The Basic Differences in Chips

First off, I should note that the Core i7 chip has what Intel calls a “turbo mode”. That is, when it’s not utilising all of its cores, it can dynamically overclock itself up to 3.4GHz on whatever single cores are in use. It can, as shown in this video, work in steps. So you get turbo benefits from partial use of the four cores in this iMac’s chip, but also, you get turbo benefits when each core is only being partially used. For example, if four cores are running but only at a fraction of their total capacity (less then 100 per cent), the cores can still run a little faster. This should theoretically make up for the difference between the two-core 3.06GHz chip and the hyper-threaded quad core chip at a base of 2.8GHz.

The other thing to realise about these newer Core i7 chips are that they have no northbridge — or bus — between the memory and CPU. The memory controller is built right into the processor, and there’s a new tech called Quickpoint interconnect which connects the cores in a point-to-point architecture. Core i7 supports triple channel memory (which would use three banks at once), but this iMac only came loaded with two banks of RAM filled. Like our other iMac, that’s a 2GB + 2GB arrangement.

Matt explains more about i7 here. (And yes, there are differences between i7 and i5, besides clock speed.)

*Note that this machine also had a faster ATI Radeon 4850 video card with 512MB of RAM (versus the 4670 card in the other iMac) which may have impacted performance in several apps. I have no idea which of these apps uses the GPU to accelerate its tasks under Snow Leopard. (For example, Preview may use it to help render JPGs faster, or it may not. Apple could not tell me. In Adobe After Effects, the Radeon series of cards apparently is not supported for OpenCL acceleration. )

Performance with Multithreaded Apps

In short, any task we tried that expressly was written to either a) take advantage of multiple cores, or b) take advantage of multiple cores through Snow Leopard’s multicore middleware, Grand Central Dispatch, were 2-3 times faster. (More on that here.) These results include:

• 64-bit versions of Geekbench, which focus on CPU and memory tests.
• Adobe After Effects benchmarks
• Opening 20 images of Tokyo Tower that are 2000×2000 pixels and 35MB each.

Impressive stuff, but honestly, those tests were kind of uninteresting to me. I mean, those tests don’t really have any correlation to my daily computing use. So on a whim, after benchmarking, I tested handbrake, the DVD ripping software I love. It, too, was freaking fast.

I know the app is multi-threaded, but I did not know what level of optimisation it was written for. I was blown away by a 3x speed multiplier with the i7. On the Core i7 iMac, it took 43 minutes to rip a DVD, Storm Riders, a surfing film from the ’70s featuring Gerry Lopez (my favourite) and others. On the Core2Duo machine, it took 147 minutes! I know this is basically a DVD read test coupled with decoding and video conversion, but the results have me excited because this is a real task that takes my computer a long time to do, performed by a program that hasn’t been revised in a year.

Performance With Single-Core Optimised Apps (Otherwise Known as Reality)

Unfortunately, there are still very few applications that take advantage of multiple cores directly or via Snow Leopard’s GCD, not even video-based, let alone general-purpose computing.

Photoshop CS4 on the Mac, which is not set up to handle multicore processors, showed almost less than a 3 per cent improvement using the Driver Heaven benchmark. Basic tasks, like booting and shutdown, saw virtually none. Playing the 1080p Quicktime trailer of Avatar consistently showed that the i7 was using 3 per cent less of its total CPU than the Core2Duo, but I wonder if that’s a result of the faster graphics card kicking in using CoreCL. Xbench, the old program that does a more comprehensive job of benchmarking a system from disks to processors, showed almost no difference.

I think Xbench, which hasn’t been updated in years, is a solid benchmark for that old program that you depend on but has been long abandoned or at least ignored by its developer.

These scores, again, are in relation to the top line 3.06GHz Core2Duo iMac we tested. Some benchmarks have come in from the web comparing the i7 to the i5. Here’s one that claims a 30 per cent jump using Geekbench. Now we know Geekbench likes and does well with more cores and is a synthetic CPU test. But if the i5 is 30 per cent slower, and the i7 pulls even with the 3.06 GHz Core2Duo chip in single threaded activity — most day-to-day activity — does that mean the i5 is slower than the cheaper Core2Duo? Maybe. Probably not 30 per cent, since Geekbench is strictly CPU/memory and likes more cores, and this stuff does not translate so literally in the real world. But we can assume the i5 will have 30 per cent less jump from the top tier Core2Duos, translating into a mere 1.3-2 times speed increase from last gen chips on programs that like cores.

