Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Rumor Addict · Sep 8, 2003, 08:35 AM

New iMacs are here! They were up for a brief moment on the Apple France store but the US store hadnt updated. Now the Apple France store is back down as is the US store.

Here is what I saw on the france store:

15 inch / 1ghz / 256 mb DDR 333/ 4MX 32 MB/ 80 gig / USB 2

17 inch / 1.25 ghz / 256 mb DDR 333/ 5200 FX 64mb / 80 gig / USB 2

17 inch / 1.25 ghz / 512 mb DDR 333/ 5200 FX 64mb /160 gig / USB 2/ Bluetooth and Airport Extreme included.

BrunoBruin · Sep 8, 2003, 08:42 AM

The US store now has the new models.

Is the FX5200 a good card?

Simon · Sep 8, 2003, 08:43 AM

Originally posted by Rumor Addict:
New iMacs are here! They were up for a brief moment on the Apple France store but the US store hadnt updated. Now the Apple France store is back down as is the US store.

Here is what I saw on the france store:

15 inch / 1ghz / 256 mb DDR 333/ 4MX 32 MB/ 80 gig / USB 2

17 inch / 1.25 ghz / 256 mb DDR 333/ 5200 FX 64mb / 80 gig / USB 2

17 inch / 1.25 ghz / 512 mb DDR 333/ 5200 FX 64mb /160 gig / USB 2/ Bluetooth and Airport Extreme included.

Yes. The US AppleStore now shows the same.

I suppose this makes the iMac now finally OS X boot only.

Does anybody here have an idea how the GF5200FX compared to GF4MX and GF4Ti or the Radeon 9000 or 9600?

tritonus · Sep 8, 2003, 08:47 AM

The 17" is cheaper now in Switzerland, even with 1.25 processor.

GeoMac · Sep 8, 2003, 08:48 AM

Originally posted by BrunoBruin:
The US store now has the new models.

Is the FX5200 a good card?

The FX5200 is no upgrade from the GF4 mx.

DAlex · Sep 8, 2003, 08:48 AM

Hmm, updated/upgraded iMac and iPod, I'm surprised these weren't saved for the Paris Expo - makes you wonder what they may have in store for then.

DAlex

BrunoBruin · Sep 8, 2003, 08:54 AM

Originally posted by GeoMac:
The FX5200 is no upgrade from the GF4 mx.

That's what I was afraid of.

These are still nice machines, but I'd have been more tempted by a price cut. This also means prices of the discontinued 1GHz models won't drop much.

Rumor Addict · Sep 8, 2003, 08:59 AM

These new Macs have a faster system bus which should help with speed as well. They are now 167MHZ rather than the former 100/133 bus.

Luca Rescigno · Sep 8, 2003, 08:59 AM

Originally posted by Simon:
I suppose this makes the iMac now finally OS X boot only.

Well, these machines are OS X boot only, but so were the previous machines. The last OS 9-booting iMacs were the 700 MHz versions and the 800 MHz 15" and 17" Superdrive versions. The 800/Combo and 1 GHz/Superdrive were both OS X only as well.

mitchell_pgh · Sep 8, 2003, 09:10 AM

I would bet CASH there will still be older computers that can boot OS 9 around for some time...

DAlex · Sep 8, 2003, 09:39 AM

Originally posted by Rumor Addict:
These new Macs have a faster system bus which should help with speed as well. They are now 167MHZ rather than the former 100/133 bus.

Yep, the faster bus, garphics and extreme/bluetooth makes for a nice increase over my original 17fp 800 iMac. I like the speed of mine and would imagine that the new iMac would be a very nice, nippy upgrade. Tempted.

Krusty · Sep 8, 2003, 09:48 AM

Did you all happen to notice that you can now custom configure the hard drive size on the 17" iMacs in addition to the RAM. Nice .. $100 to swap the 80gb for a 160gb drive.

