CL timings. Now those timings are loose/high. Works wonders for OC'ing RAM...

 

[mdelvecchio]

What exactly is so "elegant" about requiring the disassemble of half the computer just to change out the GPU?

really? its designed to be elegant *on the desktop*. for the user. they could care less what kind of work it makes for techs.

 

[iAmLegend]

It's amazing that this new iMac is only 10% faster than the new Macbook Pro.

The MBP really is the crowning jewel of Apple hardware.

 

[AidenShaw]

is the graphics on a PCIe x8 slot?

On the MacBook Pros the graphics connection was downgraded from PCIe x16 to PCIe x8 to get PCIe lanes for the TBolt controller.

Have the teardowns or other info shown whether that's the case for the Imacs?

 

[Hellhammer]

On the MacBook Pros the graphics connection was downgraded from PCIe x16 to PCIe x8 to get PCIe lanes for the TBolt controller.

Have the teardowns or other info shown whether that's the case for the Imacs?

Well, the CPU only has 16 PCIe lanes so unless there is something magical going on, it is a PCIe x8 slot.

 

[ryanhaver]

Removable GPU!? Pretty impressive!

I have one of the first Core i7 iMacs from 2009 and they have always had a removable GPU. The 2010 Models have removable GPUs as well. You can purchase used upgrade (5670 or 5750's online, these are the 2010 iMac video cards that you can put into the 2009 model iMacs) I had a technician come to my house and replace only the GPU on my iMac i7 (2009), then on a separate occasion they replaced only my logic board.

Perhaps they are talking about the 21" models having removable GPUs? Is that it? It appears that everyone thought all the old models didn't have removable GPUs.

By the way, guys, the iMacs have had separate mobile graphics boards since the first aluminium models from August 2007. The fact that you can replace these boards without replacing the logic board is OLD NEWS. These boards are the same that you'd find in super-thick, high-end gaming PC laptops. It also explains why you're not seeing any higher than a 6750M in a MacBook Pro.

I'm glad someone else knows what they are talking about!

It's a standard: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MXM

Exactly! They are in fact the Mobile versions of Each GPU, NOT Desktop versions. That why when in Windows (under bootcamp) I prefer to use AMD's drivers for the corresponding Mobile version of each card because it works better than Apple's Bootcamp drivers, which they never update. I've had huge performance improvements using AMD's drivers off their website rather than the BootCamp Drivers themselves.

I've found it kind of maddening that Apple markets these GPUs as full desktop GPUs, because they aren't.

 

[ryanhaver]

By the way, guys, the iMacs have had separate mobile graphics boards since the first aluminium models from August 2007. The fact that you can replace these boards without replacing the logic board is OLD NEWS. These boards are the same that you'd find in super-thick, high-end gaming PC laptops. It also explains why you're not seeing any higher than a 6750M in a MacBook Pro.

I'm glad someone else knows what they are talking about!


(sorry for the double post)

 

[diamond.g]

Well, the CPU only has 16 PCIe lanes so unless there is something magical going on, it is a PCIe x8 slot.

They can use PCIe slots off the PCH...

 

[vastv]

I want one