∞ New iMacs sport 21.5, 27-inch displays, quad-core option

Apple on Tuesday introduced new iMac models featuring 21.5-inch and 27-inch displays, starting at $1,199. They offer optional quad-core processors and the new Magic Mouse, a the world’s first multi-touch mouse.

imacThe new iMac line begins with a 3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo-equipped model, equipped with a 21.5-inch 1920 x 1080 LED-backlit display. Other features include 4GB of 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM expandable to 16GB, Nvidia 9400M graphics, 500GB SATA hard drive operating at 7200RPM and 8x “SuperDrive.”

Also standard: Mini DisplayPort, 802.11n, Bluetooth 2.1+EDR, iSight video camera, Gigabit Ethernet port, four USB 2.0 ports, one FireWire 800 port and SD card slot, as well as built-in microphone and stereo speakers.

Apple now includes its Wireless Apple Keyboard standard, along with the new Magic Mouse.
A
$1,499 nets you discrete graphics in the form of ATI’s Radeon HD 4670, with 256MB dedicated GDDR3 VRAM, and 1TB/7200RPM hard drive.

Two new 27-inch LED-backlit models round out Apple’s iMac offerings, each with 2560 x 1440 resolution. The $1,699 27-inch model comes with the same 3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor, storage and memory options. The $1,999 27-inch model comes with a 2.66GHz Intel Core i5 quad-core processor equipped with 8MB of L3 cache — the first quad-core processor to be offered on the iMac line.



0 thoughts on “∞ New iMacs sport 21.5, 27-inch displays, quad-core option

  1. Interesting note about plugging things in and using the iMac as an HDTV. Guess that’s one way you’ll be able to watch Blu-ray on your iMac.

  2. One of the biggest mistakes Apple made with the iMac was to use an onboard graphics chip. It’s beneath the quality I am accustomed to with Apple.
    I can see it wit the Mini but that is it.
    Jim

  3. “All of the iMacs let you upgrade to a dedicated GPU (if it’s not already the default configuration)”

    I like upgrade paths, but my point is that a dedicated GPU should be the baseline on an iMac. Too many people don’t know the difference. I like the idea that all Macs are ready to go and top of the line to begin with.
    Jim

  4. “I like the idea that all Macs are ready to go and top of the line to begin with.”

    Sounds like you just need to click on the machine on the far right …which is a tad bit more than most people want to pay for a machine.

    I prefer seeing the upgrade path in front of me.

  5. @zwei,
    A decent dedicated GPU wouldn’t increase the cost dramatically enough to warrant a huge price bump.
    Mac pro’s are a bad comparison. I am only talking about a video card here. It doesn’t have to be top of the line, just better that an onboard GPU. Someday onboard GPU’s may match those of dedicated video card but I think Apple jumped a little to soon this time.
    IMHO.
    Jim

  6. “It’s beneath the quality I am accustomed to with Apple.”

    The GeForce 9400M is more capable and better-performing than many discrete graphics chips Apple has put in its systems. Integrated ≠ bad.

  7. Indeed. I watch Blu-ray movies on my PS3 and really have no desire to use my Mac as a player. Heck, I’ve only watched 3-4 DVDs on my Mac in the past 3 years. Only happens when the wife is watching something on the Hormone channel and I have something she doesn’t want to watch (i.e. horror flicks)

    Everything else I stream from netflix or amazon VOD to my Roku. Damn I love that little box.

  8. RE:@zwei,
    A decent dedicated GPU wouldn’t increase the cost dramatically enough to warrant a huge price bump.
    Mac pro’s are a bad comparison. I am only talking about a video card here. It doesn’t have to be top of the line, just better that an onboard GPU. Someday onboard GPU’s may match those of dedicated video card but I think Apple IESHOES jumped a little to soon this time.
    IMHO.
    Jim
    YES

  9. Hi Peter,
    So glad to see you at the Loop!

    I don’t think integrated necessarily equals bad but it certainly could be better, at least from benchmarks I have seen. And better is what I expect from Apple.
    Jim

  10. Thanks, Jim!

    Certainly there’s a significant difference in terms of capability and performance when you get into discrete chipsets – but those come at a price that’s passed along to the consumer, along with issues like decreased battery life and more heat generation. As Robert Heinlein said, there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.

    My opinion changed on IGPs when Apple started using the GeForce 9400M. It’s a capable system, and even when it comes to the previous-generation Mac mini, provided adequate, reasonable gaming performance. Nothing that was eye-popping or extraordinary, obviously, but compared to the Intel integrated graphics? Leagues better.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *