Apple iMac 2010 - What would you like to see changed?

[aiqw9182]

They are no longer produced, if you don't believe, search. Apple bought a huge stock when new iMacs were introduced. Why would ATI produce old GPUs, especially when demand for new ones is very high?

And by the way, no Mac (excluding Mini with GMA950) has used the same GPU for longer than two generations...

http://www.garysky.net/apple-to-juice-up-the-imac’s-graphics-with-ati-radeon-hd-5750.html

"steady supply of Radeon HD 4850 chips until the end of June"


Why would ATI produce old GPU's? Because Apple can demand them.

Just for kicks to really blow away that last statement of yours, here's a list of GPU's Apple has used again after a refresh of the machine, some of these have gone for three or more refreshes:
Radeon X1600
Radeon HD 2400 XT
Radeon HD 2600 PRO
GeForce 8600M GT
GeForce 9400M
GeForce 9600M GT
GMA 950
GMA X3100

 

[Hellhammer]

http://www.garysky.net/apple-to-juice-up-the-imac’s-graphics-with-ati-radeon-hd-5750.html

"steady supply of Radeon HD 4850 chips until the end of June"

Where is the 5750 then?

Why would ATI produce old GPU's? Because Apple can demand them.

Apple can't demand AMD to do anything

Radeon X1600

Was used in early 2006 and late 2006 MBP (there was slight CPU bump in mid 2006 but nothing more) and in early and late 2006 iMac (two real generations per Mac)

Radeon HD 2400 XT

Was used in 2007 and 2008 iMacs (two generations)

Radeon HD 2600 PRO

Same as above

GeForce 8600M GT

Was used in mid 2007 and early 2008 MBP (two generations)

GeForce 9400M

Was used in early and late 2009 Mac Mini and iMac, late 2008 and mid 2009 MBP, late 2008 and early and late 2009 MacBook, late 2008 and mid 2009 MBA (used in two generations in other than MacBook)

GeForce 9600M GT

Late 2008 and mid 2009 MBP (2 gens)

GMA 950

Early and late 2006 and mid 2007 Mac Mini, mid and late 2006 and mid 2007 MacBook (used in up to 3 gens)

GMA X3100

Late 2007 and early and late 2008 MacBook

So, out of the 8 GPUs you listed, only 3 have been used in more than two generations and all those GPUs are integrated and were used in low-end Macs while 27" iMac is high-end... Do your research before posting then

 

[aiqw9182]

Where is the 5750 then?

Is June over? No? Get a calendar.

Apple can't demand AMD to do anything

Apple can't demand AMD to do anything yet they got them to keep pumping out their older series of cards supposedly 8 months after? This is getting pathetic.

Was used in early 2006 and late 2006 MBP (there was slight CPU bump in mid 2006 but nothing more) and in early and late 2006 iMac (two real generations per Mac)

Was used in 2007 and 2008 iMacs (two generations)

Same as above

Was used in mid 2007 and early 2008 MBP (two generations)

Was used in early and late 2009 Mac Mini and iMac, late 2008 and mid 2009 MBP, late 2008 and early and late 2009 MacBook, late 2008 and mid 2009 MBA (used in two generations in other than MacBook)

Late 2008 and mid 2009 MBP (2 gens)

Early and late 2006 and mid 2007 Mac Mini, mid and late 2006 and mid 2007 MacBook (used in up to 3 gens)

Late 2007 and early and late 2008 MacBook

So, out of the 8 GPUs you listed, only 3 have been used in more than two generations and all those GPUs are integrated and were used in low-end Macs while 27" iMac is high-end... Do your research before posting then

LMAO!

This is just getting started. Where the hell did you learn how to count?

Radeon X1600 (2 gens)
Radeon HD 2400 XT (2 gens)
Radeon HD 2600 PRO (2 gens)
GeForce 8600M GT (3 gens)
GeForce 9400M (3 gens)
GeForce 9600M GT (2 gens)
GMA 950 (3 gens)
GMA X3100 (3 gens)

So out of the 8 GPU's I listed, 4 of them were used for two generations and the other 4 were used for three generations.

And all of these GPU's are integrated and used in low-end Macs? LOLWTF

The following GPU's have been the cream of the crop for Apple's line of MacBook Pro's at some point: 8600M, 9600M and X1600.

The iMac is Apple's CONSUMER desktop.