DrBoar · Sep 8, 2003, 10:14 AM

Marginal CPU boost of 25% and still no L3 cache, hopefully this is not only the latest but also the last iMac s(p)oiled by the G4

Simon · Sep 8, 2003, 10:25 AM

Originally posted by Luca Rescigno:
Well, these machines are OS X boot only, but so were the previous machines.

Not quite. The previous 1GHz SD model was OS X boot only.

The 800MHz Combo was still capable of booting OS 9 and was the "old-style" model (old 100MHz SDRAM board, no audio-in, no APX or BT, etc.).

Now, with the advent of PC2700 DDR boards running 167/333MHz and USB 2 I suppose OS 9 as a boot OS is definitely gone.

kjb · Sep 8, 2003, 10:52 AM

This might be a stupid question, but what's the point of having 333mhz ram when the board only runs at 167? Isn't the ram speed wasted, or am I missing something??

Simon · Sep 8, 2003, 10:57 AM

Originally posted by kjb:
This might be a stupid question, but what's the point of having 333mhz ram when the board only runs at 167? Isn't the ram speed wasted, or am I missing something??

I think you are actually missing something.

The board runs at 167MHz. The DDR RAM is said to run at 333MHz because it is DOUBLE data rate RAM, i.e. it uses the rising and falling flank of the signal on the bus, thus it's like twice the speed of the bus' 167MHz.

The real problem is that Moto's 7455 ("G4") used here has a MaxBus that is limited at 167MHz. So the DDR's extra 167MHz are only good for using DMA stuff in addition to using the chip at full blast, because the G4's MaxBus itself is the actual bottleneck. A very sad and very old story.

The relief: The G5, or the 7457, or the 7457-RM or the Gobi 750, or the Mojave 70...

andreas_g4 · Sep 8, 2003, 10:59 AM

Originally posted by Rumor Addict:
These new Macs have a faster system bus which should help with speed as well. They are now 167MHZ rather than the former 100/133 bus.

I'm surprised Apple didn't put only a 133 MHz bus in the low-end iMac. Usually they do stupid things like that (1.6 G5 anyone?)

I like the simplyness (can I say so in English?) of the iMac product line. The equeal bus/RAM speed is a good sign.

No 15" SD model and L3 cache, though. Ahh, I complain too much... Both machines are decent.

Agent69 · Sep 8, 2003, 01:08 PM

I would consider the 1.25ghz model as an upgrade from my 700Mhz eMac but I simply do not need a superdrive.

MindFad · Sep 8, 2003, 01:41 PM

Cool. But I hope this is the last G4 iMac we see.

thunderous_funker · Sep 8, 2003, 01:48 PM

Originally posted by MindFad:
Cool. But I hope this is the last G4 iMac we see.

Why would they put a G5 in an iMac? There's only a $200 difference between the 17" iMac and a G5 already.

Don't think it's going to happen. The iMac will be discontinued in it's present form before it gets a G5, IMO.

MindFad · Sep 8, 2003, 02:31 PM

I think Apple might with the next revision. But who knows. I hope, anyway. Since Apple's all for closing performance gaps all the sudden, I could see a 1.6 G5 going into high-end iMacs, and maybe a 1.4 G4 in the lower model. The G4 *is* a damn performance gap. I'm not ragging on the machines, though. It would be a good move for Apple, though, and I'm sure they could pull it off.

mitchell_pgh · Sep 8, 2003, 02:41 PM

I was about to post a pro iMac rant until I went and saw the price difference between a iMac with a superdrive and a low end G5 tower!

I work for a university so the difference is $100

I would be getting a NICE 17" LCD, but would miss out on the optional hard drive bay.

To be honest... It's a trade off... I have two ugly CRTs, but am rather happy with them... I would miss the second monitor, I like the idea that I could upgrade the thing later on down the road...

Hrm....

kmkkid · Sep 8, 2003, 03:55 PM

Looking good.