Value

For the most part, in our review, I said that you should stick to the preconfigured options, upgrading to Apple’s next recommended config before considering upgrades to the lower tier models. How does that advice change now that we’ve seen the i7? I don’t know! I guess it depends if you’re a betting man. If you think programs for Snow Leopard using GCD are coming, paying $US200-$US500 bucks more from the top line Core2Duo chip for an i5 or i7 might make sense. The probability of you getting programs that can use those extra cores goes up if you are a graphics or video professional who expects to see support from Adobe, Apple, etc. (Apple already claims big jumps in Aperture that we weren’t able to test.) Or if you rip a lot of DVDs! The rest of you? The Core2Duo stuff could be fine for today and fine for tomorrow. But the Core i7 is not worse for today and will definitely be faster tomorrow. It just costs more.

Me personally? I’d opt for the Core i7. I just might wait ’til the new iMacs refresh a bump and the i7 is cheaper and part of a standard build. But I’m patient like that.

[iMac Review]

Specifically, using his charts and mine, it wasn’t hard to recognise the jump in the multi-threaded, 64-bit results from geek bench in the categories of integer, floating point and memory-streaming tests, as well as the threaded tests. (Memory tests were slightly faster; the others were drastically so.) Interesting, as the Core i5 chip is clocked at 2.66GHz and the Core2Duo iMac I tested runs at 3.06GHz.

(The turbo boost function, which overclocks the Core i5 chip to up to 3.2GHz when running non-multi-threaded apps, should be kicking in performance here, too.)

Interesting, but two things to remember: Core i7 chips are coming out for the iMac shortly and will run at 2.8GHz and have hyperthreading so the four cores emulate eight. And there are still not many (if any at all) major OS X apps that can take advantage of Snow Leopard’s multicore support. [Electronista's tests, Gizmodo's iMac Review]

Both the the Shift: Intel P55 and the Shift: Intel X58 are powered by Intel Core i7 900 processors running Windows 7. ATI Radeo HD and NVIDIA GeForce graphics cards are featured, and I’m sure the discerning gamer expects nothing less.

Storage options include up to six mechanical or 12 SSD drives. The two diverge on memory specs, with the P55 containing up to 8GB DDR3-1600 low latency RAM and the X58 up to 12GB DDR3-2000 or 24GB DDR3-1600. DVD or Blu-Ray drives are options for both rigs while a standard Asetek closed-loop liquid cooling system keeps things chilled.

Pricing begins at an optimistic $US2199 and $US2599, respectively, although with all the options listed above, that can (and probably will) climb much, much higher. Since Shift is the only PC that Maingear is going to focus on selling from now on, I hope it works it out for them.

Let’s look at the best-case scenario: The A70z all-in-one. It’s thoroughly unremarkable in specs, offering a 19-inch LCD (isn’t that kind of small these days? Not that the iMac’s insane 27-inch model should be the benchmark, but still…), up to a Core 2 Duo processor, and up to 500GB storage in a decent-looking if not particularly noteworthy package (pictured above). It also boasts of a fast startup and shutdown time and is only 2.4 inches thick (the new iMac is about an inch thick, for reference, though of course it costs several times more). The A70z will start at $US500, which sounds pretty cheap, but the base model is likely to include a Celeron proc and a much lower-capacity HDD, for starters, so don’t get too excited. The Acer Z5610, for example, costs $US800 to start (not that far from an A70z with similar specs) in a much more slick package.

Winning second place (out of two) is the A58e tower. Clearly a $US350 business-oriented tower desktop that boasts of “up to 320GB of data storage, up to 2GB of memory and a DVD burner” isn’t exactly up our alley — but just as music critics must cover the latest Coldplay album, so must we bite the bullet and mention this snoozefest of a computer. Keep in mind that these prices aren’t actually that low: Dell’s base package Vostro desktop tower starts at only $US300, with similar specs.