 

[peakchua]

if desktop 5750 is used.. then great! but if mobility.. then i would advise everyone to get the old model if it ever happens. i want 5850 1gb gddr5 mobility with 20% higher clocks (the 5870 has the same specs other than clock speeds) then again.. apple sometimes makes the wrong choices relaying to long waiting imac fans i really hope other than imac, and radeon that all gpus can support physx, and that apple will suport directx 11, 10 and 9 and also support crossfire.. i think that a impossible solution to support crossfire is to make USb or mdp gpu connectors lol jk

 

[Hellhammer]

This is just getting started. Where the hell did you learn how to count?

You should ask yourself

Radeon X1600 (2 gens)
Radeon HD 2400 XT (2 gens)
Radeon HD 2600 PRO (2 gens)
GeForce 8600M GT (3 gens)
GeForce 9400M (3 gens)
GeForce 9600M GT (2 gens)
GMA 950 (3 gens)
GMA X3100 (3 gens)

Where was 8600M GT used for three generations? It was used in mid 2007 and early 2008 MBP, that's two gens

And all of these GPU's are integrated and used in low-end Macs? LOLWTF

All GPUs that were used for longer than two generations were integrated and used in low-end Macs

The following GPU's have been the cream of the crop for Apple's line of MacBook Pro's at some point: 8600M, 9600M and X1600.

But they were only used twice and iMac has never used them or had the same GPU for longer than two generations

 

[aiqw9182]

You should ask yourself

Really? You sure about that?

Where was 8600M GT used for three generations? It was used in mid 2007 and early 2008 MBP, that's two gens

Mid 2007, Late 2007 and Early 2008(late 2008 17" if you want to count that also). Maybe YOU should do your research.

All GPUs that were used for longer than two generations were integrated and used in low-end Macs

HAHAHAHA! Now I see why you are trying to get the 8600M out of the argument. Get a clue.

But they were only used twice and iMac has never used them or had the same GPU for longer than two generations

The 4850 in the early 2009 iMac was the first time the iMac even had an upgrade option for the GPU that wasn't the standard one.

 

[Hellhammer]

Mid 2007, Late 2007 and Early 2008(late 2008 17" if you want to count that also). Maybe YOU should do your research.

You really count that slight difference in CPU as a new gen? EveryMac nor MacRumors list it as a new generation

The 4850 in the early 2009 iMac was the first time the iMac even had an upgrade option for the GPU that wasn't the standard one.

It doesn't matter, it was still used and iMac hasn't used the same GPU for longer than two generations, no matter was it an option or standard.

 

[aiqw9182]

You really count that slight difference in CPU as a new gen? EveryMac nor MacRumors list it as a new generation

CPU bump as new gen? Maybe you missed the larger hard drives, more VRAM and more RAM(in the 17")?

It doesn't matter, it was still used and iMac hasn't used the same GPU for longer than two generations, no matter was it an option or standard.

LOL, it doesn't matter? Why? Because Apple can't do something they haven't done before, when in reality they have done it before with the MacBook Pro? You've gone from saying no GPU other than the GMA 950 was used more than twice, to not learning how to count and claiming that "all those GPUs are integrated and were used in low-end Macs while 27" iMac is high-end" when the iMac is a consumer product and the MacBook Pro is a pro product, and finally you're trying to save yourself by dwindling your argument to Apple never doing it on the iMac. They also never had an exclusive build-to-order GPU on the iMac, that didn't stop them from offering the 4850 in the early 2009 iMac.

 

[Hellhammer]

CPU bump as new gen? Maybe you missed the larger hard drives, more VRAM and more RAM(in the 17")?

That happened in early 2008. Late 2007 isn't count as its own generation, it was just very minor update

LOL, it doesn't matter? Why? Because Apple can't do something they haven't done before, when in reality they have done it before with the MacBook Pro? You've gone from saying no GPU other than the GMA 950 was used more than twice, to not learning how to count and claiming that "all those GPUs are integrated and were used in low-end Macs while 27" iMac is high-end" when the iMac is a consumer product and the MacBook Pro is a pro product, and finally you're trying to save yourself by dwindling your argument to Apple never doing it on the iMac. They also never had an exclusive build-to-order GPU on the iMac, that didn't stop them from offering the 4850 in the early 2009 iMac.

8800 GS and 7600GT (+X1600 with 256MB) were all BTOs... (8800 GS was online only i.e. BTO)

 

[aiqw9182]

That happened in early 2008. Late 2007 isn't count as its own generation, it was just very minor update

No ****, that's why I mentioned the 17" from late 2008 that you are ignoring.

8800 GS and 7600GT (+X1600 with 256MB) were all BTOs... (8800 GS was online only i.e. BTO)

X1600 - upgrading VRAM is not a new BTO GPU
7300GT - upgrading VRAM is not a new BTO GPU
8800GS - it wasn't build to order on the 3.06GHz model from 2008, therefore it is irrelevant, as the 4850 wasn't standard on ANY models.

