Up until the new design delay there was a refresh roughy every 9 months, using whatever latest CPU and GPU they could. So while Haswell won't be a big improvement for iMacs, why would the skip it?
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.
Will the 2013 haswell iMac be retina Poll
- Thread starter TwoBytes
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Up until the new design delay there was a refresh roughy every 9 months, using whatever latest CPU and GPU they could. So while Haswell won't be a big improvement for iMacs, why would the skip it?
Theoretically, in turns of pure throughput, you could put a retina panel in the 21.5 model and combined with the 680mx, the experience wouldn't be that painful.
But rule out a 27 retina without some sort of SLI graphics system. The pure horsepower to drive a 4k display would just be tremendous.
But rule out a 27 retina without some sort of SLI graphics system. The pure horsepower to drive a 4k display would just be tremendous.
Haswell is slated for release around April 2013; the iMac line will more than likely be refreshed late summer - fall next year, so unless new iMacs unexpectedly came out around Mar-Apr, I would be more than surprised if the late-summer iMacs didn't include Haswell, especially given that APPLE often gets access to new Intel processors before the rest of the industry.
Not always a premium. True, an equally equipped 13" rMBP is $300 more than it's non-retina counterpart, but the 15" Retina MBP is actually cheaper!!
The MacBook Pro does have more ports and an optical drive, but an otherwise equally equipped 15" rMBP - 2.6 i7, 8 GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM, 512GB Flash - is actually $300 less expensive than the 15" non-retina MacBook Pro. rMBP 2799 vs 3099 for the MacBook Pro. (fwiw the rMBP also has significantly less screen glare.) Add to that $100 for the HiRes/anti-glare option and now the diff is $400.
If they can get high enough yields for 3840x2160 and 5120x2880 displays, then yep. If not, no. Due to the higher costs they'll probably have the standard models and then the 'super' Retina models.
It depends entirely on how much the appropriate resolution screens will cost at that time. I had an argument here not too long with a couple of posters in which I stated that the 2012 iMac will not a retina display due to the cost. One of the posters was quite vehement in stating that I was wrong because Sharp is creating 4K "Igzo" panels that should be cheap enough and it will probably be a 32" screen, with which I did not agree.
Guess what?
A couple of days ago I saw that Sharp will be shipping a 32" computer monitor with 4K resolution, based on the IGZO panels. The cost? around $5000.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaY39sLAdkQ&feature=youtu.be
Guess what?
A couple of days ago I saw that Sharp will be shipping a 32" computer monitor with 4K resolution, based on the IGZO panels. The cost? around $5000.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaY39sLAdkQ&feature=youtu.be
Eventually there will be one, but Apple is likely focussing on getting the iPad Mini and Airs retina ready. Once they are done we will likely see retina iMacs starting to pop up.
iMacs need retina the least, and Apple would rather use economies of scale to keep the retinas for the smaller devices cheap.
iMacs need retina the least, and Apple would rather use economies of scale to keep the retinas for the smaller devices cheap.