[P]

Originally Posted by driven 

How great is the performance increase of the Quad i5 / i7 over the Core 2 Duo? (Even with the lower clock speeds of the quads)

Ginormous ideally, but it depends on the exact application. You can check any review of the Lynnfield Core i7/i5. Anandtech is my favourite at the moment. Their Photoshop test is here, and the rest of that article has other tests. i5 750 is the default on in the top iMac, and the E8600 is comparable to the best you can get in a Core 2 iMac. A pretty decent gap, but the video encoding tests are much better than that.

Note that Turbo means that as soon as you only stress two cores, those will clock up to match the Core 2, and the integrated memory controller makes Core i7/i5 a much more efficient design than Core 2.

[P]

Originally Posted by mattyb 

I asked this in a thread in the Lounge as well. Can one hook up a game console to these new iMacs? I've got an Xbox. Anybody care to point me to somewhere that explains this?

Cheers.

Depends on which resolutions the screen actually accepts. The native is 1440p, a semi-standard resolution that is exactly 4 times 720p. Thus 720p is likely supported (exactly 4 pixels per point the console puts out), but we don't know that yet.

[mattyb]

Cheers P and ajprice for your replies.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

I love the new iMac. Although I think they should've kept the 24".

They have, more or less. They basically chopped an inch off the bottom edge of a 23" screen.

[Sosa]

Regarding the quad cores, if you chose to upgrade from the i5 2.66 ghz to the i7 2.8 ghz Apple charges $200 more. However their respective MSRPs are $199 and $285 respectively.

Benchmark Reviews: Performance Computer Hardware Tests and Overclocking Guides.- Offline

So, if you choose to upgrade your quad core CPU you will pay a hefty premium.

[driven]

Originally Posted by P 

Ginormous ideally, but it depends on the exact application. You can check any review of the Lynnfield Core i7/i5. Anandtech is my favourite at the moment. Their Photoshop test is here, and the rest of that article has other tests. i5 750 is the default on in the top iMac, and the E8600 is comparable to the best you can get in a Core 2 iMac. A pretty decent gap, but the video encoding tests are much better than that.

Note that Turbo means that as soon as you only stress two cores, those will clock up to match the Core 2, and the integrated memory controller makes Core i7/i5 a much more efficient design than Core 2.

So ... it would seem that it's worth it to pay the extra money for the Quad, yes?

[driven]

Another question: If using the iMac 27" as an external monitor (let's say in 5-6 years when the CPU is no longer "the $hit") ... do you have to power up the entire computer, or is the system set up to just power up the display portion? (The later of course would be better).

Maybe it's too soon to tell now since nobody has actually touched these things yet.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by driven 

So ... it would seem that it's worth it to pay the extra money for the Quad, yes?

Depends on what you do. Dual is fine for most people but for multimedia encoding quad will make a humungous difference.

In fact, my 3 year old 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo seems quite zippy for most of my usage... until I start using Aperture or encode video.

[driven]

Thanks. Video work, software development ... and future proofing.

[Sosa]

Are these quad processors the future of home computers? 3-4 years from now will the base iMac be a quad processor so that people with duos will have issues? I'm not a user with power sapping programs, but I'm tempted by the entry level quad if it means it will extend the life of the computer. But my guess is no, because a 1ghz G4 has met my needs reasonably until now!

[Eug]

If a 1 GHz G4 has been fine for you, then a low end dual iMac would be fine.

I have a 1.07 GHz G4 iBook, a 1.25 GHz G4 iMac, and a dual-core 2.26 GHz 13" MacBook Pro. The MacBook Pro feels like a snappy modern computer to me. The G4 iBook and G4 iMac feel like they're from the dark ages by comparison.

Get the low end dual and save lots of money, and then get the low end quad a few years later when even the low end iMacs are quad.

P.S. The 1920x1080 resolution of the 21.5" iMac will feel enormous to you. The biggest G4 iMac ever made (20") has a significantly smaller resolution.

[Sosa]

Originally Posted by Eug 

P.S. The 1920x1080 resolution of the 21.5" iMac will feel enormous to you. The biggest G4 iMac ever made (20") has a significantly smaller resolution.

Funny you mention that because, after so many years on 12", I woudn't know what to do with a 27" screen. I'll probably be flabergasted by that 21" when I get it. Even at work we use 15"-17" screens. But you are talking about resolutions, which I did max out on the 12", I think it was 1260x900 or something.

I don't think the G4 feels ancient though. I mean it can be slow but mostly it works fine. Maybe I'm just so used to its quirks that it doesn't bother me. The other day though I had the gray screen of death, you need to restart this computer, I think my little Powerbook is slowly dying! I vow to keep that machine running for as long as possible! I will be purchasing a replacement battery off Ebay soon, the 2d since purchase in 2003!

