24" iMac released

[p0lar]

Originally posted by: Eug
Education deals rock. I'm getting my video card upgrade for CAD$82.

Agreed, it's close to 10%, isn't it?

I was told today that mine is shipping on the 18th. Quite a lead time, but I don't mind as long as it's in by the end of that week. Have you found anyone who's gotten their hands on one yet for a review??

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: p0lar
Agreed, it's close to 10%, isn't it?

Yeah about that, although the discount is more for AppleCare so overall it's more than 11% off for my order.

I was told today that mine is shipping on the 18th. Quite a lead time, but I don't mind as long as it's in by the end of that week.

Mine says Sept. 15. I didn't pay for expedited shipping, but my guess is that my unit is coming from China, which means they'll send it FedEx Air or something anyway.

Have you found anyone who's gotten their hands on one yet for a review??

Benches

There's a reasonable improvement over Core Duo, although it's not huge clock-for-clock.

 

[Eug]

OK, I have no will power. I changed my order to the 2.33. I'm getting a bit of help paying for it through work though.

 

[Kaido]

Originally posted by: Eug
OK, I have no will power. I changed my order to the 2.33. I'm getting a bit of help paying for it through work though.

I want pics when it comes

 

[aphex]

So i went to the local apple store to check em out, none in stock yet. On a side note, i realized again how much i dislike going there. What is it about those stores that they always seem to hire idiots who think they know everything? I've had this happen at 2 apple stores now, the only one that everyone i ran into was knowledgable and nice was the London store.

I was looking at a 1.66 Core Duo Mini and one of the reps came over. Starts telling me how much faster it will be with more ram. Told him i already have 2gb of PC5300 sodimms ready and waiting to go and he proceeds to explain to me how i bought the wrong speed, that the mini will only work with 667mhz ram and pc5300 is significantly worse and he would be surprized if it even booted. After i attempted to explain they are indeed the same thing, he still didnt believe me so tried to look it up online at apple's site... I gave up trying to "educate" him after a minute and walked over to the macbooks.

As much as i love apple, their sales reps really are tools. At least learn the damn product you sell, first dang thing they instilled in us when i worked at CC...

On a side note, the macbook does look like a good deal right now..

$999 (student price)
Free iPod Nano (don't need sell for $120)
Free All-in-one Printer (don't need sell for $100)

Could be looking at a nice 1.83ghz dual core laptop for $780

 

[Eug]

Most of the guys I've come across at the Apple Store were pretty good, but then again, all I ever buy there is iPod stuff.

I get most of my Macs directly from the online website, cuz I config them to order and they don't have those combos in-store. Still, the few times I've been to an Apple Store to actually look at Macs I haven't gotten one that was that much of a tool. I've just had better luck I guess.

P.S. I've been looking at the 7600 GT benches. It's interesting to see on Windows that it's all over the map, and doesn't do so hot with Direct3D. However, it does extremely well with OpenGL. This should bode well for OS X, since its world revolves around OpenGL.

 

[Chadder007]

Originally posted by: Eug
Hmmm... It's a cheap upgrade to the 7600GT with 256 MB RAM, so that's a no-brainer.

However, it's $$$ to upgrade to the 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo. Probably not worth it.

Yeah but ....there aren't any games out much for the MAC so why even get the upgraded video card?

 

[aphex]

Originally posted by: Chadder007

Originally posted by: Eug
Hmmm... It's a cheap upgrade to the 7600GT with 256 MB RAM, so that's a no-brainer.

However, it's $$$ to upgrade to the 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo. Probably not worth it.

Yeah but ....there aren't any games out much for the MAC so why even get the upgraded video card?

Run em in XP?

 

[bX510]

Originally posted by: Baked

Originally posted by: DJCrunkMix
$$$$ for a crap desktop ? No thanks. I'd buy it if it does/have the following for its price:

X1900XTX
2 GB Ram
500 GB Hd
Can play games

Seriously, STFU if you haven't used or are using a Mac. It's very annoying when people talk out of their ass when they have zero clue.

lmao... pwned....

edit: you know, the other day.. i went to the faculty lounge to run an errand. Kids aren't allowed in there whatsoever, and i saw some of these computers in there! I was like WHAT! The school can afford these massive computers and can't afford paper? Our school is so ghetto, teachers rarely makes copies for us now because of the budget.

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: Chadder007

Originally posted by: Eug
Hmmm... It's a cheap upgrade to the 7600GT with 256 MB RAM, so that's a no-brainer.

