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

[aiqw9182]

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

I said that they now use desktop processors in the 21.5" which implies the 24" used mobiles CPU's.

Just because Apple used the 4670 doesn't mean that's the max TDP GPU the thing can 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

The 24" with the 4850 is still the best gaming iMac at the moment. If they put the 4850 in the 21.5" it would still be a toss up between the two though(higher resolution vs led backlight).

 

[Hellhammer]

Just because Apple used the 4670 doesn't mean that's the max TDP GPU the thing can use.

I know but it's the only reasonable way to predict what is coming. If the TDP is ignored, then it's nothing more than a wild guess with zero facts backing it up, anything is possible then. 57xx has lower TDP than 4670 thus it's possible in terms of heat and power consumption. 4850 would run hotter than 4670, that you can't beat. Whether it would be too hot with current cooling system, nobody knows. That's the question

 

[aiqw9182]

I know but it's the only reasonable way to predict what is coming. If the TDP is ignored, then it's nothing more than a wild guess with zero facts backing it up, anything is possible then. 57xx has lower TDP than 4670 thus it's possible in terms of heat and power consumption. 4850 would run hotter than 4670, that you can't beat. Whether it would be too hot with current cooling system, nobody knows. That's the question

It really isn't that reliable considering the fact that the only GPU that was better at the time than the 4670 was the 4830.

 

[Hellhammer]

It really isn't that reliable considering the fact that the only GPU that was better at the time than the 4670 was the 4830.

Of course it's not reliable nor water-proof evidence but that's all we got. All this is just speculation, i.e. guessing. 21.5" would also need more powerful PSU if 4850 was used. Nobody has switched the GPU for hotter one so we don't know what it could really handle. I've built mini-ITX boxes with quad core (95W) and desktop ATI 4850 but they were not very silent nor cool but they had no heat heat issues

 

[aiqw9182]

Of course it's not reliable nor water-proof evidence but that's all we got. All this is just speculation, i.e. guessing. 21.5" would also need more powerful PSU if 4850 was used. Nobody has switched the GPU for hotter one so we don't know what it could really handle.

It still isn't worth arguing the TDP usage factor when we again have no idea what it's capable of. If you are going to suggest something that has a TDP that is orders of magnitude larger, then sure. But otherwise the point is moot.

 

[TMRaven]

I think arguing over TDP is quite frankly a splendid idea. Other companies don't fret over it as much, as they'd simply make their laptops thicker or use a tower and crank the fans up when necessary. Apple on the other hand is on the constant race to make their products slimmer and quieter day by day.

 

[peakchua]

I think arguing over TDP is quite frankly a splendid idea. Other companies don't fret over it as much, as they'd simply make their laptops thicker or use a tower and crank the fans up when necessary. Apple on the other hand is on the constant race to make their products slimmer and quieter day by day.

i wouldnt really care about thiness. just as long as my mac doesent look like crap or is only 1mm thiner than a pc, its fine... a 2 inch mac vs a 4 inch pc is fine. (macbookline). imac needs more heat outtake and cool air intake. as i said, i wouldnt care just as long my macbook pro doesent overheat, apple in their high end model using a gtx 285 + gpu and a extremely high end mobile cpu and also at 100$ cheaper every model is now. i think imac should get intake and outtake heat improvements, so that apple can put 130w tdp cpus + higher tdp gpus (21.5 inch) for general macs, APPLE needs to make prices more reasonably,,, honestly, the 50% barrier that people are keeping themselves from buying a mac :0 is price. i think it is worth it but would like to be nice to my wallet... dont you agree ?

 

[thepominlaw]

Personally for me I am happy with my first mac the late 2009 21.5" base model. But if I really had to be picky then these would be my reasons to upgrade.

1) More USB ports, say 5 on the back and two on the left hand side of the unit.
2) A user removable hard drive bay. Better still 2 hard drives bays.
3) Better graphics capability with dedicated memory (i know i could have bought 4670 but i wasn't sure i would like the mac so went base model)
4) 27" screen is too big for me how about a 24" widescreen?
5) A wireless keyboard with numeric keypad

 

[TMRaven]

Apple doesn't need to alter the design of the iMacs to accommodate for 130tdp cpus at all. Lynnfields are already high-end cpus, and the 9xx line of nehalems that Intel produces are far from efficient, and extreme edition of those are severely gouged in price for only offering some of intel's own overclocking.

People like to argue over the triple channel memory interface being better for gaming and general computing on the 9xx series nehalems, but that's far from true. Actual benchmarks show the lynnfields and bloomfields to be on par with each other per clock.

Apple will wait for sandy-bridge's release to update its top of the line lynnfield iMacs.