[Eug]

The 12" iBook and PowerBooks are 1024x768.

The main problem with the G4s are H.264 and flash video. ie. Just surfing the net means it's a text-based and still photo experience. No (consistent) video for you. Obviously with the Core 2 Duo machines video is a smooth as silk.

BTW, I even have a G4 450 Cube in the guest room, so I'm quite used to the slower machines. It's just that using a C2D Intel Mac is like an epiphany in comparison.

[downinflames68]

Originally Posted by slugslugslug 

Anyone mention the video input on the 27"? Really makes me want to go back to the old days of having a desktop and a laptop.

There won't be any. Nevermind that it has a huge screen and could work in your living room, comes with a remote and has optical audio out. Nevermind front row, who the hell would want to hook up cable or a PS3 to use that gigantic monitor? Nobody, according to apple. : brick:

[Eug]

^ Huh?

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

There won't be any. Nevermind that it has a huge screen and could work in your living room, comes with a remote and has optical audio out. Nevermind front row, who the hell would want to hook up cable or a PS3 to use that gigantic monitor? Nobody, according to apple. : brick:

Um, Rob:
Apple - iMac - Technical Specifications

Originally Posted by Apple's own ****ing homepage

Mini DisplayPort output port with support for DVI, VGA, and dual-link DVI (adapters sold separately). 27-inch models also support input from external DisplayPort sources (adapters sold separately).

It might help if you stopped banging your head against the wall.

[downinflames68]

What?! Holy ****ing ****! HOLY ****! THAT IS AMAZING. I seriously wonder if Apple listens to me since I'm so good at bitching about their retarded mistakes.

Check this out:

Add an HD input port to the iMac Petition

I sent them MANY flaming emails for the inability to put an input on the back of the iMac... and a few years ago, I did the same because iMacs ALWAYS had crappy video cards. They never offered a truly decent card... as soon as the 24" became available with the 7600GT, I ordered it. Looks like it's time to upgrade my 24" to a 27" for that input port!

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

What?! Holy ****ing ****! HOLY ****! THAT IS AMAZING. I seriously wonder if Apple listens to me since I'm so good at bitching about their retarded mistakes.

Check this out:

Add an HD input port to the iMac Petition

umm.
Add an HD input port to the iMac - Signatures

22 Total Signatures

Edit: just to be clear - I agree that this is great news.

[Eug]

[P]

Originally Posted by driven 

So ... it would seem that it's worth it to pay the extra money for the Quad, yes?

Yes, I plan to.

Originally Posted by Sosa 

Regarding the quad cores, if you chose to upgrade from the i5 2.66 ghz to the i7 2.8 ghz Apple charges $200 more. However their respective MSRPs are $199 and $285 respectively.

Benchmark Reviews: Performance Computer Hardware Tests and Overclocking Guides.- Offline

So, if you choose to upgrade your quad core CPU you will pay a hefty premium.

It's always like that, but compare that model (iMac with Core i7) to the low-end MP. The MP costs more, has less RAM, lower clockspeed, slower GPU and oh, by the way, the iMac includes a 27" IPS screen.

Also, since we're using desktop CPUs now... I am not aware of a package for Lynnfield that uses BGA, so they're almost certainly socketed. Just saying.

[P]

Originally Posted by Sosa 

Are these quad processors the future of home computers? 3-4 years from now will the base iMac be a quad processor so that people with duos will have issues? I'm not a user with power sapping programs, but I'm tempted by the entry level quad if it means it will extend the life of the computer. But my guess is no, because a 1ghz G4 has met my needs reasonably until now!

4 years from now, a quad will be very common but by no means required. In fact, I think the low-end will stay fairly low for a while - just look at Atom. Intel's next architecture, Sandy Bridge (a native quad) launches in early 2011 and is expected to still come in dual-core variants. The shrink Ivy Bridge follows abotu a year later, and early 2013 should see Haswell. Maybe quad is the smallest we'll get at that point, but we need to squeeze in the graphics on the die as well, so don't count on it.

[downinflames68]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

umm.
Add an HD input port to the iMac - Signatures

Edit: just to be clear - I agree that this is great news.

No, I agree, that sucked. Only 22 people signed it, which was lame, so I started sending Apple hate mail every few days for MONTHS, about this issue. The best part is all the people who disagreed with me on NN, saying that it was stupid. Ha. PICK. MY. FLEAS.

[Spheric Harlot]

[mduell]

Any confirmation they're using IPS panels rather than TN in the 27"?

I assume the 21.5" is TN.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Um, Rob:
Apple - iMac - Technical Specifications


It might help if you stopped banging your head against the wall.

Since when does the PS3 (GP's example) output DisplayPort?