 

[Hellhammer]

No ****, that's why I mentioned the 17" from late 2008 that you are ignoring.

What late 2008 17"? Not even a word about it anywhere. Oh, or are you talking about that tiny update with more RAM and HD? Didn't have any more VRAM than early 2008 did nor better CPU, i.e. not a new generation

7300GT - upgrading VRAM is not a new BTO GPU

7300GT to 7600GT is more than just a VRAM upgrade....

 

[aiqw9182]

What late 2008 17"? Not even a word about it anywhere. Oh, or are you talking about that tiny update with more RAM and HD? Didn't have any more VRAM than early 2008 did nor better CPU, i.e. not a new generation

7300GT to 7600GT is more than just a VRAM upgrade....

Late 2008 17" from previous model:
1680x1050 screen to 1920x1200
2GB of RAM to 4GB
250GB HDD to 320GB HDD
SuperDrive: 4× DVD+R DL writes, 8× DVD+/-R read/write, 4× DVD+/-RW writes, 24× CD-R, and 10× CD-RW recording to 4× DVD+R DL writes, 8× DVD+/-R read/write, 8× DVD+RW writes, 6× DVD-RW writes, 24× CD-R, and 16× CD-RW recording

Tiny upgrade? Where did you pull that out of your ass from?

As for the 7600GT, it still stands that Apple did something they haven't done before no matter when they started doing it. You make it seem like Apple must always follow the status quo of what they've done in the past which is the dumbest thing I've ever heard, especially when Apple has done it in their other models.

 

[Hellhammer]

Late 2008 17" from previous model:
1680x1050 screen to 1920x1200
2GB of RAM to 4GB
250GB HDD to 320GB HDD
SuperDrive: 4× DVD+R DL writes, 8× DVD+/-R read/write, 4× DVD+/-RW writes, 24× CD-R, and 10× CD-RW recording to 4× DVD+R DL writes, 8× DVD+/-R read/write, 8× DVD+RW writes, 6× DVD-RW writes, 24× CD-R, and 16× CD-RW recording

Tiny upgrade? Where did you pull that out of your ass from?

Okay, maybe that was little more but it's still only one example, it doesn't mean Apple is going to stick with 4850...

As for the 7600GT, it still stands that Apple did something they haven't done before no matter when they started doing it. You make it seem like Apple must always follow the status quo of what they've done in the past which is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

With that logic, we may see dual ATI 5970 in iMac along with dual i7 980Xs

 

[aiqw9182]

Okay, maybe that was little more but it's still only one example, it doesn't mean Apple is going to stick with 4850...

It doesn't mean they are going to, it means they can if they want as they've done it before. Glad you finally see you were wrong.

With that logic, we may see dual ATI 5970 in iMac along with dual i7 980Xs

Yeah, because something being physically impossible is totally related to Apple using a GPU for three generations that is still the second/third best option for them to use in their iMac.

 

[DoFoT9]

With that logic, we may see dual ATI 5970 in iMac along with dual i7 980Xs

in the iMac? HA!

as per the GPU upgrade, i think they will continue with the 4850 as BTO when they upgrade it later this year. then next year we will see a bigger CPU/GPU upgrade to whatever that may be (hexacore maybes?)

 

[Hellhammer]

It doesn't mean they are going to, it means they can if they want as they've done it before. Glad you finally see you were wrong.

With that logic, we may not see iMac anytime soon as Mini was without an update for over 1.5 years. It happened before, why can't it happen now? That really is bad justification.

Yeah, because something being physically impossible is totally related to Apple using a GPU for three generations that is still the second/third best option for them to use in their iMac.

It's not physically impossible if they make it bigger. You just said that they can do whatever they want, what they of course can. If they can, then anything is possible, including dual 5970 + dual 980X. You again used bad justification because you were wrong in 7600GT. If the past is irrelevant, then nobody knows what will happen.

The past is showing that it's unlikely that we'll see 4850 in next gen but if you ignore that, then 9400M might be the high-end BTO option, ANYTHING can be

 

[aiqw9182]

With that logic, we may not see iMac anytime soon as Mini was without an update for over 1.5 years. It happened before, why can't it happen now? That really is bad justification.

This is really getting pathetic and you're grasping at straws simply because you know you're wrong and trying to get the last word in. It's in Apple's best interest to use the 4850 again if they don't want to write drivers, they've used the 8600M for three generations. You were wrong. You keep changing your story and trying to come up with terrible analogies. Go back to thinking the Intel GMA 950 was the only GPU that Apple used twice, it really shows how much knowledge you have.

