Jump to content


New iMac


  • Please log in to reply
75 replies to this topic

#61 teflon

teflon

    Bastard of the Popeye Analogy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9589 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 08 August 2007 - 01:50 PM

not significantly, seeing as the resolution is quite similar between the 1440x900 and 1680x1050... i say quite similar. But there would be a slight drop in older games, and a bigger drop in newer games.

and yes mobile cards arent as powerful as their desktop counterparts, but the 8600M GT is still pretty capable.

finally, dont bother upgrading. the mid range 8 series and the HD series cards arent anything to call home about. Youd be best waiting for the second gen of DX10 cards before upgrading.

as an aside, if finally understand the purpose of the big black border. it makes the screen look so much bigger
Polytetrafluoroethylene to my friends.

Macbook Pro - C2D 2.4Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Geforce 8600M GT 256Mb / 15.4"
Cube - G4 1.7Ghz 7448 / 1.5GB RAM / Samsung Spinpoint 250GB / Geforce 6200 256Mb
Self-built PC - C2Q Q8300 2.5Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Radeon 7850 OC 1GB / W7 x64
and a beautiful HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS monitor

#62 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3318 posts
  • Steam Name:Tetsu Jutsu
  • Steam ID:smoke_tetsu
  • Location:Cyberspace

Posted 08 August 2007 - 04:03 PM

View Postteflon, on August 8th 2007, 01:50 PM, said:

as an aside, if finally understand the purpose of the big black border. it makes the screen look so much bigger
It also hides the iSight in most pics I have seen of it.

View Postteamturbo_2000, on August 8th 2007, 01:07 PM, said:

Side note about the mini- WTF can't they put at least the X1400 - X1600 into it?  Both of these cards are absolutely terrible and I'm sure fairly cheap so they wouldn't cannibalize the other Mac computers.  In the PC world, these are fairly standard cards for a $650 computer.  Get your act together Apple.
I agree.. even the AppleTV has a GeForce 7300GO.. so what's the deal? :unsure:
--Tetsuo

Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:

It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.

the Battle Cat said:

Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?

Late 2012 27 inch iMac, Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB, 3TB HDD - Mavericks

Late 2009 27 inch iMac, Core i5 2.6GHz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB, 1TB HDD - Mavericks

Mac Mini, PowerPC G4 1.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9200 32MB, 256GB HDD - Leopard

Dell Inspiron 1200 Notebook: 1.2GHz Celeron, 1.2GB RAM, Intel GMA915, 75GB HDD - Ubuntu

Generic Black Tower PC, Dual Core 64-bit 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9600 GT 512MB - Windows 7


#63 jackdawsson

jackdawsson

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 616 posts
  • Location:UK, The 51st State.

Posted 08 August 2007 - 04:17 PM

Very disappointing overall!  Making laptops as thin a possible has obvious benefits, but doing so with AIO desktops is a triumph of style over substance & surely limits the kind of video cards you can put in there.  You pretty much end up with a laptop without the portability of a laptop. Where's the benefit?  Also, the black frame reminds me of the design of certain cheap LCD TVs.  

I'm buying a new desktop within the next few weeks...I'll definitely not be buying one of these new iMacs.

#64 Homy

Homy

    Notorious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 159 posts
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 08 August 2007 - 06:18 PM

Take a look at this if you're not happy with Apple's choice of GPU: http://www.insidemac.......st&p=321879

#65 Hoxtongue

Hoxtongue

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts
  • Location:Anywhere

Posted 08 August 2007 - 07:59 PM

Hmm well as much as they may be a waste of money, I'm going to wait for Leopard to come standard and buy myself the highest end Imac, I've got some money to waste and staring at a 15 inch MBP screen isnt my thing :P I honestly have no beef with it's looks, I think the chin is kind of "unique" for lack of a better word and the new colours arent bad either.

#66 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3318 posts
  • Steam Name:Tetsu Jutsu
  • Steam ID:smoke_tetsu
  • Location:Cyberspace

Posted 08 August 2007 - 10:37 PM

You're better off getting a Mac Pro or a Macbook Pro for that much.
--Tetsuo

Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:

It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.

the Battle Cat said:

Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?

Late 2012 27 inch iMac, Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB, 3TB HDD - Mavericks

Late 2009 27 inch iMac, Core i5 2.6GHz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB, 1TB HDD - Mavericks

Mac Mini, PowerPC G4 1.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9200 32MB, 256GB HDD - Leopard

Dell Inspiron 1200 Notebook: 1.2GHz Celeron, 1.2GB RAM, Intel GMA915, 75GB HDD - Ubuntu

Generic Black Tower PC, Dual Core 64-bit 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9600 GT 512MB - Windows 7


#67 cleansanchez

cleansanchez

    Notorious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 185 posts
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 08 August 2007 - 10:59 PM

View PostMacFly, on August 8th 2007, 04:21 PM, said:

Wow, I was really dreading this update, since I bought a 24incher back in February. The thought of being bypassed with cheaper, better tech is depressing, but inevitable. While this is just horrible news for future imac gamers, I can’t help but feel much better about my NVidia 7600 graphics card that I opted for. :happy:

My main purpose for getting the 24incher was that the graphics card can be removed. I was gambling that future imacs might have the same capability and I would be able to replace mine later on when better cards are available. Does anyone know if the new imacs have this capability?