I swear the iMac took a $400 price drop in the Canada store (I think it was $2799 now it's $2499) And it's ALOT better. Odd. They must want to get rid of the G4's.

Chris

andreas_g4 · Sep 8, 2003, 04:41 PM

Originally posted by kmkkid:
Looking good.

I swear the iMac took a $400 price drop in the Canada store (I think it was $2799 now it's $2499) And it's ALOT better. Odd. They must want to get rid of the G4's.

Chris

$ 2799 - $ 2499 = $ 300

gorickey · Sep 8, 2003, 07:07 PM

Hmm, why not the new bluetooth mouse/keyboard with these babies? Especially since they have built-in bluetooth capabilities?

bastion · Sep 8, 2003, 08:02 PM

I'm still trying to figure out how people here "upgrade" their monitors... if you mean replace, that isn't really an upgrade.

Riemann Zeta · Sep 8, 2003, 08:08 PM

The new video card is not that great, but it is not that bad either.

"The NV34 is the successor to the GeForce4 MX but unlike the MX, it is not an overly castrated version of its older siblings. In fact, the architecture of the NV34 is, according to NVIDIA, virtually identical to the NV31; the only official differences being the memory controller and clock speeds.
The NV34 128-bit memory controller is devoid of any of the NV30/31's compression algorithms, mostly to keep die size down on the larger 0.15-micron process. The NV34 is aimed at the mass market, and thus must be as cheap to manufacture as possible. Featuring only 47 million transistors (compared to NV31's 75 million), the NV34 is missing more than just the NV31's compression engine. Because the NV31 is geared for higher clock speeds its pipelines, although functionally equivalent to the NV34's, do have extra stages to help gear the part for higher clocks. Around 15 - 20% of the NV31's die is reserved for the compression engines, with the remaining 10 - 20% of the die difference being reserved for those extra pipeline stages. The combination of the two aforementioned differences make up the vast majority of the 28 million transistor difference between the NV31 & 34.
Obviously on a 0.15-micron process, the NV34 can't reach as high clocks as the NV31, which is why it shouldn't be a surprise that one of its first incarnations--the GeForce FX 5200 Ultra will be shipping at a 325MHz core clock. This 325MHz core clock is still quite high, you'll note that it is higher than the GeForce4 Ti 4600 built on the same 0.15-micron process. The difference is that the 5200 Ultra's NV34 GPU is slightly less complicated than the GeForce4 and thus can run at higher speeds without producing as much heat and adversely impacting the overall manufacturing yield of the GPUs.
The GeForce FX 5200 Ultra features a 325MHz DDR memory clock, and although it's only 7% lower than the 5600 Ultra, the performance will be significantly less because of the lack of any compression engine" (Anandtech, 2003).

I suppose, if we were to continue with the castration metaphor, in this instantiation, NVIDIA only removed one testicle, rather than two as in the abysmal GeForce 4 MX (really a re-branded GeForce 2 MX).

Graymalkin · Sep 8, 2003, 09:35 PM

Comments thus far about the new video card have been totally absurd. There is really no comparison between a GF4MX and a GFFX, even the 5200 models. The closest comparable card to the GFFX 5200 would be the Radeon 9500.

The first thing you should notice is the GF4MX does not support programmable pixel and vertex shaders. This is a major flaw in the design of the MX series GPUs. The MX series is also crippled in their number of pixel pipelines. The MX series only have two pixel pipelines where the GF4 Ti and GF3 both have four pixel pipelines. In the Windows world the MX series GPUs are considered DirectX 7.1 class parts. That means they have fixed function shaders and less than 4 pixel piplines.

The Radeon 9000 on the other hand has a full 4 pixel pipelines and pixel and vertex shaders. The pixel shader on the Radeon 9000 is 1.4 and the vertex shader is version 1.1 which are the same versions of the shaders that the Radeon 8500 supports. The GF4Ti on the other hand only supports the 1.3 pixel shader revision. The Radeon 9000 is classified as a DirectX 8.1 product because of the number of pixel pipelines and shader revisions supported.