It's not physically impossible if they make it bigger. You just said that they can do whatever they want, what they of course can. If they can, then anything is possible, including dual 5970 + dual 980X. You again used bad justification because you were wrong in 7600GT. If the past is irrelevant, then nobody knows what will happen.

Yeah, Apple is suddenly going to make a 40" iMac. At least my predictions aren't completely retarded and make sense. The 4850 in the early 2009 iMac likely isn't even considered to be there for the generation as it was BTO and hardly anyone outside of those that followed closely knew it existed as an option. Oh and where did I say the past was irrelevant? I've been using Apple's past 8600M use of generations for this entire time, Mr. iMac is high-end but the MacBook Pro isn't.

The past is showing that it's unlikely that we'll see 4850 in next gen but if you ignore that, then 9400M might be the high-end BTO option, ANYTHING can be

You apparently can't grasp your head around the fact the the 4850 is still the second/third best GPU Apple can use.

 

[Hellhammer]

Go back to thinking the Intel GMA 950 was the only GPU that Apple used twice, it really shows how much knowledge you have.

I've said from the beginning that it's one of the GPUs that have been used fore more than twice

Early and late 2006 and mid 2007 Mac Mini, mid and late 2006 and mid 2007 MacBook (used in up to 3 gens)

Yeah, Apple is suddenly going to make a 40" iMac. At least my predictions aren't completely retarded and make sense. The 4850 in the early 2009 iMac likely isn't even considered to be there for the generation as it was BTO and hardly anyone outside of those that followed closely knew it existed as an option. Oh and where did I say the past was irrelevant? I've been using Apple's past 8600M use of generations for this entire time, Mr. iMac is high-end but the MacBook Pro isn't.

8600M GT is the rule breaker, all other dedicated GPUs haven't made it for longer than two generations. 4850 still was there, no matter was it BTO or not. If it wasn't there, where was it then? In your ass? And do you think my prediction really is retarded and impossible?

You apparently can't grasp your head around the fact the the 4850 is still the second/third best GPU Apple can use. Get your head out of your ass.

Where did I say it isn't? It's a great GPU, I've said it in at least 10 threads. 5850 isn't an upgrade but it at least is being produced. The issue is that it's unlikely that it's still in production. Even though ATI might be able to supply them, it doesn't mean that they are still made, ATI has warehouses where they can be stored. And if they still are in production, it'll cost Apple a nice $ to keep them coming as that same line could be making 5xxx GPUs which could be used in PCs too. To be honest, ATI is coming up with new mobile GPUs in this half of the year so maybe Apple is waiting for them? Imagine Cypress based GPU in iMac!

Can we stop this now? Neither of us knows what's going to happen

 

[aiqw9182]

I've said from the beginning that it's one of the GPUs that have been used fore more than twice

LOL, and you were wrong either way.

8600M GT is the rule breaker, all other dedicated GPUs haven't made it for longer than two generations. 4850 still was there, no matter was it BTO or not. If it wasn't there, where was it then? In your ass? And do you think my prediction really is retarded and impossible?

8600M GT is now the rule breaker. Before it wasn't. Now it is. Make up your mind. A rule breaker means that rule is no longer in effect and the argument of the 4850 not being allowed in three generations is now void.

As for your prediction that a two year old could conjure up, the only thing that anyone cares about right now is the GPU, Apple could easily put a 4850 in the high end 21.5" and 27" in replace of that weaker 57XX card, then put the 5870 in the high end iMac.

Where did I say it isn't? It's a great GPU, I've said it in at least 10 threads. 5850 isn't an upgrade but it at least is being produced. The issue is that it's unlikely that it's still in production. Even though ATI might be able to supply them, it doesn't mean that they are still made, ATI has warehouses where they can be stored. And if they still are in production, it'll cost Apple a nice $ to keep them coming as that same line could be making 5xxx GPUs which could be used in PCs too. To be honest, ATI is coming up with new mobile GPUs in this half of the year so maybe Apple is waiting for them? Imagine Cypress based GPU in iMac!

Can we stop this now? Neither of us knows what's going to happen

You can't keep a steady supply of something till June and onwards with it supposedly being out of production for 8 months.

 

[Hellhammer]

LOL, and you were wrong either way.

No, I was not

As for your prediction that a two year old could conjure up, the only thing that anyone cares about right now is the GPU, Apple could easily put a 4850 in the high end 21.5" and 27" in replace of that weaker 57XX card, then put the 5870 in the high end iMac.

So Apple puts 65W GPU in 21.5" and 50W in 27"? Why on earth would they do that? 4850 is almost twice as hot as the 4670.

