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

Just got the 27" i5. Impressions.

here is a capture of it... i have not yet installed the bootcamp drivers, hopefully it does not mess everything up when i do :(
 

Attachments

  • grahpicscard.gif
    grahpicscard.gif
    16.2 KB · Views: 120
dwd3885 said:
sorry guys i just can't get win7 working to the point of getting gpu-z on it. Once I installed the apple bootcamp drivers, the whole thing went to heck.
Click to expand...

You probably have bootcamp 3.0.2 or something like that. You will need to download Bootcamp 3.1 from Apple, that runs Windows 7 much better, I think. I installed Windows Ultimate 7 with the old installer ok though, do not know what trouble you're having, but you need everything updated on the Mac end first. Then follow the directions of Bootcamp, maybe you better print it out or you can just read it from another computers screen while you install, good luck.
 
TO ALL THE PEOPLE WANTING TO KNOW ABOUT THE GRAPHICS CARD (I only read the first page, sorry if this has already been adressed)

ATI Radeon HD 5750 with 1GB -- Thats not a mobile graphics card, thats one of the higher end graphics cards right now. People put it in their 'gaming rigs' (the people with no life and who aren't seriou-- nothing didnt say that)


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-5770,2446-7.html
^^ crysis (gaming) benchmark for this card

I am (extremely) envious of anyone with the new iMac, although I think my MBP will do until I can afford a max'd out 12 core mac pro with 3 27 inch displays.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-CiD3Xqp5M
^^ Better benchmark..
 
Hamsterz said:
TO ALL THE PEOPLE WANTING TO KNOW ABOUT THE GRAPHICS CARD (I only read the first page, sorry if this has already been adressed)

ATI Radeon HD 5750 with 1GB -- Thats not a mobile graphics card, thats one of the higher end graphics cards right now. People put it in their 'gaming rigs' (the people with no life and who aren't seriou-- nothing didnt say that)


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-5770,2446-7.html
^^ crysis (gaming) benchmark for this card

I am (extremely) envious of anyone with the new iMac, although I think my MBP will do until I can afford a max'd out 12 core mac pro with 3 27 inch displays.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-CiD3Xqp5M
^^ Better benchmark..
Click to expand...

You really should read the thread. This is obviously NOT a 5750.
 
hey, if someone needs anything else with a w7 i5 let me know.

I chose i5 over i7 as I feel hyperthreading is well.... hype... its really not that great. The thing I dont get is those who get the 3.6 i5, if you chose that option and then also upgrade the graphics it costs $50 more than the quad i5!!! To me the i5 makes so much sense.... the graphics upgrade is $150... so in a sense $50 for a quad core over an i3 is a no brainer, however that value for money goes way down once you are looking at $200 just to to get 130 mhz and hyperthreading.

Just my two cents.
 
Is this good news? Is it better than expected or something?
Hellhammer or other any Mac genius, you always have good explanations. Make a easy one please, so n00bs like me understands. :D
 
Nice machine, though I don't understand why the 3.6 GHz Core i5 is only available on the 21.5", not the 27".
 
dwd3885 said:
So I must say, I went to the Apple Store West County today and was looking for a Magic Trackpad and left with a 27" Core i5 iMac! I was going to place an order online, but they had it in store. I'm only moving from last years Core 2 Duo 21.5" so I had owned that for less than a year and it was a great machine. I'm hoping to keep this one longer. :)

Boy it's a great screen. The 27" is big. The quad core is just flying through things. Of course, all I'm doing now is transferring all my stuff but it is going great!

Can't wait to put this thing through its paces. Anybody want me to run anything for them to see how it runs (speed, ie?)

I'm ripping a dvd right now, I'll let you know the speed. Pirates 3, from disc to mp4 file in handbrake.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Click to expand...

why wouldn't they care the i5, it aint no i7:D
 
easepease said:
hey, if someone needs anything else with a w7 i5 let me know.

I chose i5 over i7 as I feel hyperthreading is well.... hype... its really not that great. The thing I dont get is those who get the 3.6 i5, if you chose that option and then also upgrade the graphics it costs $50 more than the quad i5!!! To me the i5 makes so much sense.... the graphics upgrade is $150... so in a sense $50 for a quad core over an i3 is a no brainer, however that value for money goes way down once you are looking at $200 just to to get 130 mhz and hyperthreading.

Just my two cents.
Click to expand...

you can always justify it your way, but the i7 is a better value, esp when you consider resale
 
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but don't more applications make use of hyperthreading than they do extra cores?

One point is that the 3.2 Ghz i3 iMac Geekbenches right at 6000 while the 2.8 Ghz i5 iMac Geekbenches at 6800. That's a tight gap, which I'd explain by citing the i3's hyperthreading capability.

I'm almost certain I'll go with the i7, but I won't decide for another week when I buy.
 
dwarnecke11 said:
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but don't more applications make use of hyperthreading than they do extra cores?

One point is that the 3.2 Ghz i3 iMac Geekbenches right at 6000 while the 2.8 Ghz i5 iMac Geekbenches at 6800. That's a tight gap, which I'd explain by citing the i3's hyperthreading capability.

I'm almost certain I'll go with the i7, but I won't decide for another week when I buy.
Click to expand...


Applications don't code for hyperthreading, they're either single threaded, or are coded to scale up to however many cores possible. If an application was coded to support 4 cores, it will utilize a clarkdale's 2 cores + 2 virtual cores. It will also support an i7 lynnfield's 4 cores, but not any of its virtual cores.

Geekbench is also a synthetic benchmarks which scales heavily depending on the cpu. In other words it's very cpu biased, so very small cpu increment gains will be pretty decent chunks of gains in geekbench. Take geekbench with a grain of salt.
 
TMRaven said:
Applications don't code for hyperthreading, they're either single threaded, or are coded to scale up to however many cores possible. If an application was coded to support 4 cores, it will utilize a clarkdale's 2 cores + 2 virtual cores. It will also support an i7 lynnfield's 4 cores, but not any of its virtual cores.

Geekbench is also a synthetic benchmarks which scales heavily depending on the cpu. In other words it's very cpu biased, so very small cpu increment gains will be pretty decent chunks of gains in geekbench. Take geekbench with a grain of salt.
Click to expand...

think about it really though. if the i3 were as good as the i5 or quad i5, then it would be priced accordingly. physical cores are better than virtual ones, especially if the clock speeds are similar.
 
Don't get me wrong, the i7 760 at 4 physical cores will generally be better than the i3 550 at 3.2ghz and its 2 physical cores-- especially considering the turboboost capabilities in the lynnfield chip will reach speeds of up to 3.4ghz in single threaded applications. I'm just stating that geekbench is sometimes used too much on these forums as the "end all" to comparing machines.
 
verdict?

So is the Mobility 5850 with DDR5 that is supposedly in here... is that pretty good? A lot better than the last gen?
 
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