Both the GF4MX and Radeon 9000 lack support for the most recent shader revisions. The Radeon 9500, and 9700 (9600 and 9800) support these new revisions. As do all the GFFX chips. The new shader revisions call for larger shaders - up to 160 instructions - where the 1.x shaders only supported up to 14 shader instructions. The new shader revision also calls for higher precision math to be used to calculate final pixel values. With the 2.0 pixel shader revision the GPU must be able to handle 128-bit floating point math. This provides far more dynamic range than the 1.x pixel shader's 64-bit fixed point math. The difference between 1.x and 2.x pixel shaders is breathtaking.

The GFFX 5200 is a fully qualified DX9 part which means it has at least four pixel pipelines, support for pixel and vertex shader versions 2.0 and above, and full vertex transforming capabilities. While the 5200 isn't quite as capable as its 5600 and 5900 cousins in terms of pushed pixels it can handle all of the same shaders and graphical doodads. Saying the GFFX 5200 is akin to the GF4MX in any way shows a serious lack of understanding of video cards.

Poncho · Sep 9, 2003, 03:54 AM

Yoy can't compare a FX5200 with a Radeon 9500 ! The 9500 is even faster than the 9600!
The FX5200 is a slow card. Look at some benmarks.

Simon · Sep 9, 2003, 04:38 AM

Originally posted by Poncho:
Yoy can't compare a FX5200 with a Radeon 9500 ! The 9500 is even faster than the 9600!
The FX5200 is a slow card. Look at some benmarks.

Maybe we could come up with some kind of list that shows how fast the cards are relative to one another. Obviously only Mac-available versions are important and mobile GPUs should be considered in a seperate list.

This is of course not scientific, but it would be nice for non-GPU-experts like me to get an idea of what we are getting and what would be available.

Here's a start. Please correct and/or complete:

Desktop:

GeForce 2MX
GeForce 4MX
Radeon 7500
GeForce 3
GeForce 4Ti 4200
Radeon 9000
GeForce FX 5200
GeForce 4Ti 4600
Radeon 9600
Radeon 9800

Notebook:

Radeon 7500 Mobility
GeForce 420 Go
GeForce 440 Go
Radeon 9000 Mobility
GeForce 460 Go
Radeon 9600 Mobility

(this involved a lot of guessing, please do correct!)

tae667 · Sep 9, 2003, 06:31 AM

Originally posted by Simon:

(this involved a lot of guessing, please do correct!)

Here's my list, I think I've seen one in futuremark.com, but right now I can't find it, so this one is coming straight from my memory.

Desktop:

GeForce 2MX
Radeon 7500
GeForce 4MX
GeForce FX 5200
Radeon 9000
GeForce 3Ti
GeForce 4Ti 4200
GeForce FX 5600
Radeon 9600
GeForce 4Ti 4600
Geforce FX 5900
Radeon 9800

Radeon 9000 is just downgraded 8500. GeForce fx 5200 is GF4MX with Direct X 9 support(like we care) and other, very minor differences.. GF4ti's are very fast cards, they just don't have support for latest effects, etc.

And again, please correct me if I'm wrong.

Simon · Sep 9, 2003, 07:36 AM

tae667, thanks for your corrections:

So, let me update:

Desktop:

GeForce 2MX
Radeon 7500
GeForce 4MX
GeForce FX 5200
Radeon 9000
GeForce 3Ti
GeForce 4Ti 4200
GeForce FX 5600
Radeon 9600
GeForce 4Ti 4600
Geforce FX 5900
Radeon 9800

Notebook:

Radeon 7500 Mobility
GeForce 420 Go
GeForce 440 Go
Radeon 9000 Mobility
GeForce 460 Go
Radeon 9600 Mobility

Any other corrections/suggestions? Anybody?