Are u sure that the graphics card can be removed in your model. Plus I certainly don't know about the current (new) ones. I had thought that the two BIG disadvantages of the iMac has ALWAYS been that the graphics and cpu are not upgradable. The only option being to max out build to order options at time of ordering.

#68 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3318 posts
  • Steam Name:Tetsu Jutsu
  • Steam ID:smoke_tetsu
  • Location:Cyberspace

Posted 09 August 2007 - 03:53 AM

The 24 inch iMacs have\had MXM Modules but who knows if you can find compatible modules to replace the one in there with. They are not exactly standard and it is difficult to get to. It also has firmware issues just like the Mac Pros. Meaning you can't just use any graphics card with OS X. It has to be compatible with EFI.
--Tetsuo

Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:

It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.

the Battle Cat said:

Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?

Late 2012 27 inch iMac, Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB, 3TB HDD - Mavericks

Late 2009 27 inch iMac, Core i5 2.6GHz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB, 1TB HDD - Mavericks

Mac Mini, PowerPC G4 1.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9200 32MB, 256GB HDD - Leopard

Dell Inspiron 1200 Notebook: 1.2GHz Celeron, 1.2GB RAM, Intel GMA915, 75GB HDD - Ubuntu

Generic Black Tower PC, Dual Core 64-bit 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9600 GT 512MB - Windows 7


#69 cleansanchez

cleansanchez

    Notorious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 185 posts
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 09 August 2007 - 07:27 AM

Yes, I did some research Smoke Tetsu. The MXM is deliberately non-standard. No known OEM suppliers. No suggestion of anything being developed.

But in theory at least it will be possible to upgrade. Hey, the cube has been supported so maybe the "MXM" iMacs will eventually attract upgrade suppliers.

There are a trickle of iMacs on eBay in Australia at the moment but nothing to get excited about just yet. I am really low on $$$ and with three computers to buy for my family I am really desperate. I cannot honestly plead to the wife that the new iMacs are, like, revolutionary. Just a bit faster cpu, shiny, and arguably slower gpu.

Plus I just know I'll have the extra cost of anti-glare screens too. LOL. We can only guess that the people at Belkin have already designed a clip on model.

#70 MacFly

MacFly

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 44 posts
  • Location:Little Rock, Arkansas

Posted 09 August 2007 - 08:35 AM

View PostSmoke_Tetsu, on August 9th 2007, 02:53 AM, said:

The 24 inch iMacs have\had MXM Modules but who knows if you can find compatible modules to replace the one in there with. They are not exactly standard and it is difficult to get to. It also has firmware issues just like the Mac Pros. Meaning you can't just use any graphics card with OS X. It has to be compatible with EFI.

Thanks, Smoke_Tetsu for the link. I was hoping Apple would keep using the MXM cards in future imacs so there would be a chance of upgrading later, but who knows?.
Crosses fingers.

#71 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3318 posts
  • Steam Name:Tetsu Jutsu
  • Steam ID:smoke_tetsu
  • Location:Cyberspace

Posted 09 August 2007 - 05:09 PM

View Postcleansanchez, on August 9th 2007, 07:27 AM, said:

Yes, I did some research Smoke Tetsu. The MXM is deliberately non-standard. No known OEM suppliers. No suggestion of anything being developed.

It seems that also a part of that is because each laptop developer makes their laptops differently enough that it's hard to make it standard and they are trying to work on that but it'll take time.
--Tetsuo

Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:

It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.

the Battle Cat said:

Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?

Late 2012 27 inch iMac, Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB, 3TB HDD - Mavericks

Late 2009 27 inch iMac, Core i5 2.6GHz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB, 1TB HDD - Mavericks

Mac Mini, PowerPC G4 1.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9200 32MB, 256GB HDD - Leopard

Dell Inspiron 1200 Notebook: 1.2GHz Celeron, 1.2GB RAM, Intel GMA915, 75GB HDD - Ubuntu

Generic Black Tower PC, Dual Core 64-bit 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9600 GT 512MB - Windows 7


#72 plokoonpma

plokoonpma

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 29 posts
  • Location:Panama, Central America

Posted 16 August 2007 - 03:40 AM

1. I wonder how many here really play "demanding games"
2. I wonder how many bougth, tested or compared in person the iMacs with 2.4ghz
3. I wonder how some people expect Apple to house so much power on an iMac with such a thin bezel.

really... come on..

beyond that, the new iMacs are fast,  way cheaper and does games very well. All the games I tossed at it ran flawlessly, good fps on multi player and crisp graphics, even at max settings.
Games that I ran so far: CoD /UO, CoD2, Doom 3, Raven Shield / Athena Sword, Raven Shield Vegas, Total Immersion Racing, Ghost Recon , GRAW, Halo, Rise of Nations, Command & Conquer / Zero Hour, GTR2, Colin Mcrae 05 to mention some.

screens and pics of iMac

Please dont flame a product that you haven't used it yet please, not everyone want to buy the ultimtte gaming machine, besides alienware its the one who rules that department, not Apple.