However, it's $$$ to upgrade to the 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo. Probably not worth it.

Yeah but ....there aren't any games out much for the MAC so why even get the upgraded video card?

Well, if you're a gamer, you can install Windows for the less common games, or just run the Mac version. Most of the big popular games get ported.

However, OS X is also very heavily OpenGL intensive. Think sorta like Vista Aero Glass, but now. Also, I use Aperture. It's a 3D-accelerated image management & editing program. In essence, it's a "2D" image application that requires OpenGL and programmable shaders. It eats both CPU and GPU power for breakfast, leveraging Core Image to power its real-time but non-destructive photo editing functions.

On my G5 2.0 (single) with Radeon 9600 128 MB it's quite slow. I've tried it on a dual G5 2.0 with GeForce 6800 Ultra and it was much better. I suspect a Core 2 Duo 2.33 iMac with GeForce 7600 GT will be noticeably better than that dual G5 system I tried.

P.S. Despite it not being all that worth it over 2.16 GHz, I decided to go the 2.33 GHz upgrade route. It's only money.

 

[manly]

Originally posted by: aphex
So i went to the local apple store to check em out, none in stock yet. On a side note, i realized again how much i dislike going there. What is it about those stores that they always seem to hire idiots who think they know everything? I've had this happen at 2 apple stores now, the only one that everyone i ran into was knowledgable and nice was the London store.

I was looking at a 1.66 Core Duo Mini and one of the reps came over. Starts telling me how much faster it will be with more ram. Told him i already have 2gb of PC5300 sodimms ready and waiting to go and he proceeds to explain to me how i bought the wrong speed, that the mini will only work with 667mhz ram and pc5300 is significantly worse and he would be surprized if it even booted. After i attempted to explain they are indeed the same thing, he still didnt believe me so tried to look it up online at apple's site... I gave up trying to "educate" him after a minute and walked over to the macbooks.

As much as i love apple, their sales reps really are tools. At least learn the damn product you sell, first dang thing they instilled in us when i worked at CC...

On a side note, the macbook does look like a good deal right now..

$999 (student price)
Free iPod Nano (don't need sell for $120)
Free All-in-one Printer (don't need sell for $100)

Could be looking at a nice 1.83ghz dual core laptop for $780

New iPod nanos are coming soon, which should depress the price of the old ones a bit ($120 seems to be a low estimate unless you're already factoring in new models).

I generally don't even bother with clueless people, but if the rep was being an ass, I would have asked for his manager. If he was just dumb, then walking away is the right thing to do.

How well would Aperture do with Intel GMA 950 graphics?

 

[p0lar]

Originally posted by: Eug
P.S. Despite it not being all that worth it over 2.16 GHz, I decided to go the 2.33 GHz upgrade route. It's only money.

Yeah, they're saying it's not upgradeable; but, Apple also said the first core duo Mac Mini wasn't and it clearly was. If work's paying for it -- bonus!

I'm going to take mine to 2GB after I get it, but using other RAM. I'll either keep the 1G for diagnostics should something go wrong, or sell it for someone wanting to upgrade their laptop. The suspense is killing me, though. I don't care if I get mine soon or not, I just want SOMEONE to get one so we can get a closer look/dissection.

PICS or BAN for whoever gets it first!

 

[erikistired]

Originally posted by: Eug

Originally posted by: Chadder007

Originally posted by: Eug
Hmmm... It's a cheap upgrade to the 7600GT with 256 MB RAM, so that's a no-brainer.

However, it's $$$ to upgrade to the 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo. Probably not worth it.

Yeah but ....there aren't any games out much for the MAC so why even get the upgraded video card?

Well, if you're a gamer, you can install Windows for the less common games, or just run the Mac version. Most of the big popular games get ported.

However, OS X is also very heavily OpenGL intensive. Think sorta like Vista Aero Glass, but now. Also, I use Aperture. It's a 3D-accelerated image management & editing program. In essence, it's a "2D" image application that requires OpenGL and programmable shaders. It eats both CPU and GPU power for breakfast, leveraging Core Image to power its real-time but non-destructive photo editing functions.

On my G5 2.0 (single) with Radeon 9600 128 MB it's quite slow. I've tried it on a dual G5 2.0 with GeForce 6800 Ultra and it was much better. I suspect a Core 2 Duo 2.33 iMac with GeForce 7600 GT will be noticeably better than that dual G5 system I tried.

