Why not 1.25 GHz on iMac?


macrumors newbie
Original poster
Dec 22, 2002
Melbourne, Australia
Lots of people predict a speed bump to 1 GHz for the top of the line iMAC at MWSF'03. Why not bump it to 1.25 GHz? Is the heat a major issue? Or would that bring the iMac to close to the PowerMacs? Is the slow bus the problem?

I'm itching to buy my first Apple since the Apple IIe I had when I was 14... (BTW, anyone remember the game "Aztec" on the Apple IIe? I want a port of that, pretty please... :D ) That Apple has moved to a Unix backbone goes a long way in convincing me to switch (back). I've done lots of number crunching at Uni on multi-user Unix systems, so I've grown used to that OS.

But I also used to be a heavy PC gamer (competing in the German LM-CTF Quake national league...), so wondering how many fps you can squeeze out of the machine is kind of second nature, even though I play Nethack mostly these days... :rolleyes: An additional .25 GHz may mean little in terms of everyday use, but it sure would make me feel better about buying the machine...



macrumors 68000
Nov 22, 2001
Not if the PowerMacs are updated as well. However, I doubt they will jump from 700/800Mhz to 1.25Ghz somehow.

JW Pepper

macrumors regular
Jul 21, 2002
It looks to me like we might see the ending of Motorola chips in Apple machines at MWSF and a new bread of RapidIO IBM chips, if these chips support Altivec as well.

If we see an all IBM lineup berfore the 970 arrives it would undoubtly mean a re-hash of the specs accross the board. Apple could easily take the brakes of the iMac and I bet anything that an IMB G3 with Altivec would run a lot cooler than the G4, so yes we could easily see a 1.33 or 1.66 iMac with 1.25ghz.

:cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool:


Jul 9, 2000
macs are slow compared to pcs these days

it would be fine to bring imac to 1.25 ghz

the powermac has all the expandability so it distinguishes itself as more pro than the imac
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.