It’s useless to brand computers like these objectively “good” or “bad”. The A58e and A70z don’t need to have catchy names, or up-to-the-minute specs, or eye-catching designs or even prices that are all that low. They will be bought, and they will be used. They will churn out Excel spreadsheets and PowerPoints and TPS reports, and they will suffice for those duties. They will provide no joy, unless you are a goofy salesman who sends adorable emails back and forth with your office’s frumpy-yet-cute receptionist, and even then it will take about four years before anything happens between you two, so maybe you should just get another job because this one is clearly sucking the life out of you. Yet, they will be bought.

These computers will also match your office’s Mr. Coffee. (Note: Speculation.)

At any rate, the 70z is available from the end of November, and the A58e is available now. [Lenovo]

There are five new rigs in the range, and rather than try and break them down myself, I’m going to let the press release explain their features:

n Alienware M15x – The most powerful 15-inch gaming laptop in the universe. Sporting Alienware’s acclaimed new mobile ID which debuted with the M17x laptop, the M15x offers Alienware performance in a compact package guaranteed to appeal to mobile enthusiasts and hardcore gamers on the go. The first Alienware laptop to feature a mobile Core i7 processor, the M15x also offers a 1GB NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260M GPU* and up to 8GB DDR3 1333MHz memory* to take on, and dominate, even the most intense game titles. Prices start at $2499 (AUD) and additional technical specifications are here.

n Alienware Aurora and Aurora ALX – The Aurora is the most upgradeable and the Aurora ALX is the most powerful MicroATX desktops Alienware has ever created. Featuring the latest Intel® Core™ i7 processors, including an optional Extreme Edition overclocked** to 3.6GHz, the Aurora line of desktops are designed to deliver the power needed for hardcore gaming, pro-level HD audio and video editing, 3D animation and more. To crank up your gaming performance, Aurora and Aurora ALX have options for dual 1GB ATI Radeon HD 5870 graphics cards, up to 24GB DDR3 1333MHz memory[asterisk] or 12GB DDR3 1600MHz memory, respectively, and up to 2TB of hard drive storage – all in a compact, MicroATX chassis for taking up less desk space. Prices start at $2499 (AUD) and additional technical specs are here.

n Alienware Area-51 and Area-51 ALX designed for extreme gamers and tech enthusiasts who demand only the latest, most advanced equipment, the Area-51 line of desktops features Intel Core™ i7 processors factory overclocked* to an intense 3.86GHz for peak performance. To max out your graphics benchmarks, these systems offer the quad-GPU power of dual NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 295 graphics cards. Other featured specs include up to 12GB DDR3* memory clocked at 1333MHz or 1600MHz, respectively, and six easy-access, cable-free hard drive bays that support both 7,200RPM and 10,000RPM drives, solid state drives and RAID 0, RAID 1 and RAID 10 configurations. Prices begin at $3699 (AUD).

Playing with them yesterday, they’re certainly solid in the performance department, if not design. And they’re actually somewhat affordable, which is something Alienware machines have traditionally struggled with.

[Alienware]

We don’t know much more at this point, but it’s just one of many concepts Samsung has on show at the FPD exhibition in Japan. Follow the link to check them out, including a netbook with a 7-inch AMOLED screen. [Akihabara News]

But First, Simplicity

This 1998 ad with Jeff Goldblum narrating implies there are two physical steps to setting up an iMac. They skipped the mouse and keyboard cable, though. Today, an iMac is set up using just one power cable, depending on wireless networking and Bluetooth peripherals to get the rest done.

The LCD

The 27-inch iMac’s screen is practically as bright (and more contrasty) than any of the previous iMacs—even Cinema Displays—and it looks astounding. It’s LED-driven so it comes to full luminescence immediately and takes up less power. It also has better side-to-side viewing angle as an IPS tech monitor; like the iMac 24 before it, it goes 178 degrees without much change in colour accuracy or brightness. And here’s the kicker: Although it has 19 per cent more area of LCD than the old 24-incher, it has an astounding 60 per cent more pixels. That makes it more pixel dense than any of the Cinema Displays at 109ppi. And with a 2560×1440 resolution it has 90 per cent of the dot count of a 30-inch cinema display. All these stats are great. They sound great, and they make for a powerful picture. But the actual view of the screen leaves me with a positive—but slightly imperfect—impression.