 

[Hellhammer]

i wouldnt really care about thiness. just as long as my mac doesent look like crap or is only 1mm thiner than a pc, its fine... a 2 inch mac vs a 4 inch pc is fine. (macbookline). imac needs more heat outtake and cool air intake. as i said, i wouldnt care just as long my macbook pro doesent overheat, apple in their high end model using a gtx 285 + gpu and a extremely high end mobile cpu and also at 100$ cheaper every model is now. i think imac should get intake and outtake heat improvements, so that apple can put 130w tdp cpus + higher tdp gpus (21.5 inch) for general macs, APPLE needs to make prices more reasonably,,, honestly, the 50% barrier that people are keeping themselves from buying a mac :0 is price. i think it is worth it but would like to be nice to my wallet... dont you agree ?

That would need holes in the case and Apple doesn't compromise the design in order to get better performance. All Apple products are expensive and it doesn't look like Steve would be offering wallet friendly Macs anytime soon. We got desktop CPUs now, after years of whining.

TMraven had it right, Apple is currently more interested about making them slimmer and quieter than satisfying the fairly small group of people who are after the performance. Maybe the introduction of Steam to OS X will make some difference and Apple starts to offer decent GPUs but I can't see them changing the design in order to do that

 

[peakchua]

Lets keep our thumbs up for the 4870 then


the 4870 is sadly... higher clocked and has no difference :S in terms of specs. I REALLY HATE 128 BIT BUSSES. other than that, i think amd needs to stop providing max 800 strem procesccors and **** little bits of texture units, rops (16!! you need 24) and more. AMD needs to revamp stream processing and make it more comparable with cuda which is obviously more powerful than stream. the perfect mobility card would be

ati mobility radeon 6850
1000 stream processors
1.5 billion 32nm or 40nm transitors
64 texture units
72 ROP/Z stencil units
24 rop units
600 - 800 mhz shader/memory clocks etc.
TDP: 40

 

[peakchua]

That would need holes in the case and Apple doesn't compromise the design in order to get better performance. All Apple products are expensive and it doesn't look like Steve would be offering wallet friendly Macs anytime soon. We got desktop CPUs now, after years of whining.

TMraven had it right, Apple is currently more interested about making them slimmer and quieter than satisfying the fairly small group of people who are after the performance. Maybe the introduction of Steam to OS X will make some difference and Apple starts to offer decent GPUs but I can't see them changing the design in order to do that

for the imac, it would be possible.. instead of one line. there would be three one like a staple shape. i would be overdoing the cooling though apple would be able to put 130w desktop processors from intels nehalem architecture. i really hate the idea of apples slimness. my macbook burns without a fan speed of 3600 rpm which drains my batteries my macbook needs heatsinks coming out of the SIDES!!! not a place where you need airflow. (chasis)

 

[DoFoT9]

for the imac, it would be possible.. instead of one line. there would be three one like a staple shape. i would be overdoing the cooling though apple would be able to put 130w desktop processors from intels nehalem architecture. i really hate the idea of apples slimness. my macbook burns without a fan speed of 3600 rpm which drains my batteries my macbook needs heatsinks coming out of the SIDES!!! not a place where you need airflow. (chasis)

heh. macs with wings? i thought that was an iPad thing?

we all know apples reasoning for using thinness over heating/expandability etc.

 

[Hellhammer]

Lets keep our thumbs up for the 4870 then


the 4870 is sadly... higher clocked and has no difference :S in terms of specs. I REALLY HATE 128 BIT BUSSES. other than that, i think amd needs to stop providing max 800 strem procesccors and **** little bits of texture units, rops (16!! you need 24) and more. AMD needs to revamp stream processing and make it more comparable with cuda which is obviously more powerful than stream. the perfect mobility card would be

ati mobility radeon 6850
1000 stream processors
1.5 billion 32nm or 40nm transitors
64 texture units
72 ROP/Z stencil units
24 rop units
600 - 800 mhz shader/memory clocks etc.
TDP: 40

It has GDDR5, that's the main difference.

 

[TMRaven]

for the imac, it would be possible.. instead of one line. there would be three one like a staple shape. i would be overdoing the cooling though apple would be able to put 130w desktop processors from intels nehalem architecture. i really hate the idea of apples slimness. my macbook burns without a fan speed of 3600 rpm which drains my batteries my macbook needs heatsinks coming out of the SIDES!!! not a place where you need airflow. (chasis)

What's so important about the bloomfield nehalems when compared to the lynnfield nehalems?

The current 27 inch iMacs do not have the problem of burning without higher rpm. In fact I'm typing this message right here, and my cpu is at 37c while cpu fan is at 940rpm.

It has GDDR5, that's the main difference.

GDDR5 and 256bit bus width. Mobility 4870 is what Apple should have put in the current top of the line iMacs.

 

[diegobgr]

Should we expect a great update concerning gaming?

I will like to enjoy the iMac in summer. Thinking about wait till September or October kills me...

