24" iMac released

[p0lar]

Originally posted by: L00ker
This is the ONLY Mac to use an intel processor set

Which model doesn't use an Intel CPU?

 

[L00ker]

Anything other than a Mac Pro, all the Power Mac's were motorola PPC60x (603, 604, 604e's) then the G series started with a newer design the PPC750 Series of processors (In the G3's) which is when the Mac's became known as faster than their intel counterparts at the same clocks the next step up was the PPC7400 which is when it becamse a collaborative effort between apple motorola and ibm whereas before it was apple and motorola, continued on to the G5 which was the last of the PPC based chips with the PPC970 which would be pretty much the same as a northwood core? as it's a 130nm processor and the new Pro is an intel dual core xeon (merom) not quite the same as a conroe but a powerful setup none the less...

 

[p0lar]

Originally posted by: L00ker
Anything other than a Mac Pro, all the Power Mac's were motorola PPC60x (603, 604, 604e's) then the G series started with a newer design the PPC750 Series of processors (In the G3's) which is when the Mac's became known as faster than their intel counterparts at the same clocks the next step up was the PPC7400 which is when it becamse a collaborative effort between apple motorola and ibm whereas before it was apple and motorola, continued on to the G5 which was the last of the PPC based chips with the PPC970 which would be pretty much the same as a northwood core? as it's a 130nm processor and the new Pro is an intel dual core xeon (merom) not quite the same as a conroe but a powerful setup none the less...

Merom is not a dual core Xeon, it is the mobile variant of the Core 2 Duo (aka Conroe). As well, the PPC970 was nowhere near the same architecture as an Intel Northwood, what's your source of information for such gibberish?

And Ill requote you:

This is the ONLY Mac to use an intel processor set

Either correct your tense or change your statement, you're spewing disinformation into a public forum.

www.apple.com -- from what I can discern about their products (Desktop/Laptop/Workstation), everything there is Intel-based. The rest of this drivel concerning performance is subjective and was never substantiated by anyone but Apple, who are certainly not known for objective benchmarks regarding their own equipment.

On an unrelated note, my iMac has shipped as well.

 

[bluemax]

Downright sexy, I tell you!

I'll be getting one next year or so....

 

[p0lar]

Eug: Has yours arrived yet? I know mine's on its way as well now, but I'm anxious.

Why is it that of all the Mac afficionados out there who have received theirs already, they took horrible photos? Isn't this their strong-point?

 

[Eug]

w00t! My 24" iMac is now in Canada. I expect delivery of it tomorrow.

 

[Eug]

LOOker, you seem confused. ALL Macs, consumer and pro laptops, consumer and pro desktops, and servers, now use Intel chips.

Originally posted by: p0lar
Why is it that of all the Mac afficionados out there who have received theirs already, they took horrible photos? Isn't this their strong-point?

Haha. Cuz they're too impatient and just want to start playing with the thing? I dunno. Anyways, I know a few web designers and they definitely take lousy pictures. Not that I expect mine to be any better.

 

[p0lar]

Originally posted by: Eug
Haha. Cuz they're too impatient and just want to start playing with the thing? I dunno. Anyways, I know a few web designers and they definitely take lousy pictures. Not that I expect mine to be any better.

You can't do this to (me|us)!!

But, you can put 'em up on a private site so that you don't get slashdotted -- then send it to me, heh. I'm almost tempted to dissect mine upon arrival and slashdot the whole mess.

Anyway, if you can, I want some relative shots from the top and bottom of the screen. Put a quarter on top of it so we can relate to its size. (or a looney/tooney if you're Canadian, heh)

 

[0roo0roo]

http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.net/sep_2006/event/index.html

 

[Eug]

Macworld benches the Mac Pro Quad 2.0 vs. the 24" iMac 2.33 with 7600 GT

The quad absolutely rules in Cinema 4D, but either loses or wins by only a small margin in the other tests.

I think much of the less-than-stellar performance of the Mac Pro 2.0 can be attributed to the fact that the apps aren't well optimized for quad cores, but do you think the FB-DIMMs used by the Mac Pro have much to do with it?

 

[halfadder]

Originally posted by: Eug
I think much of the less-than-stellar performance of the Mac Pro 2.0 can be attributed to the fact that the apps aren't well optimized for quad cores, but do you think the FB-DIMMs used by the Mac Pro have much to do with it?

FB-DIMM is a mixed bag. FB-DIMM is less efficient for single-thread applications, but it's really the best overall choice for 4+ cores and 8+ DIMM slots in the Intel world. (My overall preference is what AMD does, and that's putting the memory controller on the CPU itself... but we're talking about Intel here).

FB-DIMM and Intel's memory controller are optimized for multiple threads. The best case would be a server where multiple CPUs are moving a lot of different data to a lot of different threads.

If you use your MacPro to edit video, render video/3D, and do other background tasks while you work, and have several active threads hitting the CPU rather hard, then the combination of 4 cores and FB-DIMM might very well be the best possible combination. Especially if you some day want to populate all 8 DIMM slots.

If your primary needs are gaming or running a single application most of the time, then you will probably be better off with a system that uses two cores (such as Core2Duo) with regular old DDR2-SDRAM as this will offer you solid performance and 4 DIMM slots without all of the added overhead of the serial memory controller and more complicated slots and banks system of the FB-DIMM world.

 

[Eug]

PICS!

 

[40Hands]

OMG IT'S SOOO CUTE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! lolz!

 

[p0lar]

Originally posted by: Eug
PICS!

Tooney, looney, quarter! Shots from under, shots from above, shots all around!

