[DaveyJJ]

I say new mini and possibly iMac.

And per rumours, possibly Airport Extreme and Time Capsule updates, maybe.

EDIT ... POSTED SPECS ALREADY for new iMacs. Apple's already beaten me. And Mac Pro and mini.

[iEvan]

Here's hoping they release just a ATI Radeon HD 4870 upgrade kit down the line so I can pay through the nose to upgrade

[Janichsan]

Hm, I would have expected some bigger changes from the mini update, like a new casing. The specs aren't too shabby, though. Especially since it got FW 800.

The choices for the GPU in the 24" iMac sound nice: Nvidia GT 120 or GT 130 or ATI HD 4850? Woah. Especially since the latter two are pretty powerful as far as I know.

The new Mac Pro doesn't look very revolutionary, either. But the ATI HD 4870 probably rocks.

[iEvan]

I would have thought the same on the Mini as well... something along the lines of using their new lazer cutting process to slim the case down and make it look a little fresher. I'm sure that will come down the pipe at some point. Shame that the new iMacs didn't have an anti-glare option either.

[Ranger_Joe]

Quad core Mac Pro? Sexy.
http://www.apple.com...erformance.html

[teflon]

Yeah, but at the same time its the entry model, they dont really want it to sell that well, when they make much more money on the iMac. In fact, its already at quite a low price point and the upgrade will have cut quite heavily into their profit margins.

On the whole its quite a big release day for Apple and I think that what theyve released is pretty interesting/exciting if not fantastic or too unexpected. For me, Im pretty intrigued by the dual band Airport Extreme. Just a shame about the price really...

tBC, looks like its time for you to pony up the cash for the latest Mac Pro revision eh?

[the Battle Cat]

teflon, on March 3rd 2009, 07:01 AM, said:

tBC, looks like its time for you to pony up the cash for the latest Mac Pro revision eh?

Is this the one you were telling me I was supposed to wait for? The one with the new process that produces superfine doomafletchies or somptin?

[DaveyJJ]

If I had the need and the cash for a Pro, that dual quad core is the one to buy. Wow, that'd be a blazing machine.

[jackdawsson]

I wish I could say: great updates without reservation, but I'd be lying if one takes into account the ridiculous UK price increases (notwithstanding the falling value of sterling) & that some of the iMac updates seem so minor as to barely warrant ANY price increases. Likewise the Minis. The updates seem okay, but then why only 1GB RAM in the low-end Mini & £649 for the high-end one? Really, quite ridiculous & I expect recently falling Mac desktop sales to continue falling for a long time to come. Also, not very good for Mac game developers. All in all, I'm fairly disappointed.

[iEvan]

Huzzah, the ATI Radeon HD 4870 Graphics Upgrade Kit for Mac Pro was released. To top if off it works in both the Early 2009 or Early 2008 Mac Pro models. No ship date or price however :-(

[teflon]

the Battle Cat, on March 3rd 2009, 03:16 PM, said:

Is this the one you were telling me I was supposed to wait for? The one with the new process that produces superfine doomafletchies or somptin?

um yeah... something like that...

Apple took their time getting here, but they've now stuck Nehalem CPUs in there (pay attention to the clock speeds though, in the base configs its 1 quad core at 2.66Ghz or 2 quad cores at 2.26Ghz, and then $1,400 to get up to 2 quad cores at 2.66Ghz), with on board memory controllers. And its easier to get to the RAM slots (should you bother to try).
Oh and were back "up to date" with the GPUs, now that we can have a 4870 in there (sadly no 4870 x2, and still no SLI, and both NV and ATI have got new cards coming out around now too).

Anyway, the next big architecture switch out for Intel wont happen for a couple of years, so its either now or at the next revision, which will likely just be a quick CPU update. Of course, being a new Logic Board, you might be a bit wary of it (I know you like waiting for a b or c rev)...

so it all comes back down to you.

[jackdawsson]

I see that both the 20" iMac & low-end 24" iMac now have the 9400M video. Surely this is a retrograde step from the HD 2600 it replaces? Definitely not a good deal (nor good for gaming) after the latest price increases.

[iEvan]

Well tBC, you can always buy my previous generation Mac Pro while I enjoy the tasty benefits of the latest generation :-P

[the Battle Cat]

teflon, on March 3rd 2009, 08:06 AM, said:

um yeah... something like that...

Apple took their time getting here, but they've now stuck Nehalem CPUs in there (pay attention to the clock speeds though, in the base configs its 1 quad core at 2.66Ghz or 2 quad cores at 2.26Ghz, and then $1,400 to get up to 2 quad cores at 2.66Ghz), with on board memory controllers. And its easier to get to the RAM slots (should you bother to try).
Oh and were back "up to date" with the GPUs, now that we can have a 4870 in there (sadly no 4870 x2, and still no SLI, and both NV and ATI have got new cards coming out around now too).

Anyway, the next big architecture switch out for Intel wont happen for a couple of years, so its either now or at the next revision, which will likely just be a quick CPU update. Of course, being a new Logic Board, you might be a bit wary of it (I know you like waiting for a b or c rev)...

so it all comes back down to you.

Yes, the Nehalem CPU. That's what I was trying to remember. Finally! Now I don't know what to do, scarf it up or wait for revision b... I think I'll wait a couple months to hear if there are any horror stories. If folks are happy with it then I don't need to wait for revision b. Oh boy oh boy.

iEvan, on March 3rd 2009, 08:29 AM, said:

Well tBC, you can always buy my previous generation Mac Pro while I enjoy the tasty benefits of the latest generation :-P

That is very kind and generous of you and I hope you'll understand if I say "Sod off thou yeasty hedge-born pignut!"