 

[Hellhammer]

Should we expect a great update concerning gaming?

I will like to enjoy the iMac in summer. Thinking about wait till September or October kills me...

Depends on what GPUs Apple decide to use. If they are bitchy and just use the 5xxx counterpart, no as they aren't that great but if we see e.g. 5870 and 5770, then it'll be a good update for gaming

 

[DisMyMac]

I don't care whether it's USB 3, FW1600/3200, or Light Peak - it must have at least one of them, or no sale.

I would even consider a mac pro if it had new ports.

 

[diegobgr]

Depends on what GPUs Apple decide to use. If they are bitchy and just use the 5xxx counterpart, no as they aren't that great but if we see e.g. 5870 and 5770, then it'll be a good update for gaming

5770 will be a really great improvemente for gaming. It will really worth the wait.

The question is, WHEN???

 

[Hellhammer]

5770 will be a really great improvemente for gaming. It will really worth the wait.

The question is, WHEN???

They are mobile chips, thus the improvement isn't that great when comparing to desktop chips (4670 to 5770 is major upgrade in desktops but only ~20% in mobile)

 

[DoFoT9]

They are mobile chips, thus the improvement isn't that great when comparing to desktop chips (4670 to 5770 is major upgrade in desktops but only ~20% in mobile)

its just a name for the GPUs right? they dont correlate back to the desktop GPUs

 

[Hellhammer]

its just a name for the GPUs right? they dont correlate back to the desktop GPUs

Well, sometimes like in ATI 4xxx series it goes like the mobile version is based on the same chip as the desktop counterpart i.e. mobility 4850 is based on the desktop 4850. In 5xxx series, that doesn't unfortunately apply as mobility 58xx is based on desktop 57xx called "Juniper". The best 5xxx chip called "Cypress" is not used in any mobility cards as of now. That applies to almost whole series, 5650 and 57xx are both based on the desktop 56xx chip called "Redwood".

That's why most people are so confused. They think 5850 would be huge upgrade as it is in desktop models but in mobility cards, the difference is fairly small

 

[DoFoT9]

Well, sometimes like in ATI 4xxx series it goes like the mobile version is based on the same chip as the desktop counterpart i.e. mobility 4850 is based on the desktop 4850. In 5xxx series, that doesn't unfortunately apply as mobility 58xx is based on desktop 57xx called "Juniper". The best 5xxx chip called "Cypress" is not used in any mobility cards as of now. That applies to almost whole series, 5650 and 57xx are both based on the desktop 56xx chip called "Redwood".

That's why most people are so confused. They think 5850 would be huge upgrade as it is in desktop models but in mobility cards, the difference is fairly small

makes total sense - pretty smart move from ATi to LOSE fans

so when are 5xxx mobility chips set to come out? or even 6xxx?

 

[ermir4444]

Are we going to see a 5650 in the next 21.5? I mean i was really surprised Apple did not include this card in the high end MBP. Highly efficient with a TDP of 15-19W and better than the 330m and the 4670 for that matter. Looking at AMD's 5 series line up the 5650 is the best choice for the mainstream user and casual gamer in my opinion considering the low TDP and the great performance. I'm not sure about the price but with what i read somewhere it was on par with the 330m. It would be a great contender to replace the 4670.

I see some opinions here pointing to the 57xx for the medium range iMacs but i dont really see the point. It would be a mediocre gain (almost 5%) over the 5650 with a much higher TDP and probably price as well and because they are both based in the same 56 series desktop architecture.Sometimes Apple's choices really amaze me...

 

[peakchua]

Are we going to see a 5650 in the next 21.5? I mean i was really surprised Apple did not include this card in the high end MBP. Highly efficient with a TDP of 15-19W and better than the 330m and the 4670 for that matter. Looking at AMD's 5 series line up the 5650 is the best choice for the mainstream user and casual gamer in my opinion considering the low TDP and the great performance. I'm not sure about the price but with what i read somewhere it was on par with the 330m. It would be a great contender to replace the 4670.

I see some opinions here pointing to the 57xx for the medium range iMacs but i dont really see the point. It would be a mediocre gain (almost 5%) over the 5650 with a much higher TDP and probably price as well and because they are both based in the same 56 series desktop architecture.Sometimes Apple's choices really amaze me...

apple likes to keep up to date with products and this has primarily made it a competitor in the industry. the reason why 5750 is a good choice over the 5650 is because it uses gddr5 memory which is faster, more advanced than GDDR3, DDR3 DDR2, DDR and so on. 5750 would have a significant increase of about 20-30% over the current 4670 due to gddr5, a better architecture, and higher clocks, + 80 additional stream processors. it is not on par with the 330m. the 330m sucks. 330m is somewhere in the middle of class 2 mobility gpus according to notebook check.