I agree. I really think it is just going to be a price drop this time around to clear out some inventory. Lately the iMac has been on a 10-11 month cycle.
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.
Good time to buy iMac?
- Thread starter poonnapat
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree. I really think it is just going to be a price drop this time around to clear out some inventory. Lately the iMac has been on a 10-11 month cycle.
I can't see them offering any new CPUs, as I really don't think there are any options available from Intel to work with the current iMac CPU socket in use today. Maybe there are lower power versions of the same CPUs available, but I don't think there are going to be much gains in terms of CPU speed.
Since the last update, nVidia has released a new GPU line (200M line), which features significantly faster and much much more powerful GPUs.
While the possible August/September (new) iMacs might not gain much of anything in terms of CPU speeds, it is very likely for them receive massive upgrades to their graphical capabilities.
The 9400M used today could in theory be replaced with the 210M, as that is the current generation's lowest base GPU from nVidia. As you can see, the 210M is a major step above the current 9400M offerings from Apple today. I'd go as far to say that they would match the nVidia GT 130 in terms of specs and performance.
I can't see them offering any new CPUs, as I really don't think there are any options available from Intel to work with the current iMac CPU socket in use today. Maybe there are lower power versions of the same CPUs available, but I don't think there are going to be much gains in terms of CPU speed.
Since the last update, nVidia has released a new GPU line (200M line), which features significantly faster and much much more powerful GPUs.
While the possible August/September (new) iMacs might not gain much of anything in terms of CPU speeds, it is very likely for them receive massive upgrades to their graphical capabilities.
The 9400M used today could in theory be replaced with the 210M, as that is the current generation's lowest base GPU from nVidia. As you can see, the 210M is a major step above the current 9400M offerings from Apple today. I'd go as far to say that they would match the nVidia GT 130 in terms of specs and performance.
Apple can't go with current CPUs. I usually don't compare PCs and Macs but there are quad-core PCs for less than 500 and Apple sells low-end iMac for 1099. There is simply no reason to update iMacs GPUs again. If Apple do that, they are digging their own grave. October-November is possible because Arrandales are coming in Q4. Last update took 11 months and update before than took 10 months. Economy sucks now and desktops don't sell very well...
I think the iMac case would melt should they try and put a Xeon Processor in it
Mobile chips are used in the iMac, which means Clarksdale is the only current choice. I think on the high end it tops out at 1.73. Then there is that Turbo boost thing of 1 core which I heard tops out at 2.8.
I expect Apple to do a simple price reduction (as rumored) for Christmas, then do a real upgrade once Arrandale comes out.
Oh, I forgot about heat and the iMacs case
What is turbo boost?
If you're using app that can only use one core it can overclock the core temporarily so the app will work faster. Eg 2.0GHz Clarksfield can be boosted up to 3.2Ghz for one core, if needed. I think some Pentiums had that as well. It's great feature if you're using app that can't use all four cores but needs higher clocked single or dual core. Correct me if I'm wrong
I thought generally, Apple never does hardware releases in November or December. Currently, not only are the current CPUs a tad outdated, but the GPUs employed in the current iMac are 1-2 generations old now. The mobile 9000M line employed on the MB/MBP/Mini/iMac are two full generations old now.
If Apple does not plan for a release of a slightly bumped up iMac between August - October, then a new iMac will not be released until January or February 2010.
Personally, I think the current iMacs are a very poor deal at this time. They are grossly overpriced and outdated hardware. There were reports that Apple was looking at 10% price reductions on the iMac line to take place before Fall 2009, which has lead me to believe there might be some tweaks coming to the iMac line in addition to the expected price drops.
Leopard is 64-bit somehow but not fully, i think. DDR3 is too expensive at the moment. Or would you like that base iMac costs 1900$ because it has 8Gb of RAM? 2Gb or even 1Gb is enough for average consumer. More RAM is useless is you don't use it
1GB is really pushing it today. 2GB at a minimum, and even with that, running any virtualized environments (i.e Parallels or VMware) will be sluggish at best. 4GB is the sweet spot today. 8GB is too cost prohibitive to majority of users today, and 2GB is just barely cutting it for most.