P.S. Despite it not being all that worth it over 2.16 GHz, I decided to go the 2.33 GHz upgrade route. It's only money.

that's what i like to hear eug! it's only money! now if i could get my wife to believe that i could replace my pc with a mac pro.

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: manly
How well would Aperture do with Intel GMA 950 graphics?

It works, but not great. The dual core does help it a lot though. My MacBook Core Duo 2.0 with GMA 950 is faster than my G5 iMac with Radeon 9600.

EDIT:

Re: My Core Image discussion above... Here are some benchmarks on PowerPC stuff of Core Image:

http://www.barefeats.com/image06/quad-ima.gif

Note that in this iMaginator test that the Quad G5 2.5 with 7800 GT is 3.7X as fast as the Quad 2.5 with 6600.

I'm thinking the new maxed out iMac will be as fast as or faster than the Dual G5 2.7 with GeForce 6800 Ultra.

 

[Eug]

It seems the 24" started shipping on Thursday/Friday. Some guy overseas got his last week and posted pix using his .Mac account, but I won't bother posting the link because his site has exceeded his bandwidth allotment. I guess a lot of people were interested in seeing what the 24" looks like.

Mine still slated for Sept. 15 shipment.

P.S. I visited the Toronto Eaton Centre Apple Store yesterday and they don't have the 24" yet either.

 

[secretanchitman]

Originally posted by: Eug

Originally posted by: manly
How well would Aperture do with Intel GMA 950 graphics?

It works, but not great. The dual core does help it a lot though. My MacBook Core Duo 2.0 with GMA 950 is faster than my G5 iMac with Radeon 9600.

EDIT:

Re: My Core Image discussion above... Here are some benchmarks on PowerPC stuff of Core Image:

http://www.barefeats.com/image06/quad-ima.gif

Note that in this iMaginator test that the Quad G5 2.5 with 7800 GT is 3.7X as fast as the Quad 2.5 with 6600.

I'm thinking the new maxed out iMac will be as fast as or faster than the Dual G5 2.7 with GeForce 6800 Ultra.

intel gma 950 was faster than a G5 with 9600? hmm...i would think its the opposite even though the G5 is inferior to any intel processor that apple has now. 9600 pwns the gma in basically any 3d task...

 

[manly]

Originally posted by: secretanchitman

Originally posted by: Eug

Originally posted by: manly
How well would Aperture do with Intel GMA 950 graphics?

It works, but not great. The dual core does help it a lot though. My MacBook Core Duo 2.0 with GMA 950 is faster than my G5 iMac with Radeon 9600.

EDIT:

Re: My Core Image discussion above... Here are some benchmarks on PowerPC stuff of Core Image:

http://www.barefeats.com/image06/quad-ima.gif

Note that in this iMaginator test that the Quad G5 2.5 with 7800 GT is 3.7X as fast as the Quad 2.5 with 6600.

I'm thinking the new maxed out iMac will be as fast as or faster than the Dual G5 2.7 with GeForce 6800 Ultra.

intel gma 950 was faster than a G5 with 9600? hmm...i would think its the opposite even though the G5 is inferior to any intel processor that apple has now. 9600 pwns the gma in basically any 3d task...

We're talking about Aperture, not the latest FPS. AT forums members love to hate on Intel GMA 950 graphics, but it (probably) ships on a majority of the Core Duo platform and it really isn't that bad.

 

[Eug]

Here is a pic of the 24" iMac compared to the 17" and the 20".

Originally posted by: manly

Originally posted by: secretanchitman
intel gma 950 was faster than a G5 with 9600? hmm...i would think its the opposite even though the G5 is inferior to any intel processor that apple has now. 9600 pwns the gma in basically any 3d task...

We're talking about Aperture, not the latest FPS. AT forums members love to hate on Intel GMA 950 graphics, but it (probably) ships on a majority of the Core Duo platform and it really isn't that bad.

While Aperture is a 3D app, it's still VERY heavily dependent on CPU performance. One big reason for this is the fact that RAW conversions are 100% CPU I believe.

 

[Zebo]

Too bad they did'nt use thier 23" IPS panel but samsung PVA... I'd definity check it out before ordering sight unseen or get the 20"

 

[Eug]

I ordered it sight unseen. Initial reports though are that it's not 100% perfectly even, but better than most, with good colours, viewing angle, and contrast.

