Shipping of the i7 Quad Core iMac.

I have placed and order with my Apple Authorized Reseller about 2 weeks ago. They still do not have a tracking number for me, and are saying that the unit should be shipping Dec. 1-4. I have to leave soon and need to take my Mac with me. I cannot afford to wait for them to get it in. So my question is, should I just ask for a refund and order online now, or wait it out. Is anyone else having this problem with orders that are placed through AAR's. My friend got his that he ordered on Friday, I do not understand why they are not able to give a specific date and or tracking number. Any information or experiences would be appreciated.
Thanks

Check out this article from Macworld. It has info about the performance differences and a good suite of "real world" application tests:
http://www.macworld.com/article/143698/2009/11/speedmark6_intro.html
And this Macworld review of the 27" iMacs has a handy comparison chart as well:
http://www.macworld.com/article/143970/2009/11/core15_imac.html

Similar Messages

Give it to me straight -- Can the new Quad Core iMac run Maya well?

Hey all, I've been hunting around the interwebs for reviews of the new 27 inch quad core machine and I'm having a heck of a time tracking down specifics regarding iMacs and their ability to run Maya, After Effects, other adobe programs, etc.
I'm a student right now, going on four years. I own a small graphic design/animation business and I'm afraid my poor little Macbook Pro is going to keel over on me any day now. I've noticed a drop in performance in the last six months, especially with Maya and After Effects. So I've been evaluating options, and I know it has to run OSX. Windows has only given me headaches in regards to Maya work. In short, it's gonna be a Mac.
I've priced out a Mac Pro, and I'd rather not spend 3 grand on a machine that doesn't have a monitor, and may have properties that I'm paying for that I don't necessarily need: monstrous expandability, server capabilities, a big-stinking CPU footprint. But the mantra I always hear is "Only pro models can run Maya". So I reluctantly began putting away money for a new Mac Pro, uncertain if I'd be able to afford the software to go with it. Then I read this article:
http://gizmodo.com/5411073/why-its-gotten-straight-stupid-to-buy-a-mac-pro
In my mind, this article couldn't be more perfect for my position. It's telling me, "These high end iMacs are almost as powerful as the Mac Pro you can't afford. You can save a thousand bucks off the base computer. It comes with a monitor that you don't have to pay for. " But unfortunately the one question I need answered, that I'm having a heckuva time tracking down is "Can the stinking thing run Maya or can't it?" And if it can, will it be crippled?
So, please, anyone out there, can the new monster iMac run Maya, and if it can, does it suck at it?

No, there's no way to talk to Apple technical support via email, and they probably could not or would not be able to answer any questions about performance with third-party products. I doubt that more than a handful of Apple employees, sales rep or tech, would have access to any benchmark data on Maya with any model of Mac, and those Apple people would probably be those working with the Pro VAR channel or directly with large production companies.
I just got off the phone with an Apple sales associate who emphatically confirmed that the i7 iMac can run "all that Adobe stuff", but she'd never heard of Maya.... fun....
Not terribly surprising; Maya is pretty specialized and the Apple Store phone reps are generalists working mostly with consumers. Most people running Maya would be working with an Apple VAR or would otherwise have access to specialists. You might try talking to an Apple Pro Video/Film VAR - there are a number around the country though none in Salt Lake, apparently - or asking in the Autodesk forums:
http://area.autodesk.com/forum/autodesk-maya/
If you search for "iMac", you'll find some comments, though none I can find yet regarding performance with the new iMac models. But if you post asking if anyone has experience with Maya on the i7, you might get useful responses.
Regards.
P.S.
And on top of that I can't buy a 27 inch display separately
Well, you can, and they're not terribly expensive; under $400.00. But that might be more than your budget could accept, which may be what you meant. I'd elect a smaller primary monitor and go with two displays in any case, even with an iMac. I find it much better for workflow to have a monitor for the primary canvas and a separate one for tool palettes, etc.
Message was edited by: Dave Sawyer

Quad Core iMac vs. Quad Core Mac Pro?