[teflon]

Yup, give it a month or so to let the dust settle then see if theyre still standing. After all, the Xeons are brand new from intel too.
You could also try and hang on until 10.6 is out and enjoy that bundle of goodness (except you might want to give it a similar wide bearth for a couple of months).

if it was me, though, Id jump in feet first. Ive always got my old machine as a backup and if theres any major issues Id just ship it back to Apple to get sorted.

[Greg Gant]

I'd like to see a real world performance shoot out between the previous 8 core Mac Pro entry vs the 4 core. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that the difference isn't the greatest, especially for codec mashing.

RobArt, I hope your finger is on the buy button....


As far as the ATI Radeon 4870, I was stoked on buying it and then realized, "Hey wait, I don't play games on my Mac!" I can't even boot Windows currently as my four internals are wrapped up into my RAID 1+0 volume, and the internal hidden SATA ports aren't Windows bootable (However you can force boot OS X off then by the option key) and my eSATA card isn't bootable.

[ltcommander.data]

jackdawsson, on March 3rd 2009, 11:22 AM, said:

I see that both the 20" iMac & low-end 24" iMac now have the 9400M video. Surely this is a retrograde step from the HD 2600 it replaces? Definitely not a good deal (nor good for gaming) after the latest price increases.

From a gamer's perspective, this round of refreshes were a disappointment. The headline news? The Mac Pro no longer has a high-end GPU option. ATI has lowered the price of the 512MB HD4870 to $149. It's a mid-range GPU. The GT120 is a rebranded 9500GT which was a rebranded 8600GT. It retails for about $60 now. What's more Apple is charging $200 to upgrade from the GT120 to HD4870. The entire HD4870 is only worth $150 so Apple is making $100+ pure profit from a $150 GPU by charging the equivalent of $260 for it.

For the iMacs, the 9400M should be a downgrade from the HD2600Pro. I don't even know why Apple bothers offering both the GT120 and the GT130. Especially with the mid-range 24" iMac having options for the GT120, GT130, and HD4850. They are complicating their supply chain too much. With only $50 between the GT130 and HD4850, Apple should have just stuck with the HD4850 and either absorb the cost or adjust the price accordingly. If they are charging $50 for the GT130 to HD4850 upgrade, the price they pay would be lower anyways. I bet the GT130 was only included to satisfy nVidia.

The only thing that worked out well is the Mac Mini getting a 9400M and DDR3 unlike the White MacBook whose IGP is more bandwidth limited by DDR2.

[Janichsan]

Just read that elsewhere: the 15" MBP also got a minor speedbump. The middle model got an 2.66 GHz CPU by default or optionally a 2.93 GHz one (before, it was 2.53 and 2.8 GHz). But no optional matte screen. Blast.

[PeopleLikeFrank]

ltcommander.data, on March 3rd 2009, 12:38 PM, said:

From a gamer's perspective, this round of refreshes were a disappointment. The headline news? The Mac Pro no longer has a high-end GPU option. ATI has lowered the price of the 512MB HD4870 to $149. It's a mid-range GPU. The GT120 is a rebranded 9500GT which was a rebranded 8600GT. It retails for about $60 now. What's more Apple is charging $200 to upgrade from the GT120 to HD4870. The entire HD4870 is only worth $150 so Apple is making $100+ pure profit from a $150 GPU by charging the equivalent of $260 for it.

This is 100% standard from Apple though. The 8800GT wasn't the high-end card when it came out either (on the PC side). By the time Apple introduced it, new lineups from ATI & Nvidia were both around the corner, and the price they charged was far above what the same card would sell for retail.

But really, the 4870 is still above "mid-range" - it sits around the same point as the GTX 260, which is a performance part. It's just not the highest of high-end, and honestly, there's not been any indication that Apple has any interest in offering those sorts of parts. It's been gone over before, but this forum really doesn't represent the majority of buyers, and cards like the 4870x2 are really niche. If apple did introduce something like that, they'd charge in the region of $700-800. (MSRP at the time of original PC launch, plus a good 20% or so.)

[ltcommander.data]

nobody, on March 3rd 2009, 01:05 PM, said:

This is 100% standard from Apple though. The 8800GT wasn't the high-end card when it came out either (on the PC side). By the time Apple introduced it, new lineups from ATI & Nvidia were both around the corner, and the price they charged was far above what the same card would sell for retail.

But really, the 4870 is still above "mid-range" - it sits around the same point as the GTX 260, which is a performance part. It's just not the highest of high-end, and honestly, there's not been any indication that Apple has any interest in offering those sorts of parts. It's been gone over before, but this forum really doesn't represent the majority of buyers, and cards like the 4870x2 are really niche. If apple did introduce something like that, they'd charge in the region of $700-800. (MSRP at the time of original PC launch, plus a good 20% or so.)

I'm pretty sure that at the time of release the 8800GT was a performance part in the $250 price segment. The HD4870 is decidedly mid-range at $150. Apple could have at least went with the 1G HD4870. With 9 months to 1 year between product updates, at $150 will look very dated very quickly, while a $250 like the 8800GT on release is still fairly mid-range after a year. It'd be nice if Apple offered a GTX285 as a high-end option if they don't want to bother with Crossfire and SLI for the HD 4870 X2 or GTX295.