Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iMac Build Quality: White vs. Aluminum

luffytubby said:
As for the graphics card. The White Imacs had a 7600 GT right? Is 7600 GT really better than a 2600 Pro?

Was this a backward upgrade? What will they upgrade to next? Geforce 5200:D?

I actually owned that card.... Dont laugh:(
Click to expand...

I'm not a graphics card "geek", but I looked for reviews of the 2400 and 2600 cards and found that the performance seemed to be optimized for DirectX 10 but lagged behind on DirectX 9. There are different numbers of shaders for different aspects, some increased and some reduced… not that I know all that much what that means, but it seems reasonable that if a certain program benefits more from something that has been reduced on a newer card, you might lose some performance in that area.
 
Well for what it is worth, your question for build quality is much like asking, which model of the corvette you prefer. However, underlying your question is the reality that many here have pointed out. Technology is a high point in deciding whether to remain with the white imacs or go to the aluminum. From my experience and expertise I would say the white would be good if you were looking to play some of the most 3d demanding games availible without concern that one day your core technologies offered in the newer aluminums like hd technology will be outdated. You can get similar 3d rendering if you have the aluminum with the best card availible with the highest processor, but for all purposes, I play WOW with the plane jane aluminum 20" with no frills and aside from a bumb pf 1 gig ram, it plays fairly well.

If you go white, be sure you don't overlook the cpu differences. The core 2 duo will out pace the core duo so don't miss that if an incredible deal arises and in your haste you purchase what appears to be a great deal and find out later that you could have bought a G5 dual 1.8 from ebay and run leopard just as good.

My imac has run since October of 2007 and shows no flakiness whatsoever. Don't listen the the die hards who say to stick with the old technologies, even if apple were adding mid grade hardware to their new line up, it is still far superior to the outdated technologies of yesteryear.

Eric
 
strawnman said:
If you go white, be sure you don't overlook the cpu differences.
The core 2 duo will out pace the core duo ...
Click to expand...

True enough, but there's virtually NO technology difference between the
24" ALU iMacs and the white C2Ds. CPU clock rates got a minor bump,
and the internal SATA bus went to 3 Gb/s (but the white C2D's 1.5 Gb/s
SATA is still much faster than any large-capacity HDD on the market).
OTOH, the 20" ALU's 7-bit LCD panel was a major techno-downgrade.

...newer ain't necessarily better,

LK
 
Leon Kowalski said:
True enough, but there's virtually NO technology difference between the
24" ALU iMacs and the white C2Ds. CPU clock rates got a minor bump,
and the internal SATA bus went to 3 Gb/s (but the white C2D's 1.5 Gb/s
SATA is still much faster than any large-capacity HDD on the market).
OTOH, the 20" ALU's 7-bit LCD panel was a major techno-downgrade.

...newer ain't necessarily better,

LK
Click to expand...

Let's not forgot to mention the new Santa Rosa chipset and its ability to natively address a full 4GB of RAM.
 
SaSaSushi said:
Let's not forgot to mention the new Santa Rosa chipset and its ability to natively address a full 4GB of RAM.
Click to expand...

Nice, but a very minor improvement. I have 4GB (3.3 useful) in my white 20"
and also keep the ActivityMonitor "memory pie-chart" icon on the dock -- I've
never seen memory usage anywhere near maxed-out.

The choice between display quality and a little more memory is a no-brainer;
it's everyday "right now!" quality vs. a "maybe someday" small improvement
in performance.

BTW, I started out with a 20" ALU -- because that's the screen size that best
fits my work area. The TN+film 7-bit panel was so ugly that I (grudgingly)
"traded up" to a 24" ALU -- which also had an unacceptable display. The 20"
white iMac is vastly superior to either (IMO, of course). It's the screen size
I wanted, with ACD quality, no glare, and $600 (33%) less than the 24" ALU.

...if "aluminum & glass" is the answer, WHAT was the question?