Agent69 · Sep 9, 2003, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by bastion:
I'm still trying to figure out how people here "upgrade" their monitors... if you mean replace, that isn't really an upgrade.

Upgrades are often performed by simply replacing parts. You're nitpicking.

AssassyN · Sep 9, 2003, 03:26 PM

Not sure if this has been noticed or not, but these updated iMacs no longer come w/ the "Pro" Keyboard/Mouse, but rather the standard "Keyboard/Mouse" like the eMacs have been using.

NightEyes · Sep 9, 2003, 04:55 PM

The FX5200 is more than a GF4MX with Direct 9 support. Read the review of the new iMac card in tomshardware.com

Paul Stephen C. · Sep 9, 2003, 07:36 PM

1.25Ghz?

Not much of a boost. Certainly no temptation to anyone with a 17" 800MHz/IGhz iMac, but perhaps that's just as well. You don't want to be too annoyed a few months after you bought the "ultimate" iMac!

Interesting point AssassyN.

What mouse/keyboard does the new iMac have?

I, for one, ditched the soap bar mouse within weeks, and bought a Microsoft (ugh!) bluetooth wireless Intellimouse with scrollwheel. I didn't like buying an MS product, but come on Apple - you're letting us down with your crappy mouse - we wanna scroll!

I'll replace my iMac when it goes G5 and not before!

Paul Stephen C. · Sep 9, 2003, 07:40 PM

Sorry for the double post, but I just saw that even after 31 posts I'm still a "junior member"! The connotations (in UK at least) are simply too hard to bear!!

What to you have to do to be more than a "junior member"?!

AssassyN · Sep 10, 2003, 10:58 AM

Post more

OldManMac · Sep 10, 2003, 04:47 PM

Originally posted by AssassyN:
Not sure if this has been noticed or not, but these updated iMacs no longer come w/ the "Pro" Keyboard/Mouse, but rather the standard "Keyboard/Mouse" like the eMacs have been using.

The Pro keyboard/mouse are no longer available. All new Macs will be coming with the same one the eMac uses.

andreas_g4 · Sep 10, 2003, 05:02 PM

Originally posted by Paul Stephen C.:
Sorry for the double post, but I just saw that even after 31 posts I'm still a "junior member"! The connotations (in UK at least) are simply too hard to bear!!

What to you have to do to be more than a "junior member"?!

andreas_g4 · Sep 10, 2003, 05:03 PM

Post more threads with only-smilies - like me above...

gumby5647 · Sep 10, 2003, 05:20 PM

What to you have to do to be more than a "junior member"?! [/B]

Become a post whore in the lounge

Paul Stephen C. · Sep 10, 2003, 06:55 PM

Yes yes, thank you folks for all the advice re getting rid of my "junior member" status! I guess I'll have to show more posting commitment...

Back to the real points(!) - does anyone who has a flatscreen iMac (800Mhz/1Ghz) feel in the least bit tempted by the upgrade. OK, there's USB 2 - does that really make much of a difference to a home iMac? I'm happy with the G4 1GHz speed, especially with a broadband connection (which is a BIG upgrade to a home computer). What would you be tempted by?

I don't want a noisy aluminium box with a desk-standing screen. In time, want an iMac like I have now, but with a G5 processor. I reckon my iMac will have a useful life of at least 5 years, but i know I'll give in within 3!

I love the "pro" keyboard - has this been discontinued on the new iMacs?

And I meant what I said about the soap bar mouse. It seriously lets us down IMHO. I wanna scroll.

Finally, are we now paying for every MacOs upgrade? Panther, Lynx, Moggy, ?? MacOsX I can understand, but variations on the theme for �100 a time seems excessive.

kmkkid · Sep 10, 2003, 09:59 PM

Originally posted by andreas_g4:
$ 2799 - $ 2499 = $ 300

ahhhhh you caught me. I was never that good at math

Still $300 is quite a savings.