You can't keep a steady supply of something till June and onwards with it supposedly being out of production for 8 months.

Why? The article you linked fights again what you are saying. It said supply till June 2010. What's after that? How can they use 4850 if it's no longer supplied? Decide already! First you said they cannot use 4850 if it's not supplied. Now you're saying that they can even though the supply will end in few days.... Desktop 4xxx are still available, even though they are no longer produced

 

[aiqw9182]

No, I was not

Yes you were. Four of the GPU's I listed were used three times. You were wrong.

So Apple puts 65W GPU in 21.5" and 50W in 27"? Why on earth would they do that? 4850 is almost twice as hot as the 4670.

Why on earth would they do that? Does Apple advertise how many watts their GPU's use? They don't even advertise that their mobile. They advertise performance, in which the 4850 takes a dump all over any other 5000 card with the exception of two. One of which is equivalent in performance.

Why? The article you linked fights again what you are saying. It said supply till June 2010. What's after that? How can they use 4850 if it's no longer supplied? Decide already! First you said they cannot use 4850 if it's not supplied. Now you're saying that they can even though the supply will end in few days.... Desktop 4xxx are still available, even though they are no longer produced

If ATI is still making 4850's for Apple, who's to say Apple can't ask them to keep making them? It's not that difficult of a concept. You keep saying they are no longer produced but have posted no concrete evidence that they aren't being produced. I posted an article that explicitly stated that they are still giving steady supply to Apple, which can only be done when still in production. Apple extends the contract with ATI and there you go, problem solved.

 

[Hellhammer]

Why on earth would they do that? Does Apple advertise how many watts their GPU's use? They don't even advertise that their mobile. They advertise performance, in which the 4850 takes a dump all over any other 5000 card with the exception of two. One of which is equivalent in performance.

Watts are physical facts and with current design and cooling system, it's highly unlikely that 4850 could be used in 21.5". People think 5xxx is better because the first number is bigger even though the second number is the most important. So many people have been ranting about why no 5850 even though it's not even better. IF 4850 can be sticked into the 21.5", it would be great but 5850 would go there better because it's a lot cooler.

 

[peakchua]

Watts are physical facts and with current design and cooling system, it's highly unlikely that 4850 could be used in 21.5". People think 5xxx is better because the first number is bigger even though the second number is the most important. So many people have been ranting about why no 5850 even though it's not even better. IF 4850 can be sticked into the 21.5", it would be great but 5850 would go there better because it's a lot cooler.

+1 the only reason why 4850 is better is the 256bit memory bus. 5850 is only (gddr5) 2-5% faster due to GDDR5. the 4850 would kick ass if it had gddr5

 

[aiqw9182]

Watts are physical facts and with current design and cooling system, it's highly unlikely that 4850 could be used in 21.5". People think 5xxx is better because the first number is bigger even though the second number is the most important. So many people have been ranting about why no 5850 even though it's not even better. IF 4850 can be sticked into the 21.5", it would be great but 5850 would go there better because it's a lot cooler.

Apple got the 4850 in the 24" iMac which had worse cooling and heat sinks than the 21.5", hence why they are now able to use desktop processors. I highly doubt it's physically impossible for them to use it in the 21.5". People do think the 5XXX series of cards is better, but so begins the Apple upsale. Not to mention they already have the drivers for the 4850 rolling and ready to go(obviously).

 

[Hellhammer]

+1 the only reason why 4850 is better is the 256bit memory bus. 5850 is only (gddr5) 2-5% faster due to GDDR5. the 4850 would kick ass if it had gddr5

Lets keep our thumbs up for the 4870 then

Apple got the 4850 in the 24" iMac which had worse cooling and heat sinks than the 21.5", hence why they are now able to use desktop processors. I highly doubt it's physically impossible for them to use it in the 21.5". People do think the 5XXX series of cards is better, but so begins the Apple upsale. Not to mention they already have the drivers for the 4850 rolling and ready to go(obviously).

But 24" used mobile CPUs (well custom but they were 45W). Currently, the 21.5" is using 35W GPU so at least I wouldn't expect anything significantly hotter like 4850. I'm basing my speculation what is currently used, that's why it was impossible to predict 27" with quad core 4850 has been sticked into 15" lappies so of course it's not impossible but that would require some improvement in the cooling so that iMac won't sound like an airplane when in use

If Apple can stick 4850 in 21.5", then I'll raise my hat for them as that's great job and will definitely stop the whining about games. 5850 in 21.5" is much easier job as it's only 4W hotter than 4670 but provides more or less the same performance as 4850. I really hope they put a good GPU in 21.5" as that's the best gaming Mac IMO due it's normal resolution and acceptable price