The "I'm waiting for an iMac refresh" thread

[kfscoll]

The update won't really affect you because your usage seem very light.

i3, i5 and i7 are "new" processors from Intel but because they are still dual core like Core 2 Duos are, there is no huge bump in performance. You likely won't even notice any difference. You won't benefit from more speed if you don't use it. Software is still mainly single-threaded meaning that it cannot utilize more than one core so Core 2 Duo will be more than fine for you and will last years.

Your usage doesn't require much from the GPU so 9400M is fine. RAM you can always add but 4GB should be plenty.

USB 3.0 is simply faster than USB 2.0 is so file transfers wibyll take less time. However, USB 2.0 is still fine for most people because they don't do big file transfers.

And this quote is a prime example of why one shouldn't trust Internet forums alone to make a computer buying decision.

The desktop i7 and i5 processors (i.e. the ones used in the current iMacs) are quad-core processors. Other than clock speed, the difference between the i7 and i5 is that the i7 uses Hyperthreading, which makes the CPU appear to the OS as if it has 8 cores. In either case, the i7 and i5 are SUBSTANTIALLY faster than the Core 2 Duo processors. Not only do they have more processing cores (4 vs 2), but the Nehalem architecture upon which they're based is substantially more efficient than the Core 2 architecture. To say that you won't notice a difference in performance between the i5/i7 iMac and the Core 2 Duo iMac is nonsense. I've owned both and the difference is significant. In addition, the i5 and i7 processors will automatically overclock themselves if fewer than four cores are in use. For single threaded applications, the 2.8GHz i7 processor available in the BTO iMac can increase its speed to 3.46GHz.

See here for more info on Turbo Boost: http://www.intel.com/support/processors/sb/cs-029908.htm

The mobile i7 and i5 processors as used in the newest MacBook pros are indeed dual core parts, but those processors obviously aren't used in the iMac line.

It's almost a certainty that when the inevitable iMac refresh hits the current Core 2 Duo processors will be replaced by dual-core Nehalem chips (most likely the Intel i3). My recommendation would be to either wait for the upcoming iMac refresh if you're looking for a dual-core CPU or get the quad-core i5/i7 iMac now.

 

[Sweet Lou]

Hi all,

its official the new imac will be released next Tuesday.

How do i know?

I just gave in and bought mine ... Murphys law says it was a week early

May i just say, as a lifelong pc user, this thing is just WOW. I've never set up a new computer this quickly, painlessly or easily. It flies, and it just works.

There has been almost no stress in working out how to do things, so i'm officially a mac person.

Good luck with waiting for the update ... really hope its soon for you all.

It seems like you have better luck then you thought!

 

[Hellhammer]

And this quote is a prime example of why one shouldn't trust Internet forums alone to make a computer buying decision.

The desktop i7 and i5 processors (i.e. the ones used in the current iMacs) are quad-core processors. Other than clock speed, the difference between the i7 and i5 is that the i7 uses Hyperthreading, which makes the CPU appear to the OS as if it has 8 cores. In either case, the i7 and i5 are SUBSTANTIALLY faster than the Core 2 Duo processors. Not only do they have more processing cores (4 vs 2), but the Nehalem architecture upon which they're based is substantially more efficient than the Core 2 architecture. To say that you won't notice a difference in performance between the i5/i7 iMac and the Core 2 Duo iMac is nonsense. I've owned both and the difference is significant. In addition, the i5 and i7 processors will automatically overclock themselves if fewer than four cores are in use. For single threaded applications, the 2.8GHz i7 processor available in the BTO iMac can increase its speed to 3.46GHz.

See here for more info on Turbo Boost: http://www.intel.com/support/processors/sb/cs-029908.htm

The mobile i7 and i5 processors as used in the newest MacBook pros are indeed dual core parts, but those processors obviously aren't used in the iMac line.

It's almost a certainty that when the inevitable iMac refresh hits the current Core 2 Duo processors will be replaced by dual-core Nehalem chips (most likely the Intel i3). My recommendation would be to either wait for the upcoming iMac refresh if you're looking for a dual-core CPU or get the quad-core i5/i7 iMac now.

You thought I did not know that? Please. You don't have show your knowledge about it for me, I know all that already.

