New iMacs - Graphics

[pigoo3]

This is for you Nick from a person who knows his stuff about the new intel Iris Pro.

Sounds very impressive. Does not use system RAM.

Sounds like an interesting development...not needing to use system ram.

Of course like I mentioned to Charlie...the new integrated graphics must still be slower than dedicated graphics...otherwise it would most likely not be in an entry level computer.

- Nick

 

[dtravis7]

Yes I agree it will not be as fast but better than most and probably quite useable for most people.

 

[pigoo3]

Yes I agree it will not be as fast but better than most and probably quite useable for most people.

Probably so. It will be interesting to see benchmarks when they come out.

My 2011 13" MacBook Pro with integrated graphics...does everything pretty well. I do some online gaming...and the fans never get very loud.

If I do the same gaming with my 2008 MacBook (with integrated graphics)...the fans hit "high-gear" right away...and everything gets real hot real quick!

- Nick

 

[chscag]

The Pro 5200 version adds 128MB of embedded DRAM onto the CPU package itself

Sounds like an interesting development...not needing to use system ram.

That can't be true Dennis, because 128 MB of embedded DRAM is not enough to power most graphic intensive packages. The Intel HD 4000 borrows up to 1 GB of memory from the system in order to get the speeds it does. The Intel Iris Pro has to borrow memory from the system in order to post decent benchmarks.

It's better than the HD 4000 because it does embed some DRAM (128 MB) but still not good enough to match the nVidia chipset - according to the article you quoted.

 

[dtravis7]

"It's not necessarily faster than the equivalent NVIDIA solutions, but it should use less power and can obviously enable smaller board layouts."

He does not say it's worse than Nvidia.

Also was just posting his comment. I would not own a Glue Strip iMac. Check iFixit.

 

[chscag]

I know what you mean Dennis. And by the way, using less power is meaningless for a desktop unless you're in hock to the electric company. I think Apple may have blew it with this one.... By the way, "Glue Stick" Mac made me laugh. Now you're in trouble with chas_m! ;P

 

[dtravis7]

So is a Desktop with thin sides. That is totally wasteful and not needed in a DESKTOP.

Here is the rest of the quote. Sounds better than most think.

"The previous generation entry-level 21.5-inch iMac used NVIDIA's GeForce GT 640M, a lower clocked version of the GT 650M we compared to Intel's Iris Pro 5200 in our preview. Looking at the clock speed differential alone, Intel's Iris Pro 5200 should be at least performance competitive, if not faster than the outgoing GT 640M. The other big difference is that the Iris Pro 5200 we previewed came in a 47W thermal configuration, whereas what Apple deployed in the new iMac is a 65W part. Iris Pro 5200 scales extremely well with clock speed thanks to the eDRAM, so I'm expecting a relatively good increase in performance from this configuration compared to the Mobile CRB we tested."

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7365/apple-updates-the-imac-haswell-cpus-pcie-ssds-80211ac-wifi

 

[dtravis7]

I know what you mean Dennis. And by the way, using less power is meaningless for a desktop unless you're in hock to the electric company. I think Apple may have blew it with this one.... By the way, "Glue Stick" Mac made me laugh. Now you're in trouble with chas_m! ;P

Bring him on! You did not see though my edit Charley, it's Glue STRIP!

 

[chscag]

Sounds good on paper. I'll wait until I see some benchmarks and comparisons before I give it my final condemnation.

 

[dtravis7]

Same here my friend. Same here. I wish they would go back to magnets though for the glass!

 

[pigoo3]

For what it's worth...some of the early "White" Intel iMacs were kinda "glue strip iMac's" as well.

You could remove the white bezel/front half of the housing...but to get access to the logic board...you had to peel away the sticky aluminum foil tape from the display to remove it. Of course the sticky foil tape would tear...and usually need to be replaced (which sounds similar to newer/"thin" iMac's).

A good number of the older G5 iMacs were MUCH easier...since you removed the back half of the housing instead of the front half to get access to the logic board, fans, HD, etc.

- Nick

 

[pigoo3]

Hey I have a better name for the newer "thin" iMac models with the extreme tapered edges..."iMac Air"!

- Nick

 

[dtravis7]

Nick, that foil was a shield. I always got it back on but it looked bad. This is NOT. It's the WHOLE LCD and Glass held on with strips of Glue! Watch the iFixit video. iFix it did not have every nice things to say about it!

To get the Integrated Glass and LCD off, you have to use a special tool and work it for sometimes 1/2 hour carefully around to cut the glue. NO bezel. Nothing.

I could do it, you could do it, but how many typical people could without destroying the whole thing and breaking the glass or LCD or Camera module.

 

[pigoo3]

Nick, that foil was a shield. I always got it back on but it looked bad. This is NOT. It's the WHOLE LCD and Glass held on with strips of Glue! Watch the iFixit video. iFix it did not have every nice things to say about it!