LK
 
luffytubby said:
The main thing that I can see, seems to be the fact that the remote control is not magnetic with the Aluminium Imac, so it can't stick, which was kinda cool:p

Overall, both the White and the Alu looks slick. I think it's impossible to choose which looks better.



As for the graphics card. The White Imacs had a 7600 GT right? Is 7600 GT really better than a 2600 Pro?

Was this a backward upgrade? What will they upgrade to next? Geforce 5200:D?

I actually owned that card.... Dont laugh:(
Click to expand...

Yeah they sorta went backwards on the vidcard. I was hoping for a bit more of a jump like a 2600xt or 8600gts.

And it's sad they don't have a nice place for your remote on the new iMacs.
 
trip1ex said:
Yeah they sorta went backwards on the vidcard. I was hoping for a bit more of a jump like a 2600xt or 8600gts.
Click to expand...

It is an underclocked HD2600XT Mobility Radeon card. This is old news already.

And it's sad they don't have a nice place for your remote on the new iMacs.
Click to expand...

I have a place for it on mine: right on the stand underneath the machine. :)

A more logical complaint would probably be why the remote is still a white plastic 1st gen iPod Shuffle-lookalike and not at least aluminum-grey colored. But that would be picking nits. :p
 
Leon Kowalski said:
The choice between display quality and a little more memory is a no-brainer;
it's everyday "right now!" quality vs. a "maybe someday" small improvement
in performance.
Click to expand...

Gradients aside, display quality is a subjective issue. Some, like myself, prefer the look of the new glossy displays on the 24". You clearly don't and I respect that.

The new chipset is an actual objective improvement, small as it may be.

The 20" white iMac is vastly superior to either (IMO, of course). It's the screen size I wanted, with ACD quality, no glare, and $600 (33%) less than the 24" ALU.
Click to expand...

Well, thank you for the "IMO". :)

As I've said before I owned a 20" white Core Duo iMac prior to this one and I was entirely satisfied with the matte display. At the time I thought it was the most beautiful-looking display I had ever owned. I like the glossy screen on my alu 24" even better.
 
SaSaSushi said:
Gradients aside, display quality is a subjective issue.
Click to expand...
I can agree with that for the 24" ALU; the gradients are/were a technical
problem, and there's some indication that Apple is addressing the issue.
OTOH, the 20" ALU display is (objectively) a cost-cutting downgrade to a
vastly inferior 7-bit TN panel.

Some, like myself, prefer the look of the new glossy displays on the 24".
You clearly don't and I respect that.
Click to expand...

I agree. I had no experience with (or opinion on) "glossy" before spending
2 months with my ALU ex-iMacs. Overall, I now prefer matte -- but freely
admit that glossy has its advantages for viewing photos/video. OTOH, I'd
still pick matte for editing photos and for general browsing, blogging, and
other text-centric activities.

...ymmv -- and I respect that,

LK
 
SaSaSushi said:
It is an underclocked HD2600XT Mobility Radeon card. This is old news already.

I have a place for it on mine: right on the stand underneath the machine. :)

A more logical complaint would probably be why the remote is still a white plastic 1st gen iPod Shuffle-lookalike and not at least aluminum-grey colored. But that would be picking nits. :p
Click to expand...

I hear ya, but just because you like the remote on your stand doesn't mean some of us don't miss the nice magnet on the side of the casing. :p

And it still would have been nicer if they actually clocked the 2600xt mobile chip to run at 2600xt speeds out of the box because then I wouldn't have to mess with overclocking it myself and I'd have more of a guarantee the internal design was capable of dissipating the extra heat generated from the overclock. I mean there's a reason I got a Mac and enjoy the Mac. And it's mostly to get away from the hassle of these things.

Anyway it's not bad at all. Overall I think the new iMacs rocks. But I do miss the magnet thang and wish the gpu was a bit stronger.
 
trip1ex said:
I hear ya, but just because you like the remote on your stand doesn't mean some of us don't miss the nice magnet on the side of the casing. :p

And it still would have been nicer if they actually clocked the 2600xt mobile chip to run at 2600xt speeds out of the box because then I wouldn't have to mess with overclocking it myself and I'd have more of a guarantee the internal design was capable of dissipating the extra heat generated from the overclock. I mean there's a reason I got a Mac and enjoy the Mac. And it's mostly to get away from the hassle of these things.

Anyway it's not bad at all. Overall I think the new iMacs rocks. But I do miss the magnet thang and wish the gpu was a bit stronger.
Click to expand...

Yeah, like I said I had a 20" white Core Duo iMac and I did enjoy the magnetic remote. It's just not a problem for me to keep it on the stand and I haven't lost it yet.

As for the clock speed of the 2600XT I think its pretty clear that not being able to run the card stably at the default specs without ramping up fan speeds to very high levels is exactly why they clocked it as they did. It is an extremely slim and compact case and there is a tradeoff there. ;)

I haven't seen the need to OC it yet anyway since it handles the few games I throw at it handily as is.
 
I was in the mac store getting my white iMAC repaired and I was shocked by how small the new alu iMacs were...
did some digging and realized that from white to alu they have switched from regular to widescreen displays.
Thus the 20" ws is now the height of a 17" regular screen.
Definitely would recommend the 24" if you are going to buy one.
 
Fahrwahr said:
Thanks again for all the replies. The appointment at the Genius Bar today had an unhappy outcome: apparently the original purchase was in October 2004 (ours was a gift purchased on eBay), so we are four months beyond the end of the repair extension program. It doesn't seem worth $650 (parts and labor) to invest in a flawed design (in fact, the genius said the logic board looked like the replacement part, so it may have already been replaced once).

My parents settled on a refurbished base model aluminum iMac. The heat-conducting property of the aluminum enclosure makes sense -- the tight plastic enclosure of the white iMacs would seem to lead to more component failure. The Apple Store originally stated that it would be 3 to 5 business days until the iMac ships, but it's on its way to FedEx now.

Any ideas on what to do with the problematic iMac G5? I would hope the working parts of the machine would be worth something.
Click to expand...

Ouch, $650 for the repair. Certainly 1 instance like this is justification for Applecare purchase on a new machine. What to do with the old one? Ebay. Even broken Macs brings a fair price. You could probably get $200+ for it, and maybe thats lowballing.

Ill be moving into a new 20" ALU iMac this saturday. It was bought at the refurb store, $999 which IMO is an incredible price. I personally like the look of the white units better. Someone said "white is out". Well I Im no fashionista, if I could choose from the old style with the exact same innards as the new for the same price, Id take the all white.
 
Al imac problems were resolved years ago :p. It was basically one problem, freezing (i know, i think im gonna get a nightmire like those days again tonight), others were the fact people didnt like the glossy screens, and thats its hard to open, which it isn't supposed to. also the 20" imacs use TN panels which have bad viewing angles, so it depends, Al imacs are beautiful machines, I'm looking at a new MacBook in the summer for a companion for school, I am tired of bringing my dads MacBook pro, or the family MacBook, or should I say my iFamily®:p:p.

Awesome machine, get them a base 20" iMac, just wait until they're updated, but, i guess it doesnt matter, either way, its an update, the whole Intel thing is HUGE. According to Benchmarks, the base MacBook air beats all but 1 configuration of the PowerMac G5.
 
Thanks for the validation.

Just got a deal on a new in box white 20" 2.16 C2D monday, after selling my PM G5 dual last week. Especially loving my 22" lcd spanned onto the side of it. Bumped the ram up to the 3 gig maximum, which make parallels sing.

Got on the apple refurbed website, and saw that it's newer, thinner, shinier sister is now going for $9 more than what I bought mine for. (Not including sales tax). The comments about the 20" Al's display, heat issues, and graphics card helps to validate my choice. At least it helped me not regret buying the one I've got.

What are the keyboards like on the new Al's? How do they compare to the old school white ones? Thanks for your responses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back