My old Dual 2.5Ghz PowerMac had a coolant leak and Apple is replacing it with a Quad Core 2.66Ghz Mac Pro with 8 gigs of ram and 1 terabyte hd. Is the new Quad Core iMac a more powerful computer? 2.66Ghz vs. 2.66Ghz - NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 vs. ATI Radeon HD 4850? I'm thinking about not even opening the Mac Pro and putting it and my 24" Dell monitor on eBay. Help!

The iMac still has no PCI Express slots and is limited in the RAM upgrade versatility compared to the Mac Pro. Furthermore with only a single Firewire port, uncompressed video capture to a fast hard drive has to take place to a separate partition of the internal hard drive to ensure uninterrupted capture. On the hand it has an infrared port for the remote that the Mac Pro doesn't have, and an SD slot. The SD slot is good for still digital camera media, if you have an SD compatible camera, and it is good for "sneakernet" of data to other machines with SD slots or SD camera adapters. Many printers have these slots nowadays too. A bootable backup can be made to an SD card.
PCI Express offers SATA cards, and Fiberoptic connector cards for faster hard drive connectivity, as well as faster networking, and faster video and audio interface cards than can be found via Firewire and USB.
Also the Mac Pro can have up to 4 internal SATA hard drives.
So the question is, are you going to miss the expansion capabilities, or not? That should be the deciding factor.

Is there anyway to add a 3rd display to the quad core iMac 27?

Is there anyway to add a 3rd display to the quad core iMac 27? I know a 2nd can be added using the mini port.. but curious to see if there is a solution to add a 3rd if desired.
Thanks!

As Sherman says, the only way to add a 3rd display to an iMac or MacBook is to use a USB to DVI adapter. I've been using the Gefen adapter for a year or so now with my MacBook Pro and it works great:
http://www.gefen.com/kvm/dproduct.jsp?prod_id=4517
But USB does not have a lot of bandwidth, so you can't use it for video, games and other similar stuff. Works great for Mail, web browsing, iWork, etc.

VIDEO IN on new Quad Core iMac?

Hello FOlks.
I have a Digital Night Vision Monocular I need to connect video in on my Quad Core iMac.
Can anyone tell me WHICH CABLE is the cheapest and best for this?
I need a standard video like from a camcorder plug, I've seen converters with multiple video input sources even.
I already read discussions about it, I just need to know WHICH MODELS work with the new video input feature of the newest iMac's like mine.
thanks
A
Message was edited by: Host <Corrected title to reflect OP question>

Your topic subject line says "VIDEO OUT on new Quad Core iMac."
You will not be able to use RCA input (or any other composite input such as S-Video) on the new 27-inch iMac's Mini DisplayPort. The only input that works there is DisplayPort, which can be from regular DisplayPort or Mini DisplayPort output. There are some costly adapters that convert DVI to DisplayPort, but I do not know of any other type. One issue is going probably going from an analog signal to digital.
You may instead find success using a USB video input interface device. The most popular are by Miglia and Elgato. Such devices usually come with software that allows you to display and capture video input from various sources.

RAM on the new Quad core 2.5ghz G5

I am thinking about running Logic 7 on one of the new Quad core 2.5ghz G5’s. I am currenty running Logic 7 on an 800mhz G4 iMac. I have 1 GB of RAM on my iMac and I was wondering how much RAM I should get if I purchase the Quad core G5. Since there will be 4 processors, I’m sure I will have TONS of processing power for plug-ins and a high number of edits and lots of automation, but I was wondering how much it would really help me if I loaded the machine to capacity with RAM. For instance, would I ever even need more than 1GB of RAM or is getting 8GB of RAM really going to increase performance that much on a Quad core G5? I’m sure 16GB of RAM is OVERKILL. I’m hoping someone who is competent on this subject will be able to help. I already know the generic “you can never have too much RAM” answer. That’s not the answer I’m looking for. I’m hoping that someone will be able to give some guidance as to what would be overkill and what might be just the right amount. For each session, I will be recording upwards of 30 audio tracks, probably using around 15-20 plug-ins and 3 or 4 of those will be reverbs which use up a lot of computer power. I just want a stable system that will be able to last me for a few years. I’ve outgrown the capabilities of my 800mhz G4 iMac and I’m hoping that my next system will be able to last me for a while.
Thanks in advance,
David