:lol:
iMac 20" 2.4 / 4gbs ram
eMac 1.42 / 2gbs ram
MBP 15" 2.4 / 4gbs ram
MacPro 8core 3ghz/ati x1900xt/9gbs ram

[a] FrOg
Game Ranger account: 135977

#73 teflon

teflon

    Bastard of the Popeye Analogy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9589 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 16 August 2007 - 04:22 AM

ok, demanding games include Supreme Commander with settings on full (my MBP cant handle this and i have to drop several settings). FEAR with settings on full. Lost Planet DX10 version any settings. GRAW 2, medium and above. Company of Heroes, settings on full.
thats all i can think of right of the top of my head, but ive played all of these, and FEAR is the only one that my MBP could manage at full settings with a good frame rate. For a brand new computer thats not so great. For a laptop its pretty good.
of all the games you mentioned, the old 20" iMacs could have played them well too, with the exception of CoD2 and GRAW. And i doubt that you managed to have those at full settings.

as for testing the computers, were quite happy to let other people do that for us and look at the numbers. Those numbers show quite clearly that the GPU in these machines is worse than what you could get previously.

and in answer to 3, ive always said that id rather have a slightly thicker machine with a better GPU. This could have been done even if it was only an option for the 24" machine, it could have been done very very easily, not compromised the style too much, and perhaps have allowed apple to make that chin a bit smaller. The new iMacs are very much style over substance when it comes to the GPU selection.

oh, and welcome to the forums ;)
Polytetrafluoroethylene to my friends.

Macbook Pro - C2D 2.4Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Geforce 8600M GT 256Mb / 15.4"
Cube - G4 1.7Ghz 7448 / 1.5GB RAM / Samsung Spinpoint 250GB / Geforce 6200 256Mb
Self-built PC - C2Q Q8300 2.5Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Radeon 7850 OC 1GB / W7 x64
and a beautiful HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS monitor

#74 plokoonpma

plokoonpma

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 29 posts
  • Location:Panama, Central America

Posted 16 August 2007 - 01:16 PM

Thanks for the welcome!

You are rigth on the settings, GRAW almost at full and CoD2 Mac too.
I see this machines as a good start for people that have PPC or first Intel Macs.
The CTO is great for those who can spend the extra money, I'm still hoping for a tower with desktop family quad Intel processors with the x16 PCIe and decent graphic cards options (8800GTS 768ram)    :lol:

And just wondering, its FEAR good, i ordered it but really didn't spent time looking for reviews, any comment on it will be nice.
iMac 20" 2.4 / 4gbs ram
eMac 1.42 / 2gbs ram
MBP 15" 2.4 / 4gbs ram
MacPro 8core 3ghz/ati x1900xt/9gbs ram

[a] FrOg
Game Ranger account: 135977

#75 Dark_Archon

Dark_Archon

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1792 posts
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 16 August 2007 - 01:40 PM

The gpu is worse than what you could get previously FOR MORE. The new high end 24" iMac might not compare to the old high end 24" iMac, but the new 20" one does compare favorably to the old 17" and 20" models. Although I agree, the 2600 Pro for the high end wasn't the right choice. They should have gone with a XT upgrade option instead.

Edit: Is the XT even available as a mobile GPU?

Edit2: There is, and apparently that is what the iMacs graphics card registers as in Windows.
Mac Pro 2.66 Ghz NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT 7 GB RAM SONY DW-D150A SuperDrive

#76 teflon

teflon

    Bastard of the Popeye Analogy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9589 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 16 August 2007 - 03:37 PM

fear is a very well executed game. you might cringe at the number of horror clichés in there, and its not scary (though it will make you jump a few times). Its definitely a good game though, and well worth the money.

hmmm... if the 24"s GPU is an XT (which is literally just a higher clocked Pro, and with faster VRAM (GDDR3 instead of DDR2)), then i might forgive apple a tiny amount. But if its the mobility version, then no chance.
the XT clocks at 800Mhz, the Pro at 600Mhz. whos up for testing?
and then, whos up for overclocking?
Polytetrafluoroethylene to my friends.

Macbook Pro - C2D 2.4Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Geforce 8600M GT 256Mb / 15.4"
Cube - G4 1.7Ghz 7448 / 1.5GB RAM / Samsung Spinpoint 250GB / Geforce 6200 256Mb
Self-built PC - C2Q Q8300 2.5Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Radeon 7850 OC 1GB / W7 x64
and a beautiful HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS monitor