The guy was looking for 21.5", there is no way Lynnfield will find its way into 21.5". I accidentally (=typo) included the i7 in that post, I should have left it out. However, i3 only offers minor upgrade from C2D, that wouldn't change his life at all. The only good thing about i3 is HT, that's all. It's not worth waiting IMO. Quad core 27" is the best bang for your buck but he said 27" is too big.

 

[TMRaven]

And this quote is a prime example of why one shouldn't trust Internet forums alone to make a computer buying decision.

The desktop i7 and i5 processors (i.e. the ones used in the current iMacs) are quad-core processors. Other than clock speed, the difference between the i7 and i5 is that the i7 uses Hyperthreading, which makes the CPU appear to the OS as if it has 8 cores. In either case, the i7 and i5 are SUBSTANTIALLY faster than the Core 2 Duo processors. Not only do they have more processing cores (4 vs 2), but the Nehalem architecture upon which they're based is substantially more efficient than the Core 2 architecture. To say that you won't notice a difference in performance between the i5/i7 iMac and the Core 2 Duo iMac is nonsense. I've owned both and the difference is significant. In addition, the i5 and i7 processors will automatically overclock themselves if fewer than four cores are in use. For single threaded applications, the 2.8GHz i7 processor available in the BTO iMac can increase its speed to 3.46GHz.

See here for more info on Turbo Boost: http://www.intel.com/support/processors/sb/cs-029908.htm

The mobile i7 and i5 processors as used in the newest MacBook pros are indeed dual core parts, but those processors obviously aren't used in the iMac line.

It's almost a certainty that when the inevitable iMac refresh hits the current Core 2 Duo processors will be replaced by dual-core Nehalem chips (most likely the Intel i3). My recommendation would be to either wait for the upcoming iMac refresh if you're looking for a dual-core CPU or get the quad-core i5/i7 iMac now.

So you're telling people not to trust internet forums for computer advice, yet you're on an internet forum, giving advice?

Anyways, Hellhammer already knows plenty about intel cpus.

 

[kfscoll]

So you're telling people not to trust internet forums for computer advice, yet you're on an internet forum, giving advice?

Funny, I thought the same thing as I was typing my reply.

I haven't really followed Hellhammer's posts, but he explained that he made a mistake when he mentioned the "i7" and "dual-core" in the same breath. But he sure seemed to get bent out of shape when I challenged his "expert knowledge!" Since I didn't know that his post was a mistake, it was reasonable for me to assume that he didn't know what he was talking about when he said the desktop i7 was a dual-core chip.

Anyway, apologies to all if I inadvertently "dissed" anyone -- just trying to give the OP some straight poop.

 

[Btom]

.....
Anyway, apologies to all if I inadvertently "dissed" anyone -- just trying to give the OP some straight poop.

Straight poop or not, you should also read the first post in the series, where the guy is asking about word processing and spreadsheets and which computer to buy. And only then bring in your big expert guns...

Tom B.

 

[eddvedd]

So you're telling people not to trust internet forums for computer advice, yet you're on an internet forum, giving advice?

Anyways, Hellhammer already knows plenty about intel cpus.

Agreed. Hellhammer seems to be the resident genius in this forum. Plus, his name is badass.

 

[juicedropsdeuce]

So you're telling people not to trust internet forums for computer advice, yet you're on an internet forum, giving advice?

Anyways, Hellhammer already knows plenty about intel cpus.

Hahaha. Called out.

That is funny!

 

[luffytubby]

And this quote is a prime example of why one shouldn't trust Internet forums alone to make a computer buying decision.

The desktop i7 and i5 processors (i.e. the ones used in the current iMacs) are quad-core processors. Other than clock speed, the difference between the i7 and i5 is that the i7 uses Hyperthreading, which makes the CPU appear to the OS as if it has 8 cores. In either case, the i7 and i5 are SUBSTANTIALLY faster than the Core 2 Duo processors. Not only do they have more processing cores (4 vs 2), but the Nehalem architecture upon which they're based is substantially more efficient than the Core 2 architecture. To say that you won't notice a difference in performance between the i5/i7 iMac and the Core 2 Duo iMac is nonsense. I've owned both and the difference is significant. In addition, the i5 and i7 processors will automatically overclock themselves if fewer than four cores are in use. For single threaded applications, the 2.8GHz i7 processor available in the BTO iMac can increase its speed to 3.46GHz.