How do you know it's Samsung PVA? Are they the only makers of 24" 1920x1200 screens? And isn't PVA supposed to be a little better in the colour dept, esp. for blacks? Or are you more concerned with response time? Cuz if so, gaming is not a major concern for me.

My current iMac is a 20" LG-Philips which I guess makes it an IPS. I like the screen, but the blacks aren't the greatest in the world.

EDIT:

The new 20" is listed at 800:1.
The new 24" is listed at 700:1.

Hmmm...

 

[imported_goku]

I can't believe people are bickering about specs, what happened to the thread crapping about how pcs are better than macs?

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Eug
I ordered it sight unseen. Initial reports though are that it's not 100% perfectly even, but better than most, with good colours, viewing angle, and contrast.

How do you know it's Samsung PVA? Are they the only makers of 24" 1920x1200 screens? And isn't PVA supposed to be a little better in the colour dept, esp. for blacks? Or are you more concerned with response time? Cuz if so, gaming is not a major concern for me.

My current iMac is a 20" LG-Philips which I guess makes it an IPS. I like the screen, but the blacks aren't the greatest in the world.

EDIT:

The new 20" is listed at 800:1.
The new 24" is listed at 700:1.

Hmmm...

I'll be interested in your side by side review..Apple always used IPS before in thier desktop displays for it's superior color and veiwagles..There is no 24" IPS... As far as samsung I read it on macrumors.com but can't find it now. Yes there are other makers of 24" displays but knowing apple they'd use the best which is samsungs in that size.

 

[L00ker]

Originally posted by: ultimatebob
One thing that I find amusing is that the Apple commercials are always saying that "Macs are sooo much greater than PC's!", when in reality this thing IS a PC. For the most part, it's using stock PC and laptop parts, and it can run Windows just like one of those evvvillll PC's can.

Of course, "Buy a Mac, it's a PC in a prettier case with a different operating system!" probably doesn't make for a very good advertisement.

This is the ONLY Mac to use an intel processor set, I am not sure as to why (and I don't think anyone here can really say for certain) they made this jump but previously if you were to do raw benchmarks between similar spec systems the Mac machines would blow the Intel's out of the water, just in raw computing power. One of the key reasons for mac's being faster is they (at one point I am not terribly current on most recent models) had only a 2x multiplier between the bus and proc i.e. proc running at 1.8GHz would = 900MHz FSB basically where we (in the intel community) are just now starting to get into that range with the 800-1066 mhz bus speeds, apple was running an 800MHz bus on their G3's I believe which was a 1:1 proc/bus before they went to a 1:2 (1 processor clock to 2 bus clock cycles yeilding the 1/2 proc speed = bus speed). Now I think they are just going to focus on selling their OS which IMO if you want an OS taht just works and you don't have to tinker with OSX is the way to go, Windows will always be a much more maintenance intensive OS. As far as hardware Apple in the past has always been VERY selective about their hardware which is why the mac clone thing never lasted because apple does build top notch systems and cheap clones only gave them a bad name.... but thats a relatively brief look at why apple used to be able to claim they were faster than intel...

 

[Alex]

the specs are definitely mouth wattering!

my bro got the latest and greatest imac before this one came out.... all maxed out except for the video card which is a mobility x1600 or something with 256mb... i admit its a beautiful looking setup but if i had one of those i'd swap in a normal usb keyboard and mouse and use only wxp on it!

i just dont like or need osx but my bro likes it just fine! different strokes for different folks i guess

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: Eug
I ordered it sight unseen. Initial reports though are that it's not 100% perfectly even, but better than most, with good colours, viewing angle, and contrast.

How do you know it's Samsung PVA? Are they the only makers of 24" 1920x1200 screens? And isn't PVA supposed to be a little better in the colour dept, esp. for blacks? Or are you more concerned with response time? Cuz if so, gaming is not a major concern for me.

My current iMac is a 20" LG-Philips which I guess makes it an IPS. I like the screen, but the blacks aren't the greatest in the world.

EDIT:

The new 20" is listed at 800:1.
The new 24" is listed at 700:1.

Hmmm...

I'll be interested in your side by side review..Apple always used IPS before in thier desktop displays for it's superior color and veiwagles..There is no 24" IPS... As far as samsung I read it on macrumors.com but can't find it now. Yes there are other makers of 24" displays but knowing apple they'd use the best which is samsungs in that size.

OK, but my panel is a bit of an older one, considering I have the G5 iMac from May 2005.

P.S. My iMac has shipped. I hope to get it by Friday, but Apple is predicting I won't get it until after that.