The default brightness is a bit much, but of course you can turn it down. And the contrast is welcome; even my new 13-inch MacBook Pro looks yellowed and washed out next to it. But at this pixel density, which is sharper than my notebook, it’s almost too sharp, requiring me to sit closer than I would ordinarily do with a 27 inch display. I like the feeling of crispness — 16 per cent crisper than the last generation. But my eyes feel like the pictures are being delivered by a land shark holding a laser pointer straight into my corneas, and I can feel the strain within minutes. I would have to jack up as many font sizes as possible or sit as close as I do to my MacBook to make it work for long long periods of time. Maybe I’m just a wimp of a geek, but I’ve never been sensitive to these sorts of things on any sort of machinery before.

This is the iMac next to a 13-inch MBP and a Dell 2407 24-inch monitor. The iMac’s screen puts both to shame in brightness and clarity.

Apple is making a big deal of the fact this screen is 16:9. I think it looks better in this wider iteration, but it’s not an epic jump since the last gen was 16:10. You’re losing vertical pixel count here, on both the 21.5- and 27-inch models, despite added diagonal inches. Also, the glass cover is now edge to edge, without the thin silver rim around it, on the top and sides. It’s still glossy and very very reflective, despite being covered in anti-reflective coating.

I will feel guilty for mentioning this, because it’s ever so slight, but I’ll feel more guilty if I don’t mentioning it to you: The screen, when it’s white, has the tiniest bit of blotchiness to it. The backlighting is slightly uneven in my model.

My previous comparison to the 30-inch Cinema Display wasn’t for academic purposes, either. One of the most interesting features on the new iMac is that it can use its Mini DisplayPort (normally an output) as an input; that is, it can become a secondary display for notebooks or other devices. Factor in the near-identical specs to the 30-inch Cinema Display, most notably its updated LED screen, and you have absolutely no reason to buy a 30-inch Cinema Display when you can have this — but not just yet.

That’s what two full sized 1080p trailers look like on this screen.

Eager to test this shit and be the first to the internet with an image of an Xbox linked into an iMac (”World’s collide!” would be the headline, I decided), I ordered a monoprice Mini-DisplayPort-to-HDMI adaptor. Unfortunately, I discovered that the inputs would not work with a PS3 or Xbox at any res, HD or otherwise. The current adaptors on the market are unidirectional, I was told, and that although theoretically the iMac can take in a display of up to its native display, it would not happen today. I’m sure someone is making a cable as we speak for this very abominable purpose of piping in Microsoft gaming to a desktop Mac — but it’s not here yet. (New cables, by the way, will include audio, which the iMac is capable of taking through its connector.) The issue is, this could take months. That’s a long time, so don’t buy an iMac planning to use it with a gaming console or Blu-ray player right away.

Using it with a laptop was an interesting situation. Odd, for sure, but a welcome bonus and an obvious use. Here’s how it works. You plug in a Mini-DisplayPort-to-Mini-DisplayPort cable to the iMac, which must be turned on (unlike Sony’s all-in-one, which works while off.) The iMac flickers for a second and the laptop’s picture replaces the iMac’s. Here’s where it gets sort of weird. When the iMac is acting as a monitor, the keyboard and mouse are all blocked from working, except a few keys: The pause/play, FF, RR, volume controls and brightness keys all work. They won’t display the typical volume/brightness/FF/whatever iconography, because you’re actually still looking at your MacBook. You can actually then use your iMac as a display for one computer while listening to music on another—but why would you want to? And if you were playing a game with an Xbox, you’d be listening to the game. To toggle between the iMac and the external source, you hit Command+F2.

(*The 21.5-inch iMac is not as sharp or impressive as the 27, but a fine evolution nonetheless; see chart)

Oh, one more thing: The LED display is also thinner than the traditional panel. Even so, when combined with the extra width and height, Apple’s designers are given adequate room to play with the layout and thermal properties of the iMac. Which brings us to the chassis and internals.

The Chassis

The iMac’s chassis went from all plastic to aluminium and glass in 2007. The first aluminium models were stamped out in car factories because no computer factories could work with aluminium pieces that big. Now, the iMac has even more aluminium in them with bigger cases and a seamless wraparound back made of metal instead of the black plastic cap. Despite the loss of the slimming effect of a black plastic back, the computer’s dimensions work in its favour; it’s about 1mm thinner and obviously wider, so it still feels undoubtedly skinny.