See here for more info on Turbo Boost: http://www.intel.com/support/processors/sb/cs-029908.htm

The mobile i7 and i5 processors as used in the newest MacBook pros are indeed dual core parts, but those processors obviously aren't used in the iMac line.

It's almost a certainty that when the inevitable iMac refresh hits the current Core 2 Duo processors will be replaced by dual-core Nehalem chips (most likely the Intel i3). My recommendation would be to either wait for the upcoming iMac refresh if you're looking for a dual-core CPU or get the quad-core i5/i7 iMac now.

I thought Imac used laptop hardware entirely, due to its slim size.

Are you sure that the CPU are desktop variants?

 

[alust2013]

I thought Imac used laptop hardware entirely, due to its slim size.

Are you sure that the CPU are desktop variants?

CPU is for certain desktop, and GPU is mobile. There were iMacs from 2 or 3 years ago that used mobile CPUs, but all of the current ones are desktop, including the C2Ds

 

[Hellhammer]

I thought Imac used laptop hardware entirely, due to its slim size.

Are you sure that the CPU are desktop variants?

The latest update brought desktop CPUs to iMac. Before that, they were custom chips (TDP between mobile and desktop version, ~45W) from Intel. iMac has always used desktop (3.5") HDs though. The GPUs are mobile but the current 4670 and 4850 are just underclocked desktop counterparts so they perform fairly well.

Anyway, apologies to all if I inadvertently "dissed" anyone -- just trying to give the OP some straight poop.

Your post was correct. I made the mistake, not you It was 1am when I wrote my last reply so it wasn't the kindest

 

[aggri1]

Hi,

also waiting for an iMac refresh...

It seems to me though, that since the performance gap between the better iMacs and the low-end Mac Pro is not exactly massive (in many regards), the Mac Pros may well be updated first. Otherwise the new top-end iMac might be faster than some Mac Pro configs and that might not look very good at all.

So, maybe new Mac Pros soon and iMacs in October?

Ah well, guess I'll keep the 2003 MDD G4 chugging along a little longer.

Lots of good info here, cool (between the speculation ).

Cheers, A.

 

[Hellhammer]

Hi,

also waiting for an iMac refresh...

It seems to me though, that since the performance gap between the better iMacs and the low-end Mac Pro is not exactly massive (in many regards), the Mac Pros may well be updated first. Otherwise the new top-end iMac might be faster than some Mac Pro configs and that might not look very good at all.

So, maybe new Mac Pros soon and iMacs in October?

Ah well, guess I'll keep the 2003 MDD G4 chugging along a little longer.

Lots of good info here, cool (between the speculation ).

Cheers, A.

i7 iMac is already faster than 2.66GHz quad Mac Pro and nearly as fast as 2.93GHz quad Mac Pro. That has been the situation since October. One issue with Mac Pro update is that the cheapest SP Gulftown is 999$, if that is used in low-end, Mac Pro would start from ~3400$. There will likely be cheaper W36xx Gulftowns later on this year so Apple might be waiting for them.

My guess is that they get updated at the same time, some time in September

 

[kfscoll]

Your post was correct. I made the mistake, not you It was 1am when I wrote my last reply so it wasn't the kindest

No worries! Besides, by the looks of it, several other folks had your back because I got smacked down.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled forum thread...

 

[iamthedudeman]

Hey, is iamthedudeman a reference to I Am the Walrus or to The Big Lebowski (or to something else)?

Haha. No

My five year nephew calls me "dudeman' and not uncle. Hence the saying
"iamthedudeman'.

But on a lighter note The Big Lebowski is my favorite movie of all time. So it could also pertain to that as well.

"I told that kraut a fu****** thousand times I dont role on shabbas!"

Lol. Best movie ever.

http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=ED4VL7W6VdQ&feature=related


Sorry to go off topic but that sh** is funny. Lol.

No back to our regular scheduled programming.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

i7 iMac is already faster than 2.66GHz quad Mac Pro and nearly as fast as 2.93GHz quad Mac Pro. That has been the situation since October. One issue with Mac Pro update is that the cheapest SP Gulftown is 999$, if that is used in low-end, Mac Pro would start from ~3400$. There will likely be cheaper W36xx Gulftowns later on this year so Apple might be waiting for them.