NICE, very nice!

Mine should be in on Monday -- I guess that's what I get for sleeping on it overnight.

 

[nlk]

Thank you kindly. This information is very useful for me. Great site! Thanks again!

___________________________________________________________________
www.neolink.ro

 

[bluemax]

I'll have to wait a while before getting one..... but I'm fairly certain I will in less than a year or so. The wife can have the cheap AMD Dell machine all to herself.

Edit: Nice pics, but I'd have liked to see a few more "things" nearby to get a good indication of size.

 

[Eug]

It's fast.

CINEBENCH 9.5
************************************************** **

Tester : Eug

Processor : iMac Core 2 Duo
MHz : 2333
Number of CPUs : 2
Operating System : Mac OS X 10.4.7

Graphics Card : 7600 GT
Resolution : <fill this out>
Color Depth : <fill this out>

************************************************** **

Rendering (Single CPU): 385 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 727 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.89

Shading (CINEMA 4D) : 470 CB-GFX
Shading (OpenGL Software Lighting) : 1866 CB-GFX
Shading (OpenGL Hardware Lighting) : 4399 CB-GFX

OpenGL Speedup: 9.35

************************************************** **

iMac 20" & 24" Picture 1
iMac 20" & 24" Picture 2

 

[Eug]

Video: Aperture on the new iMac Core 2 Duo

Also, check my sig (blog) if you want to see a whole bunch of benches.

 

[L00ker]

Originally posted by: p0lar
Merom is not a dual core Xeon, it is the mobile variant of the Core 2 Duo (aka Conroe). As well, the PPC970 was nowhere near the same architecture as an Intel Northwood, what's your source of information for such gibberish?

I wasn't sure what the story was with the merom's I was told that the meroms were not the same as conroes? So I am gathering it is a mobile conroe? anyways, that's not all that important really

I should rephrase then the PPC970 was built on the same process as the northwoods (a-la 130nm) not architecture in the sense of command set etc, I didn't mean to imply that the 970 was to intel what the amd is of the same generation, I was only implying that they were within the same generation of processor manufacturing technology.

Originally posted by: p0larAnd Ill requote you:

This is the ONLY Mac to use an intel processor set

Either correct your tense or change your statement, you're spewing disinformation into a public forum.

www.apple.com -- from what I can discern about their products (Desktop/Laptop/Workstation), everything there is Intel-based.

Yes this is the only mac (read:this generation of mac's referring to iMac, Mac Pro, blah blah blah) the G5 on down were all non-intel platform and thats what I meant by that statement. I wasn't saying that this mac as in a particular model as they are all the same computer more or less just packaged differently for different audiences...

Originally posted by: p0lar The rest of this drivel concerning performance is subjective and was never substantiated by anyone but Apple, who are certainly not known for objective benchmarks regarding their own equipment.

The previous apple processor sets when compared to equally clocked Intel processors of like generations were (and are) capable of processing more instructions per cycle then their intel counterparts which would imply and substantiate faster, also up until the intel changeover they have been using a RISC based instruction set which also makes a pretty good difference as far as speed and ability to process data... Since when has intel been objective about their benchmarks?

Originally posted by: Eug
LOOker, you seem confused. ALL Macs, consumer and pro laptops, consumer and pro desktops, and servers, now use Intel chips.

Not at all, see above... ALL NEW Macs use intel based processors which is a first for apple... Previous generations do not...

 

[Eug]

^^^ Your backtracking isn't helping your cause L00ker.

Originally posted by: Eug
Video: Aperture on the new iMac Core 2 Duo

Also, check my sig (blog) if you want to see a whole bunch of benches.

Hmmm... 2 GB RAM is not enough for Aperture. I'll have to get a 2 GB module next year, to bring my total to 3 GB.

 

[manly]

Originally posted by: Eug
^^^ Your backtracking isn't helping your cause L00ker.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

 

[Eug]

My benchmark graphs.

http://www.eugbanana.com/files/Apple/iMacC2DBench/Aperture_export.0.jpg

http://www.eugbanana.com/files/Apple/iMacC2DBench/Cinebench_CPU.jpg

http://www.eugbanana.com/files/Apple/iMacC2DBench/Cinebench_shading.jpg

http://www.eugbanana.com/files/Apple/iMacC2DBench/Geekbench2006.0.jpg

http://www.eugbanana.com/files/Apple/iMacC2DBench/Handbrake_encode.0.jpg

http://www.eugbanana.com/files/Apple/iMacC2DBench/Toast_encode.0.jpg

http://www.eugbanana.com/files/Apple/iMacC2DBench/Unzip_file.0.jpg

 

[otispunkmeyer]

the only thing stopping me from getting this instead of a laptop + a screen is the fact that massive 24inch screen it has doesnt have any inputs. i would of killed for that to have at least a VGA in so i can hook up a xbox 360

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: Eug
I ordered the 24" with 2 GB RAM, 500 GB drive and 7600GT/256MB.

Says it will ship in a week. Anyone want to buy a Cube?

! honestly! they must be paying you well

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: secretanchitman

Originally posted by: XBoxLPU
Mmmm I really like the 24'' with 7600GT but how will the card do with that resolution in games?

i think it'll do okay...but the 128 bit bus will hold it back for sure. the C2D makes up for it though. dont expect to play games at 1920x1200 full blast...maybe at low-medium settings at that resolution.

but at 1280x1024 and 1600x1200, you can probably crank most of the details up with AA/AF.

and its probably not that bad just running it in the middle of the screen so it doesnt try to stretch 12x10 over 19x12