it really depends on how you personally use logic. as a basic minimum I don't think anyone would tell you that under 1GB is a good idea. but if you never use sample based instruments, large reverb impulse responses and so on, then having more than 1GB is not necessarily going to make a difference at all.
but when you start working with a lot of VIs (particularly ones that load in a lot of sample data) and running mixes that have large numbers of plug ins in use, you will need more RAM. people often make the mistake of thinking more RAM will incrementally improve performance in some general way, which it doesn't - this is what having a faster processor does. performance improvement from RAM is more of an obvious thing, when you have previously hit a wall from working on a huge RAM intensive project.. once you remove the RAM bottleneck so that the OS no longer works with swap files, it's kind of a once-off improvement, ie, it will work as well as it can and that's that.

Quad Core iMac Delivery - Australia

Anyone in Australia got a quad core iMAC??
When was it ordered?
ordered mine on 05/11... no update

I was told today my Imac would not be delivered until the end of January today. I was told 3 - 4 weeks from when I ordered it in October, it has now been 7 weeks and by the time I get it, 15 weeks, over 3 months.
Apple advertise on the web site 7 - 10 business days. I was told even if I ordered a non Quad core I would not get it to the end of January.
I ordered through David Jones with an apple rep. Seems to me if you order online you get your mac and if you order with a reseller you get screwed up the ....
The web site still says 7-10 days, apple suck.
How can you expect someone to wait 3 1/2 months for a computer.
Message was edited by: jeffschulz

My new Quad Core iMac Not Getting Along With LG External.

I just got a new Quad Core iMac. It's great, except for one this:
My LG Flatron W1953T insists on a 1360 x 768 resolution. Unfortunately, the Displays control panel does not offer that as an option. The closes is 1280 x 768, which means I have a stretched image, which does not work for reading or looking at photos. The LG does not allow me to change its resolution.
How do I get my way-cool new iMac to offer 1360 x 768 as an output?
Thanks!

What Adapter are you using, Mini DisplayPort to DVI or VGA?
Mini DisplayPort to DVI Adapter - Apple Store (U.S.)
Mini DisplayPort to VGA Adapter - Apple Store (U.S.)
Cause my LG Flatron 2253T using an Apple DVI adapter gets, well see for yourself....
Dennis

When will i5 and i7 Quad Core iMacs actually be shipped?

I ordered the new iMac 27" Quad Core i7 yesterday. I am so excited to start using it in place of my iMac G5. My order says it will be shipped in "November" but the new optional Apple Remote is showing as being shipped "November 23" (is that a hint?) Does anyone have a clearer understanding of the likely ship date for the Quad Care iMacs. I am guessing that the delay is due to Apple not yet having a supply of these particular i5 & i7 Intel chips, are they being used currently in any other Macs? I don't think so. If you have any thoughts/info, I'd love to here from you.

Since order an i7 Quad iMac, I've checked this discussion board several times a day, and other such postings several times a day. I'm glad we are able to share our excitement about getting these new iMacs up and running at home. Apple itself has been silent beyond the "November" ship date, I would think they should be getting a bit more specific in a day or two. The most hopeful sign I see is that Best Buy Canada Online is still stating est. ship date Nov. 3rd. I assume they mean Nov 3rd 2009. I am not a big fan of Best Buy, but I was able to buy my Canon 5D Mark II camera from one of their retail store in NYC, when nobody else had them in stock. This great camera is still hard to find in retail stores. Thanks for everyone's posts on the Quad's shipping date, at least we know we are not alone in the wait and anticipation!
.

Our brand new quad core imac will not start up. We hear a drive and fan noise but the screen remains black. Any suggestions?

The computer shut down on its own while we were gone and will not start up again. When we press the power button we hear drive and fan noises but no chime and the screen remains black. Any suggestions?