My guess is that they get updated at the same time, some time in September

Learn something new every day on these forums... I knew the i7 iMac was in the same ballpark as the Mac Pros, but I never heard it actually being FASTER than the low-end Mac Pro

If I was in the market for a new Mac today, I'd totally buy the i7 iMac on that alone.

 

[alent1234]

And this quote is a prime example of why one shouldn't trust Internet forums alone to make a computer buying decision.

The desktop i7 and i5 processors (i.e. the ones used in the current iMacs) are quad-core processors. Other than clock speed, the difference between the i7 and i5 is that the i7 uses Hyperthreading, which makes the CPU appear to the OS as if it has 8 cores. In either case, the i7 and i5 are SUBSTANTIALLY faster than the Core 2 Duo processors. Not only do they have more processing cores (4 vs 2), but the Nehalem architecture upon which they're based is substantially more efficient than the Core 2 architecture. To say that you won't notice a difference in performance between the i5/i7 iMac and the Core 2 Duo iMac is nonsense. I've owned both and the difference is significant. In addition, the i5 and i7 processors will automatically overclock themselves if fewer than four cores are in use. For single threaded applications, the 2.8GHz i7 processor available in the BTO iMac can increase its speed to 3.46GHz.

See here for more info on Turbo Boost: http://www.intel.com/support/processors/sb/cs-029908.htm

The mobile i7 and i5 processors as used in the newest MacBook pros are indeed dual core parts, but those processors obviously aren't used in the iMac line.

It's almost a certainty that when the inevitable iMac refresh hits the current Core 2 Duo processors will be replaced by dual-core Nehalem chips (most likely the Intel i3). My recommendation would be to either wait for the upcoming iMac refresh if you're looking for a dual-core CPU or get the quad-core i5/i7 iMac now.

i have an i5 Lenovo laptop and one nice thing i noticed is that the CPU's even under clock themselves if you're not using it to it's potential. and the performance is amazing. i was playing Civ4 on it and it still under clocked itself. Last night i fired up a flash based website so my son could watch some cartoons and the laptop never warmed up, fans never came on and it performed smoothly.

i think part of the reason is that flash likes hyperthreading. it performs nicely on my ancient P4 desktop at work but it made my old laptop into an oven which was centrino based

i'll buy a desktop iMac after they get i 5 CPU's all around. but after using my laptop i'd be crazy to pay all that money for a C2D CPU

 

[Hellhammer]

Learn something new every day on these forums... I knew the i7 iMac was in the same ballpark as the Mac Pros, but I never heard it actually being FASTER than the low-end Mac Pro

If I was in the market for a new Mac today, I'd totally buy the i7 iMac on that alone.

Yeah, it's ridiculous. Some benchmarks here! GeekBench here!

i have an i5 Lenovo laptop and one nice thing i noticed is that the CPU's even under clock themselves if you're not using it to it's potential. and the performance is amazing. i was playing Civ4 on it and it still under clocked itself. Last night i fired up a flash based website so my son could watch some cartoons and the laptop never warmed up, fans never came on and it performed smoothly.

i think part of the reason is that flash likes hyperthreading. it performs nicely on my ancient P4 desktop at work but it made my old laptop into an oven which was centrino based

i'll buy a desktop iMac after they get i 5 CPU's all around. but after using my laptop i'd be crazy to pay all that money for a C2D CPU

Lenovo is simply the best computer manufacturer in the world, they even beat Apple. ThinkPad series has been the same for years but the design just works

 

[alent1234]

probably depends on the model. i chose the one with a crappy touchpad that is unusable out of the box and had to ask our help desk for a cheapo mouse. i was supposed to get a lenovo with an ATI 5730 graphics card but the build time kept getting pushed back and i needed it for work so i chose one with Intel HD graphics because it was in stock.

MBP's are better but it's hard to justify the cost for a lot of companies. my Lenovo is an i5 520M, 4GB RAM, 320GB hard drive and LED backlit LCD for $711.

our VP hates Microsoft but even at $1200 for a 13" MBP it's impossible to justify the cost over a Lenovo or Asus laptop

 

[dahren]

So, my old iMac just recently died on me and I'm left only with my iPad, so I guess I need a new desktop machine.