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Sosa 

Are these quad processors the future of home computers? 3-4 years from now will the base iMac be a quad processor so that people with duos will have issues?

3-4? Try 1, maybe 2.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by mduell 

Since when does the PS3 (GP's example) output DisplayPort?

It can output HDMI. Presumably you can just use an HDMI-mini-DisplayPort adapter.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by mduell 

Any confirmation they're using IPS panels rather than TN in the 27"?

I assume the 21.5" is TN.

Originally Posted by Apple’s own asterisk-asterisk-asterisk-asterisking homepage :D

• Built-in 21.5-inch (viewable) or 27-inch (viewable) LED-backlit glossy widescreen TFT active-matrix liquid crystal display with IPS technology

It’s worded kind of ambiguously, but based on this it seems possible that even the 21.5-inch might be an IPS. This is backed up by the fact that it later claims:

• Typical viewing angle: 178° horizontal; 178° vertical

without any qualifications regarding whether that applies to only the 27” or not.

[dennett]

Anyone know when the base 27" will arrive at the Apple stores? I sent my wife in to pick one up today, and they didn't have them yet, not even display models. She was told it would be a few days before they arrived. I was bummed to arrive home today and not have a new toy...

[driven]

Originally Posted by dennett 

Anyone know when the base 27" will arrive at the Apple stores? I sent my wife in to pick one up today, and they didn't have them yet, not even display models. She was told it would be a few days before they arrived. I was bummed to arrive home today and not have a new toy...

That's awesome that you can send your wife to do that. If I sent my wife off to do that she'd certainly come home with the wrong thing.

[Eug]

FWIW:

My Core i7 configure-to-order 27" doesn't have a ship date yet, except for "November". However, the auto-enroll AppleCare has a delivery date of Nov. 2 - Nov. 6.

[Vinnie]

I'm planning on upgrading to the 27" Quad

2 quick questions-

Is there an adapter for the SD slot that will allow CF cards to be used? If so, could someone point me to one.

How much RAM do I need? Other than common tasks such as surfing, email... Photoshop is the one program I use the most that might benefit w/ 8 GB RAM (I guess). I seldom use FCP and none of the iLife programs.

I'm trying to future proof this machine, so should I go ahead and get the 8 gigs or do I not need it.

Thanks / Bill

[slugslugslug]

I’ve only ever seen CF/SD adapters that go the other way round. Which makes sense since CF is so much bigger. Even the beast you refer to exists, you may as well just get a USB/FW reader. It won’t be any more effort to get your card into the iMac.

[Krusty]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

It’s worded kind of ambiguously, but based on this it seems possible that even the 21.5-inch might be an IPS. This is backed up by the fact that it later claims:

Watch the iMac video introduction at apple.com. They explicitly state that LED backlights and IPS technology is used in the new iMac monitors.

[downinflames68]

I'd send my wife to get it but she turned into a ****ing psychotic slut that worships the moon.

[P]

Originally Posted by Krusty 

Watch the iMac video introduction at apple.com. They explicitly state that LED backlights and IPS technology is used in the new iMac monitors.

They also put it on the feature page:

Stunning from every angle.

The new iMac display looks great from any seat in the house, thanks to a premium display technology called in-plane switching (IPS). IPS gives you a bright picture with excellent color consistency — even if you’re viewing the display from the side.

[P]

Originally Posted by Vinnie 

How much RAM do I need? Other than common tasks such as surfing, email... Photoshop is the one program I use the most that might benefit w/ 8 GB RAM (I guess). I seldom use FCP and none of the iLife programs.

I'm trying to future proof this machine, so should I go ahead and get the 8 gigs or do I not need it.

8 gigs is never wrong, but Photoshop won't benefit directly until CS5, I think. And you can always upgrade the RAM later on.

[Eriamjh]

Originally Posted by Vinnie 

Is there an adapter for the SD slot that will allow CF cards to be used? If so, could someone point me to one.
Thanks / Bill

It's called a USB adapter. Something you probably already own.

SD slots are nice if that's the format one happens to have. I with Apple would put a USB slot on the side or even the front, but now that the keyboard and mouse are wireless, at least one less port is used by default.

[Eug]

My credit card has been billed!

...but just for Apple Care. Considering it's an auto-enroll specific to the iMac I ordered that seems a bit pointless.

[msuper69]

Originally Posted by Eug 

My credit card has been billed!

...but just for Apple Care. Considering it's an auto-enroll specific to the iMac I ordered that seems a bit pointless.

That's what happened to me when I ordered the first TiBook. It doesn't make any sense to ship and charge your credit card until the Mac has actually been shipped.

I complained to Apple about that back then and suggested that they change their "system" to be more intelligent about charging for something that is useless until you actually receive the object of the coverage.

Didn't think anything would change.