A pretty common thing for computers that have been shipped is a RAM chip becoming dislodged just enough to cause what you are describing. Try re-seating your RAM chips. Basically just pull them out and push them back in. Take a look at this article if you need some direction on this: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1423

Memory arrangements in iMac i5 quad core (mid 2010)

I used to run 8 GB of ram in 4 modules. The upper two slots were occupied with the 2 samsung 2GB modules that came with the computer. The lower two slots I filled with 2 more 2 GB ram modules from corsair. These 8 Gb of RAM worked fine until one of these corsair modules failed: after several crashes I identified the culprit module by elimination using memtest.
A good time to upgrade: I left the upper slots as is and filled the two lower slots 4 GB modules, also from corsair so that I now have 12 GB. When booting up the machine, the system profiler indicated that the machine only recognised 6 GB, one of each size module. When removing the two 4 GB modules, the imac recognised the remaining two 2 GB module. Turns out that one of the 4 GB modules is doa. It was identified again by elimination: Using only one of the 4Gb modules in the mac in the same upper left slot, the imac booted up with the good one, but not with the faulty one.
Question: why did the imac not recognise one working memory module in the upper slot when one in the lower slot was faulty, but recognised it again, once the faulty one was removed.
Apple says the i5 quad-core imac does not start up if only one of the lower slots is occupied - which is not true. Apple also says that the imac does not work properly when the memory access door is not re-installed, which is also not true.
Does it matter whether I install two 2 GB modules in the upper slots and two 4 GB modules in the lower, or would it be better the other way round. What if I installed the 4 GB modules above each other the the same with the 2 Gb modules?
Any experience would be appreciated.

Apple says the i5 quad-core imac does not start up if only one of the lower slots is occupied - which is not true.
If you look at the Apple instructions online (I believe the exact article you mentioned), I understood that Apple and I had a different idea of what top and bottom were supposed to be. Both you and I feel that the original RAM are in the top slots, but the instructions are such that it sounds as though they are in the bottom.
In any case, I've read of another case where someone moved the original RAM to the bottom and installed the added RAM in the top slots - supposedly it will result in slightly faster performance because those are the RAM that will be addressed first. However, the RAM needs to be in pairs horizontally: 2 x 4 GB in the top (or bottom) slots and 2 x 2 GB horizontally in the other banks. I do not have any idea as to why a top slot would not work if the bottom was not occupied.

Quad Core or Eight Core?

I have a G5 PowerPC Dual 2.0 and wanting to upgrade to a MacPro. My question is should I buy a Quad-Core or 8-Core? I could purchase a 2.66 Quad-Core "Nehalem" MacPro which is 800.00 less money than the 8-Core. Who benefits from 8 cores? I run Lightroom & Photoshop CS4 and primarily use the computer for photography, I occasionally render video but that is not very often. I also could look at the 2008 MacPro's but I have been told the "Nehalem" processors are a big improvement. My thought was this.....if the software does not take advantage of the extra "core" technology then going from 2.26 to 2.66 would be a good speed bump. Any advise is greatly appreciated........
Thanks in advance,
Kevin