Now I'm not sure if I should wait or buy one of the current iMacs. If I would buy one, I would certainly choose the top of the line 27" i7 - so I guess that any upgrade that would come might not make such a huge difference in regards to the processor.

I'm just a bit concerned about the GPU - I do play games rather often, either under Mac OS X or even Win7 through Bootcamp - and I'm just not sure I want to buy a machine with such an old GPU - especially with the native resolution on the 27" being so high.

Now I might get along for a while with the iPad and my work Laptop - which I can take home on the weekend - but if the update comes in late October... that is a long time without a proper machine at home.

 

[/V\acpower]

So, my old iMac just recently died on me and I'm left only with my iPad, so I guess I need a new desktop machine.

Now I'm not sure if I should wait or buy one of the current iMacs. If I would buy one, I would certainly choose the top of the line 27" i7 - so I guess that any upgrade that would come might not make such a huge difference in regards to the processor.

I'm just a bit concerned about the GPU - I do play games rather often, either under Mac OS X or even Win7 through Bootcamp - and I'm just not sure I want to buy a machine with such an old GPU - especially with the native resolution on the 27" being so high.

Now I might get along for a while with the iPad and my work Laptop - which I can take home on the weekend - but if the update comes in late October... that is a long time without a proper machine at home.

I'm am in the same dilema about the GPU. 4850 is a old one. However, from what i've read around, the 5850 laptop GPU (that the iMac will probably get in the refresh) is not really that great of a leap from 4850. But still 4850 is quite old and 2560x1440 is a **** lot of pixels.

However, as a gamer, i've already accepted the fact that on the iMac 27' i'll have to play in a Window instead of fullscreen. And anyway since the screen is already huge, i don't really see that as a big problem. Its juste like having a 24' hi-res screen into a 27' ultra hi-res screen.

I mean, whatever Mobile GPU they will put in there, it will still be a Mobile GPU on a screen with way too many pixels and you will get signifantly better performance playing at lower resolution or from a Window.

 

[rotkiv]

In Lynnfields that is true, only i7 has HT but in Clarkdale, both i3 and i5 have it but i3 lacks Turbo (that's the difference between i3 and i5). In fact, all Westmeres excluding Celeron and Pentium versions (even lower than i3) have HT as most chips are dual core.

Intel naming system rocks, huh?

if all Clarkdale CPU have HT what is the difference between Clarkdale i5 and i7?

 

[bas-macfan]

I'm am in the same dilema about the GPU. 4850 is a old one. However, from what i've read around, the 5850 laptop GPU (that the iMac will probably get in the refresh) is not really that great of a leap from 4850. But still 4850 is quite old and 2560x1440 is a **** lot of pixels.

However, as a gamer, i've already accepted the fact that on the iMac 27' i'll have to play in a Window instead of fullscreen. And anyway since the screen is already huge, i don't really see that as a big problem. Its juste like having a 24' hi-res screen into a 27' ultra hi-res screen.

I mean, whatever Mobile GPU they will put in there, it will still be a Mobile GPU on a screen with way too many pixels and you will get signifantly better performance playing at lower resolution or from a Window.

I agree and that is why i bought my i5 yesterday. I was making myself mad! The current i5 has everything i want and need. It is a monster!!!
Hope you find peace in ordering your mac or just keep waiting

 

[peakchua]

i dont know 5850 with normal clocks +gddr5 + 1gb will benefit gaming on the 27 inch ( bigger screen uses vram) also, 20% higher clocks is possible (like the 5870)

 

[iMacmatician]

if all Clarkdale CPU have HT what is the difference between Clarkdale i5 and i7?

There aren't any Core i7 Clarkdales.

I'm am in the same dilema about the GPU. 4850 is a old one. However, from what i've read around, the 5850 laptop GPU (that the iMac will probably get in the refresh) is not really that great of a leap from 4850. But still 4850 is quite old and 2560x1440 is a **** lot of pixels.

We may be waiting a while for a significantly faster mobile ATI GPU.

The next lineup is rumored to come in two interleaved parts, one in Q3 2010 which appears to be a refresh of Evergreen GPUs, and the other in Q1 2011 which seems to be the upcoming Southern Islands GPUs.