[Eug]

Some questions, some that perhaps nobody can answer:

1) Is the memory for the Core i7 iMac CL 7? Crucial seems to think so.
2) For dual channel support, you only need to do pairs, right? ie. 2x2 + 2x4 is fine right?
3) For dual channel support, two different brands is still fine these days, right? ie. 2x2 Brand A + 2x2 Brand B?
4) Does dual channel make any difference at all for Core i7? For some, why not just add 2 GB for a total for 6 GB?
Mind you, 2 GB is <US$50, so you may as well max out the slots with 2 GB SO-DIMMs.
5) Has anyone shipped Crucial memory to Canada recently? Any brokerage charges?

EDIT:

FedEx says their FedEx International Priority has no brokerage charges (just taxes).

[Eriamjh]

For the record, the CPU is socketed according to iFixit.com:

Our 3.06 GHz E7600 Core 2 Duo processor is a LGA 775 Socket T CPU. There are some Core 2 Quad chips that use the same socket, but we don't know if they would work. The i5 and i7 quad-cores included in the high-end 27" iMac use a different socket, LGA 1156 Socket H.

However, the quad socket for the iMac different from the Core 2 Duo socket so one cannot upgrade from a C2D to a Quad unless that other quad chip works somehow (I bet it would).

Looks like I have to sell some stuff to get one of these.

[Eug]

Here is the iFixit.com teardown.

This is the pic with the large heatsinks, with what appear to be heat pipes.

[Simon]

I'm very glad to see Apple finally make the step towards desktop components in the iMac. I've been complaining about this for ages. Now that they're using cheap Wolfdale and Lynnfield rather than Penryn and Clarksfield they can offer great features (fast CPU+chipset, huge high-quality screen, good graphics, good RAM ceiling) at a very decent price point. The iMac has finally become a true desktop. The only thing it lacks now is expansion options.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

What?! Holy ****ing ****! HOLY ****! THAT IS AMAZING. I seriously wonder if Apple listens to me since I'm so good at bitching about their retarded mistakes.

Umm, no. Actually you were ranting a something Apple already put in there. Presumably because you prefer to rant and use foul language to appear as the tough guy rather than read specs. Shame.

[Eug]

Yeah, the flat iMac has seen some pretty serious updates:

1) iMac G5 (although that was a desktop CPU too, albeit lower power).
2) Core 2 Duo iMac
3) Quad iMac with 8 logical cores, using a desktop part.

It's going to be cool just for bragging rights to have "8" cores in my iMac. I wonder if you can shut off HyperThreading though.

As for expansion, what bugs me the most are FW and eSATA. There is only one FW 800 port, with FW 800 hubs being almost non-existment, and there is no eSATA at all. The latter is probably to protect FW though, since with an eSATA-capable iMac, I betcha 90% of FW drive sales would disappear in Macs.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

Ha. POP. MY. PIMPLES.

Childish and filthy all in one. Great. Reported.

[P]

Originally Posted by Eriamjh 

For the record, the CPU is socketed according to iFixit.com:

However, the quad socket for the iMac different from the Core 2 Duo socket so one cannot upgrade from a C2D to a Quad unless that other quad chip works somehow (I bet it would).

Not exactly. The Quad iMac uses the LGA 1156 socket and a Core i5 or i7 chip. The Duo iMac uses the LGA 775 socket and a Core 2 chip. Obviously one won't fit in the other. There are however quads - Core 2 Quad - that use the LGA 775 socket. Whether they will work is more than I know, but it's likely - at least if you pick one of the low-energy models (Q9550s)

[P]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Some questions, some that perhaps nobody can answer:

1) Is the memory for the Core i7 iMac CL 7? Crucial seems to think so.

No idea.

Originally Posted by Eug 

2) For dual channel support, you only need to do pairs, right? ie. 2x2 + 2x4 is fine right?

Right, but they need to be identical in each pair, not just the same size.

Originally Posted by Eug 

3) For dual channel support, two different brands is still fine these days, right? ie. 2x2 Brand A + 2x2 Brand B?

Yes.

Originally Posted by Eug 

4) Does dual channel make any difference at all for Core i7? For some, why not just add 2 GB for a total for 6 GB?

Generally yes, although I haven't seen any tests. Recent Intel chipsets actually do dual channel for as much of the memory space as it can if the channels aren't matched, so you get some benefit anyway.

[P]

Originally Posted by Simon 

I'm very glad to see Apple finally make the step towards desktop components in the iMac. I've been complaining about this for ages. Now that they're using cheap Wolfdale and Lynnfield rather than Penryn and Clarksfield they can offer great features (fast CPU+chipset, huge high-quality screen, good graphics, good RAM ceiling) at a very decent price point. The iMac has finally become a true desktop. The only thing it lacks now is expansion options.

Some people are never happy.