Well I'd like to clarify a few things...
I remain very, very happy with my purchase. I have the latest version of Final Cut Studio on my Dual-Quad Mac. I am presently learning Motion, which ought to give Adobe's After Effects a good run for its money. I have been using After Effects extensively at work, where I work on a Pee Cee (A Dell XPS 600 that is about five years old and has 4GB of system RAM out of which the applications tend to see a maximum of 2GB).
I remain committed to the concept of buying as much processor as one can possibly afford, despite Joerollerblade's comments. He's correct in that spending the extra money for a slight processor increase is expensive. But he's not valuing his time as a professional. If he saves just one hour a day in processing time for his workflow, he's paying off the processor cost pretty quickly, assuming he is charging a professional rate.
As to Final Cut Pro, Apple's applications are written under the Cocoa framework and take advantage of Snow Leopard's Grand Central Dispatch for sending multiple threads to multiple processors. Thus, the more processors you have, the faster the application will work for processor-intensive tasks.
Now for some clarification.
Adobe's applications are all written under the Carbon API. Apple, when they released OS X in 2000 told developers that Cocoa was the way they ought to put together their applications and that Carbon was a transitional API to help them get from Apple's earlier System Software to the new Unix-based OS X. Apple has continued support for Carbon in order to support infrequently-updated legacy applications. We're talking applications like Leister Productions' Reunion (though I note they have recently updated their software to version 9, which supports Snow Leopard). Back in 2000, Adobe released Photoshop 6. There have been five releases of Photoshop since, which works out to a new release every two years. Surely, the folks at Adobe can develop for a new API in 9 years.
Carbon applications cannot take advantage of Apple's Grand Central Dispatch in Snow Leopard, so what Adobe has to do is detect and code for multiple processors and multiple cores in their application the hard way. And Adobe's programmers (as talented as they are) can hardly be expected to write code for eight processor cores when most computers out there have no more than four (and many have only two). Apple has just released its first all-in-one Mac with four cores at a very attractive price point. The way computers will get faster in the future is to add more cores.
But Adobe is sticking with Old Skool.They're essentially stuck in code that worked under System 8 and 9. Photoshop 11 (CS4) for Windows runs in 64-bit but, on the Mac, it's still a 32-bit application and that is probably because it's trapped in Carbon (kind of like how Jabba the Hut encased Han Solo). Frankly, it's time for Adobe to come out of the cold and have a nice, steaming hot cuppa Cocoa.
So, if we're assuming Adobe applications, does the Eight-Core Nehalem system give you advantages?
I read the review of Apple's new Quad and Eight-Core Nehalems in Macworld and they tested the two computers using their "Speedmark" test. The stock Eight-Core comes in with a Speedmark rating of 343 to the Quad-Core's rating of 348. Macworld explained that raw processor speed alone seems to place the Quad ahead of the Eight because:
"Many applications have a difficult time using even four processors efficiently, the advantage of having eight was not apparent in most of the application tests that make up our Speedmark benchmark test suite. In fact, the new eight-core system posted a lower Speedmark score than the quad-core system, and bested it in just one test—Cinema 4D, where it posted a 28 percent faster time."
I'm betting Adobe's Photoshop was one of those applications. Since the stock Eight-Core Mac Pro runs 15% slower than the stock Quad-Core, it's the raw processor speed that gave it the bump in performance over the Eight-Core. That is reason enough to upgrade the Eight-Core system's processor. The second reason why it's a good idea to get the more expensive computer is RAM.
The Quad-Core Mac Pro has slots for a maximum of 8GB of 1,066MHz DDR3 SDRAM modules. The Eight-Core can fit 32GB. That's eight times as much RAM in the more expensive computer, which will lend itself to a longer life. If you are using Photoshop to make really large images or you are using Photoshop with Adobe's suite of applications that include Illustrator and InDesign and you need to keep all of these applications open so that you can quickly modify images to suit your publication, 32GB of system RAM will come in handy as time goes on.
My current system has 8 GB installed in it by Apple. That's as much as you can fit into the Quad-Core and I'm all set for another 8GB as the demands of my software increase (which they will).
To jthunders particular question, I have Final Cut Studio on my system. I am running Leopard and not Snow Leopard and this is because Intuit's Quicken 2007 will not run on Snow Leopard. When Intuit finally updates their software, I shall upgrade my OS (assuming I do not have any current projects running and assuming I have a complete clone of my boot drive with a good installation). I routinely have both Motion and Final Cut Pro open at the same time and have had Motion, Final Cut Pro and Color open at the same time for a stretch. I was hitting my hard drive for extra RAM, but the applications handled what was needed with no problems. I contrast that to being at work on the Pee Cee running Windows XP Pro, Adobe's Premiere Pro 1.5 and After Effects 6.5. If I open up Premiere Pro and then open up AE to do something quick, Premiere slows to a crawl until it collects enough memory to get done. Typically, I need to exit Premiere Pro in order to free up enough RAM for the system to get out of its own way when I'm working on anything complex. I'm editing in NTSC (Standard Definition) in Premiere Pro and AE. I can easily work on HD video in Motion and Final Cut Pro.
Back at the beginning of March, Macworld quoted Envisioneering Group's Richard Doherty:
"Apple’s decision to upgrade the Mac Pro falls in line with the growing adoption of high-definition video. Apple is delivering all the processing power it can get for users to edit real-time HD video through the upgraded Mac Pro workstations."
So if all jthunders intends on doing is SD video, he's probably fine with what he has. But if he intends to move forward with HD video on his system, the Mac Pro line (and arguably the new Quad-core iMac) will handle the processing requirements of HD projects.
I would mention one caveat here. Mac Pros can take expansion cards and, if you want to edit HD video, you're going to need a RAID array to play back HD. The only way you can play back uncompressed HD on an iMac is by connecting a RAID array to the built-in Firewire 800 port on the iMac. You cannot choose SAS or SCSI or a Fibre Channel solution on an iMac for video.