To get the Integrated Glass and LCD off, you have to use a special tool and work it for sometimes 1/2 hour carefully around to cut the glue. NO bezel. Nothing.

I could do it, you could do it, but how many typical people could without destroying the whole thing and breaking the glass or LCD or Camera module.

I understand that the two examples are different...but both are a pain in the butt in terms of accessing the insides of the computer & both involve "sticky stuff".

But it does sound like the newer iMac's are worse to disassemble...and it sounds like some serious damage could be done if not careful.

This is probably something that Apple did to facilitate the "thin" iMac design. But like some folks are saying...this "thin" design isn't really as functionally necessary or needed in a desktop (like it is for a laptop). So if Apple didn't do the thin design...they probably also wouldn't have needed to use the "sticky stuff".

- Nick

 

[dtravis7]

You have to be very careful with that tool as you work it around not to dig in too far. The real care is near the iSight Camera.

 

[chas_m]

Just addressing the Intel Iris Pro graphics: I personally think you guys are making a mountain out of a molehill based on a VERY unrealistic understanding of how entry-level iMac buyers use their computer.

That Iris Pro would run RINGS around the graphics card in my 2009 MacBook Pro (the Nvidia 940M), despite mine having double the RAM and doing everything I could want it to do (yes, there are a bunch of high-end games I don't get to play, but you know, WHO CARES).

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=system76_gazelle_galago&num=4

(the above links shows the Intel Iris Pro 5200 whomping the tar out of an Intel HD 4600 with a far higher clock speed)

As you yourselves said, the 21.5" iMac is ENTRY-LEVEL. This is why Apple doesn't want you opening it up, for RAM or anything else. Did you know that well over 85 percent of computer buyer have NEVER opened their machine for any reason at all ever? "Upgraders" like us are an unbelievably tiny niche inside a niche.

I'm just saying that the use of a "integrated" video card that is, by all accounts, as good as nearly every video card that's ever been in all but couple-three years' iMacs is sooooooo not an issue to 98 percent of the people who buy such machines. It's like saying the iMac is inferior because it doesn't come with an anti-missle system -- it's utterly irrelevant to an entry-level buyer.

The ability to add RAM and order beefier video cards is what *distinguishes* the 27" iMac from its little brother, even more so than the screen. A 27" iMac is for the serious user, not the hobbyist. These abilities (and other factors like the price) separate the hobbyist from the prosumer.

As I see it, Apple makes choices like this to keep the cost down for the non-power users who are the most likely buyers of such a model. We nerds often have trouble relating to "light duty" users, who I am led to understand even sometimes go days (DAYS, PEOPLE) without even turning on their computer!!

 

[pigoo3]

Just addressing the Intel Iris Pro graphics: I personally think you guys are making a mountain out of a molehill based on a VERY unrealistic understanding of how entry-level iMac buyers use their computer.

I don't think I said that the new entry level iMac was a rip-off or anything like that (at least I hope I didn't say that). And I agree...the Iris Pro graphics are or will probably be pretty good.

My "beef" is...almost all iMacs since 1998 (except a VERY few models) always came with dedicated graphics hardware (including the entry level models). So Apple has taken something away (went from dedicated graphics to integrated graphics)...and they are still charging the same price (this is why I said that they could have knocked $50-$100 off the price).

Back to the Iris Pro graphics. Sure it may be good...but if Apple had continued to include dedicated graphics in the entry level iMac (as they almost always have in the past)...I'm betting that the dedicated graphics hardware would be better then the Iris Pro graphics (generally dedicated is better than integrated when comparing the same generation computer).

For me...it's about the overall value of the computer. Apple took something away from the entry level iMac (dedicated graphics)...but they didn't give something back to the comsumer interested in it (such as a lower entry level iMac price).

- Nick

p.s. If Apple wants to lower the "hardware quality" of the entry level iMac to better suit the needs of entry level users...I'm ok with that. I think that it would be absolutely awesome if Apple could sell an entry level 21.5" iMac for $999.

 

[chas_m]

ISTR that they lowered the price of the iMac by $100 last time round. I may be misremembering.

 

[pigoo3]

The "Late 2012" entry level iMac was $1299...and the "Late 2013" entry level iMac has remained $1299.

Dedicated graphics hardware was taken away from the Late 2013 entry level iMac. So for the same $1299...I feel something was lost/taken away.

- Nick

p.s. The "mid 2011" entry lebvel iMac was $1199. $100 lower than the "Late 2012" and "Late 2013" entry level iMacs.

 

[dtravis7]

Chas, I hope you are NOT referring to me as I was the one showing Anand's take on the Iris Pro showing it was WAY better than people would imagine. Since my post in fact there was another test of the actually new iMac showing the Iris Pro beating last years Nvidia Chip set in ever test but one and saying how good it was. Will find that URL and post it.

My only Criticism was Clue Sticks to get to the RAM.