Chris

Simon · Sep 11, 2003, 05:28 AM

Originally posted by Paul Stephen C.:
Back to the real points(!) - does anyone who has a flatscreen iMac (800Mhz/1Ghz) feel in the least bit tempted by the upgrade.

I think you have to distinguish that a bit.

I have a 1GHz iMac. It's nice, it's fast and it's very quiet. The new iMac is a decent upgrade. Since I have no need for USB2 the only other improvement is the 167MHz instead of 133MHz bus. That's a very nice feature (I didn't believe Apple would do that so early!). But I don't think the performance gain is that big that I would go out and spend the $1800.

If I would be looking at buying an iMac I would take it at once. It's a very nice machine, offers great performance (for its market) and has a decent price tag.

However, the 800MHz model iMac is an entirely different story. It's still got the old 100MHz SDR RAM board, it's got a 5400RPM disk, a minimalist GPU, an older and slow SuperDrive, no APX, no BT and no USB2. It has a very nice design, but I've always thought it's dog-slow. Until the 1GHz revision came out I think the board wasn't up to the great design.

If you have some money I think I'd update the 800MHz at once. If you don't, start saving and get the next iMac rev in about 6-10 months. The 1GHz mode should hold over until the next rev however.

Sarpedon · Sep 11, 2003, 11:27 AM

In Australia the new iMac were posted on local Apple web sites almost as soon as they were announced. When they will be in stores is anyone guess.

The price drop is as follows (we're talking education prices here). The prices are in Aust. dollars.

Old/New
15" $2299 $2115
17" $3299 $3044

Quite a saving.

But do you buy now or wait till Oct. and see if Panther comes out?

Oh and was it just me or did everyone else understand the video card discussion?

Paul Stephen C. · Sep 15, 2003, 06:55 PM

I have a 1GHz iMac. It's nice, it's fast and it's very quiet. ...
If you have some money I think I'd update the 800MHz at once. If you don't, start saving and get the next iMac rev in about 6-10 months. The 1GHz mode should hold over until the next rev however. [/B]

Hi Simon,

Yes I too have the 1Ghz iMac (with maxed Apple RAM), and agree with you on its virtues. I was just doing the usual "oops, there's new one out, and when will I need to upgrade" thing that being an Apple owner does to you!

I'm still curious about the keyboard and mouse that comes with the new rev. I like the 'board I got, and maintain my disaffection with the lovely-looking, but scroll-lacking mouse.

It's part of being an Apple owner that makes you want to have the latest/best isn't it? That's why we have these beautiful machines!

The 17" FP iMac is the best "wow" Mac since the Bondi Blue, and I want to keep it 'til there's another "wow" upgrade. As I said, I think the G5iMac will do it for me.

javascript:smilie('

')

Simon · Sep 16, 2003, 04:07 AM

Originally posted by Paul Stephen C.:
I'm still curious about the keyboard and mouse that comes with the new rev. I like the 'board I got, and maintain my disaffection with the lovely-looking, but scroll-lacking mouse.

Paul, the new mouse and keyboard are the same as on the eMac and the new PowerMac G5. They are definitely a downgrade from the Pro Mouse and Pro Keyboard we got with our "old" 1GHz iMacs. The new peripherals are however also cheaper.

I tossed the mouse anyway for a Logitech optical scroll mouse. The Pro Keyboard however was a hell of a good job. I am buying a second one now with my PowerBook. I'm getting one of the last ones my dealer has, because I definitely don't want the new keyboard.

greenG4 · Sep 16, 2003, 08:33 PM

I came home today and my wife sat me down in front of the computer and asked what model Mac I wanted. Talk about a surprise. Our order is in for a 17". I can't wait to see it.

Centris650 · Sep 16, 2003, 10:47 PM

Originally posted by greenG4:
I came home today and my wife sat me down in front of the computer and asked what model Mac I wanted. Talk about a surprise. Our order is in for a 17". I can't wait to see it.

You are a lucky lucky man! In more ways than one!