How do I transfer contents of hard drive on PPC iMac G4 to a new quad-core Intel Core i5

         Although my PPC iMac G4 still works OK, I am beginning to realise the time has probably come to get a current model in order to keep up with all the advances that have happened since I bought it about 8 years ago: I will probably get the new quad-core Intel Core i5.
         As this will only be my second computer, I am wondering how I can transfer all the stuff on my hard drive onto a new computer and how easy it will be,given the apparently outdated connections on my G4 like USB 1,and possibly other things I don't know about.I am running 10.4.11.
          Any tips gratefully received.

As Allen indicates, Setup Assistant appears automatically, since you do have firewire, the transfer should be speedy, depending on how much data are on the G4. The firewire on your G4 is FW400, your new Mac has FW800, but you can get an inexensive adaptor that will allow the connection, since the ports are different.
You don't need an external now, but I strongly advise getting one, with a drive as large or larger than your new Mac, you should clone/back up frequently, I use SuperDuper! which will allow automatic backups.

I cannot connect with the Mozilla server to update. I'm using Firefox to connect on a dual core iMac on OS 10.6.8.

Every time I try to update Firefox I cannot connect to the Firefox server. the bar just goes and goes and goes. I am on a quad core iMac on OS 10.6.8

If you have problems with updating or with the permissions then easiest is to download the full version and trash the currently installed version to do a clean install of the new version.
Download a new copy of the Firefox program and save the DMG file to the desktop
* Firefox 5.0.x: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all.html
* Trash the current Firefox application to do a clean (re-)install
* Install the new version that you have downloaded
Your profile data is stored elsewhere in the [http://kb.mozillazine.org/Profile_folder_-_Firefox Firefox Profile Folder], so you won't lose your bookmarks and other personal data.

2.66 Quad Core or iMac?

OK, I know this is probably a stupid question, but I want to ask it anyways...
If given the choice between the MP Quad Core 2.66 or 24" iMac 2.93 GHz for graphics work (Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator), which would you choose?
A no-brainer I assume, but I am actually confronted with this situation, caveat being, if I go for the MP I would need to use my current monitor (an older Sony CRT 20 incher) where with the iMac I would have the 24" LCD screen at the start. Both systems would be maxed with RAM (8gb) and the iMac would have the ATI Radeon GPU upgrade.
Thanks in advance.

Mac Pro for sure. The first gen still has A LOT of life still left in it. Sure the iMac is new, but it just lacks upgrade ability. A key option being the adding of multiple hard drives, and fast drives, ram, etc. Working in Photoshop with large files, you probably want a dedicated scratch disk or raid 0 volume for scratch.
I just recently installed a 5th hd in my own mac pro 1st gen. utilizing the 2 extra sata ports. I fits perfectly in the lower dvd drive space.
There's a good tut here:
http://www.tenthousandpercent.com/?section=other&article=65
BTW, in the tutorial, you don't have to break the sata cable, or use an "L" angle one either. A regular "I" sata fits perfectly.
Also, in terms of GPU, (a good link from hatter) apparently the new Ati 4870 graphics card upgrade is also compatible with 1st gen mac pros.
http://www.barefeats.com/nehal05.html

Shipping of the i7 Quad Core iMac.

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for