Thoughts on Possible 30" iMac???

[sth]

A 30" iMac (2560x1600 resolution) with a Xeon E3-1280, ECC-RAM and a GPU in the performance range of a gtx560ti would be an absolute dream machine, as long as it's still cheaper than an equivalent Mac Pro + Display.

But it wouldn't make much sense for Apple to build such a thing because it would be an absolute niche product and it would probably cut too much into Mac Pro sales as well.

Anyway, I'd be happy with a 27" iMac with an i7-2600K, which is the much more realistic assumption. I just hope that we'll see faster graphics than in the current model (which isn't bad but the graphics cards usually become a limiting factor much sooner than the CPUs when it comes to gaming).

 

[MacHamster68]

the iMac was never meant to be a gaming rig and Mac's are always a year behind the rest when it comes to GPU's if you are lucky
but i quiet like the idea of the 30" and 2560x1600 display ..hang on did not the old 30" cinema display had this resolution too , and wasn't it matte
so the solution seems simple why wait for something that never comes again (a non gloss iMac and 16/10 )
just get a new mini or a MacPro and a old cinema display 30" or just place the old cinema display in front of the new iMac, problem sorted

 

[sth]

The problem with the Mac Pro is that many people just don't have the need for a dual-CPU machine (and the price tag that comes with it).

For the price of a base Mac Pro (without a display) you can get a well spec'ed 27" iMac that not only comes with a great screen but will also outperform it.

 

[MacHamster68]

i know that , the problem is only that the iMac is still not powerful for a lot of gamers expectations , but apple never intended the iMac for gamers only , and the majority are happy with the GPU's on offer
i mean its a all in one computer , so is meant for all kind of users and always has to be a compromise in one way or the other , so most hardcore gamers will lose out like some like me who would be happy about the most basic iMac ,but cant see a point looking in a mirror on the desk or making the room dark as a cave to appreciate the better picture quality

 

[sth]

I'm not talking about using an iMac as a hardcore gaming rig. It would just be nice to have slightly more future-proof graphics on a $2000+ computer, at least as a BTO option.

Anyway, my 30" iMac wishlist above is just that: A wishlist. And as stated in that same post, I think that it's not going to happen.

And besides, the graphics solutions in the first two generations of the 27" iMac are actually not that bad.

 

[MacAlpha]

Not really interested in the 30". I am just hoping the next iMac has to external monitor ports. I find multiple monitors work better than one huge one. Three 24" would be perfect. Three 27" is getting a bit crazy as it is.

 

[iSayuSay]

Anyway, I'd be happy with a 27" iMac with an i7-2600K, which is the much more realistic assumption. I just hope that we'll see faster graphics than in the current model (which isn't bad but the graphics cards usually become a limiting factor much sooner than the CPUs when it comes to gaming).

No way Apple using overclockable processor with iMac, unless they want a misdirected person who doesn't used to be tech savvy unintendedly overclock the processor and toast it

That's gonna happen (A LOT) when you put a standard cooler on overclocked processor, which means Apple warranty service will be very busy with 2011 iMac

 

[sth]

No way Apple using overclockable processor with iMac, unless they want a misdirected person who doesn't used to be tech savvy unintendedly overclock the processor and toast it

That's gonna happen (A LOT) when you put a standard cooler on overclocked processor, which means Apple warranty service will be very busy with 2011 iMac

Errr... what makes the i7-2600K more overclockable than the other desktop CPUs in recent iMacs and how do you unintendendly overclock a CPU?

 

[zap2]

Seems like back in the day 30'' was Pro grade stuff(at least with the resolution Apple sold it with)

But I could seem them doing this in the semi-near future, but at a certain point, I think they will need to focus more on the resolution then size, 30'' is starting to get a little big. Who knows they might just focus on the resolution with the 27'', they have been focusing on making OS X resolution independence with Lion(which is good, because they have been talking about it for quite a while.

Honestly, I think there is a market for the 17'' model, school and what not. If you could get the Mac Mini back down to the price it was introduced at(or lower...and these seems do able since they will, I presume, be using Intel graphic solution), they would be room for a 899 iMac.

Or you know, go my a 899 headless Mac since they Mini is losing the separate graphics card.

 

[sth]

30'' is starting to get a little big.

Same width as the 27", just a little bit higher because of the different aspect ratio (16:10 vs. 16:9).

Who knows they might just focus on the resolution with the 27'', they have been focusing on making OS X resolution independence with Lion(which is good, because they have been talking about it for quite a while.

Not in a way that will make sense for the iMac in the near future.

If you could get the Mac Mini back down to the price it was introduced at[...]

That would be really nice. The current Mini is a nice little machine but it's just way too expensive for what it is. Probably the worst bang-for-your-buck Mac in Apple's lineup.

 

[CHSeifert]

Errr... what makes the i7-2600K more overclockable than the other desktop CPUs in recent iMacs and how do you unintendendly overclock a CPU?

The K models of the new Intel Sandy bridge CPU's have a direct function that makes it very easy to overclock the CPU's compared to the NON K models.

Intel made the K models directly aimed at overclockers - that's why

 

[sth]

The K models of the new Intel Sandy bridge CPU's have a direct function that makes it very easy to overclock the CPU's compared to the NON K models.

Intel made the K models directly aimed at overclockers - that's why

Okay, make that 2600 without the K ;-) I thought the 3.4ghz model was only available under the "K" designation, but apparently it isn't.

 

[Shivetya]

I would much prefer a smaller Mac Pro tower. The problems I see with a thirty inch iMac are, weight and packaging. Mainly, how are you going to get it home without a SUV or hatch back car? My 27 would not even fit in my Miata, it fits fine in the Golf.

The weight on the desk might be a concern to those of us with glass desks, they don't have high weight limits in most cases and I doubt I would want to move this beast around much.

Then comes in viewing distance. How far away will be good enough to keep you from tennis style use?

 

[I AM THE MAN]

I never understood why they moved away from the 24. 21 is too small nowadays. I love the 27 but would definitely by a 30.

I agree. I wish Apple would replace the 21 inch with the 24inch and leave the 27inch.

 

[I AM THE MAN]

Anyone think this is a possibility? I am hoping for it but dont think it will happen. Either way I am getting a new iMac with the next refresh. Anyone else patiently (HAHHAH) waiting?

I don't think that will be happening this year at the least.