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.
Apple Store Down Ahead of Likely iMac Refresh
- Thread starter iDabble
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The 9to5 pred is flawed. I think the base 2.7GHz is a dual core.
The quadcore 2.7 cpu is more expensive than the 3.1
The quadcore 2.7 cpu is more expensive than the 3.1
Disappointing that there is only 1 21.5" spec on that list. I don't think I have enough space for the 27" without some desk re-arranging.
Perhaps there will be better BTO options available for the base 21.5 iMacs...
I know it doesn't make sense, that is why I said the prediction must be flawed. Unless they put a more expensive CPU in a cheaper model...
Only one 21.5" option? Still no 24" option, three 27" options though, let's hope the price of the lowest has gone down...
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Will I be able to go to a certified reseller and get the new iMac today instead of goin to the apple store?
Will I be able to go to a certified reseller and get the new iMac today instead of goin to the apple store?
The fact that they (supposedly) keep the RAM and HDD size the same on the high-end is a little surprising, especially due to how prices have dropped so dramatically. Perhaps they will make up for it through cheaper base prices (i.e. $1999 for the i7-2600).
If that leak is credible, the top-end 27" may have differing guts. The 3 smaller iMacs all have ID's starting with MC812.../MC813... and MC814..., whereas the top-end (3.4QC) starts with MD063...
Does anyone know whether the second char ("C" or "D" in this case) does indicate a technical generation or something like that?
And if so - what deviation from the smaller brothers (technicalwise) would justify giving it a new ID? Simply a faster CPU would not imo, and the GPU is identical...
So Assuming for a moment that the 9to5 specs are right and that Apple went Sandy Bridge across the range we'd be looking at:
21.5", 2.7Ghz core i5 Quad Core
27" 2.7Ghz core i5 Quad Core
27" 3.1Ghz core i5 Quad Core
27" 3.4Ghz core i7 Quad Core
That look about right considering the current Intel processors?
And just a bit of random speculation but considering the spec for the high end is listed as the same as the mid range 27" except for the processor... could Apple have done something sneaky and maybe gone with Z68 and a small SSD for caching purposes in the high end iMac?
21.5", 2.7Ghz core i5 Quad Core
27" 2.7Ghz core i5 Quad Core
27" 3.1Ghz core i5 Quad Core
27" 3.4Ghz core i7 Quad Core
That look about right considering the current Intel processors?
And just a bit of random speculation but considering the spec for the high end is listed as the same as the mid range 27" except for the processor... could Apple have done something sneaky and maybe gone with Z68 and a small SSD for caching purposes in the high end iMac?
\
Fair enough, but that would mean Apple puts a $216 CPU in the base model and a $184 one in the pugrade.