Laptops were updated last October... Apple can't do two minor updates. We need something major. If Apple updates them in September or something, Arrandale update isn't going to be before mid 2010. You can think what you want but if Apple updates them before Arrandales or Clarksfields I'll eat my iMac
Ddr3 is Almost as cheap as ddr2. check newegg. maybe a $10 when buying 4-6 gb of ram. Not like iMacs have ecc ram. And ddr3 ecc ram is not that much. When HP released their gen6 servers with DDR 3 they priced them the same as the previous gen even though they come with more ram standard
1GB has been ok for me. I usually only run Firefox. Although, when I start running multiple apps, I get constant beachballs and lag.
How many people really runs Fusion or something? If you need more RAM you can buy it, but it doesn't have to be standard. 8Gb as standard would just add 1000$ to price but nothing major for average customer
2 x 4Gb DDR3 costs over 700$, and iMac has only 2 slots.
4GB of DDR3 would make your Mac Mini feel like a dragster compare to how it feels today with 1GB DDR3. I believe the ram cost ~ $57-$67 for 4GB (2x2GB) DDR3 for the Mini. A highly recommended upgrade in my book for you. If you had a choice between an SSD or the 4GB ram, I'd say you'd pick up far more performance with the ram upgrade from 1GB to 4GB, than having a Mac Mini with a quick SSD and 1GB ram.
At this time, I will agree 8GB is completely not worth it, except to the most demanding of users, but with the ram prices, they could just get a Mac Pro with that ram for about the same cost.
I am sticking to my guns with my belief that 4GB is the sweet spot.
I work as an IT manager in a very large institution with 35%+ of the population being Mac users. There are a large number of them, who also have Parallels or Fusion on their Macs.
Apple needs to move the imac to a desktop CPU. As has been said, there are 500 euro quad core systems out there.. It's looking really sad for the imac (a desktop machine).
The so called low power version of the lynnfield is still 82w, so that wouldn't work out for those hoping for that either.
So, is it in any way possible that they can simply use the desktop version of lynnfield (95w) in the next imac? Perhaps make it a little thicker, move the battery out, etc? Because it doesn't look like there's much good stuff coming out in the mobile space, at least not quad core that is. Clarksfield capped at 2ghz, etc..
The so called low power version of the lynnfield is still 82w, so that wouldn't work out for those hoping for that either.
So, is it in any way possible that they can simply use the desktop version of lynnfield (95w) in the next imac? Perhaps make it a little thicker, move the battery out, etc? Because it doesn't look like there's much good stuff coming out in the mobile space, at least not quad core that is. Clarksfield capped at 2ghz, etc..
It seems to me that if Apple changes the form factor of the iMac, that would open up a lot of possibilities for a substantial upgrade this fall.
24" iMac can take 55W so low power Lynnfield still runs 50% hotter than what current design can handle. iMac should be a lot thicker than it is to handle 82W and Apple wants it to be even thinner.
Cores and clock speeds aren't everything. Arrandales will be significant bump
Yeah well if they did a redesign and liquid cooling they'd be able to handle it just fine. They need to start treating the imac as a desktop machine and put it in the spotlight.
I think memory controller can't handle more than 8Gb so 3rd slot would be useless. Also there's no space for 3rd
At 24" the price gets too high. I know it's a nice screen and not entry level but at that price point I can build a very nice pc with two graphics cards. I have a 5 year old LCD that still works great.
I'd pay for a mac mini once the hardware refresh comes out. I would even think about a cheap iMac. But at $1500 for the next level iMac I think is too much for a computer these days.
I can't see iMac getting liquid cooling... None of the big brands sell liquid cooled computers or at least I haven't seen any.
Why put iMac into spotlight because desktops aren't "cool" at the moment. Laptops sells more in one day than desktops sells in a month