Oh, and the stand is tapered by 1.1mm on its front (as is Apple’s wont), to further hide volume.

Aside from the more flattering aspect ratios, the chin—one of the only giveaways that this is not just a screen but a computer—has shrunk by 22%. It looks much better, in my opinion. The case’s bigger size affects its internal layout, too. Apple and iFixit brought several of these details to my attention.

The most important changes are that the GPU and CPU are placed at nearly opposite ends of the case, with their own heatsinks to throw off copious heat with three very quiet fans. (The iMac’s sound profile at idle, for a stock build, is still just a whisper, less than 20dB.)

Ports: The back of the case has a Mini DisplayPort, 4 USB 2.0 ports, power plug (the machine’s only wire), Firewire 800, minijack/optical input and output, and Gigabit Ethernet. There’s Bluetooth 2.1 EDR wireless with which the mouse and keyboard interface, and 802.11 N Wi-Fi. Although the entire case is aluminium, the antenna has been cleverly hidden in a plastic Apple logo top centre on the back. Reception is a touch stronger than on my notebook.

The iChat camera and microphone (the latter of which is made up of about a dozen closely-grouped pinprick holes, like on the MacBook Pro) are situated on the top of the iMac. And despite the new model’s height they sound fine (if not a touch more distant because of the height) when compared to previous models. The top mount for the microphone keeps the sound from the new, more powerful two-way speakers from interfering with it; measured using a song and SPL meter, my notebook came in at 70dB and the iMac at 76dB at sitting distance. Louder, richer and noticeably so than a laptop, though I didn’t have an iMac 24 on hand to compare with.

The larger case allows the iMac to use four sticks of user-serviceable RAM, accessible from the bottom. (That’s useful futureproofing now that OS X Snow Leopard is shipping, and programs and the OS in 64-bit can address more than 4GB at a time.)

How About Performance?

The iMac I’m testing is a 3.06GHz Core2Duo processor with 4GB of RAM and an ATI Radeon 4670 graphics. Those are decent parts but not the highest-end quad-core i5/i7 chips or ATI Radeon 4850 GPU that will ship in iMacs in November. More importantly, the machine I have here that is shipping now is about on par with higher-end, custom-order machines from the last generation. The system benchmarks I ran earlier this week indicate that everything performs practically the same. And since we don’t have a Core i5/i7 machine to work with, I’ve included Apple’s approximations of how much boost the iMac will get from those parts — obviously, many grains of salt are necessary when reading, especially when measuring value of extra CPU cores as literal multipliers when most software still can’t leverage those channels efficiently.

As for 3D, Maclife has some framerate scores from Doom 3 and Call of Duty that are not by any means exact but somewhat representative of the machine I’m using today. But again, the bottom line is that this machine that I have, shipping today, is not faster than machines equipped similarly from the last generation — they’re just cheaper for any given performance point.

But again, even if you wait for the higher end machines, there’s no guarantee you’ll be able to access most of that extra power. Snow Leopard hasn’t seen many apps, besides the ones that ship with it that can take advantage of its multicore CPU and GPU technologies. Programs will come, but immediate speed gains aren’t guaranteed here if you buy the quad-core machines.

Here’s an exception: Those Core i5/i7 chips are also clocked slower than the Core 2 Duo chips on the lower-end machines, but have the ability to run single core applications at a greater clock speed. Since all four cores won’t be burning, the chip uses the spare electricity and the extra thermal overhead to dynamically and automatically overclock the core that is working: The i5 chip goes from 2.66GHz to 3.2GHz and the 2.8GHz i7 chip goes to 3.46GHz (with four cores that run hyperthreaded for up to eight virtual cores.)

Sounds fast, but we’ll dive into deeper tests in November. For now, you should be aware that if your desktop is less than 18 months old, you’d be somewhat silly to upgrade before the highest end chips from this generation of iMac are out.

What Else You Got?

The iMac replaces its old mouse with the new Magic Mouse, with a multitouch surface and 360-degree scrolling and swiping, almost like the gestures you find on a Macbook trackpad. I’ve said it before: I primarily use Laptops because I love trackpads. The gestures, fingertip precision and proximity to the keyboard make it a must have, and this mouse fixes some of those issues. (*Jason Chen reviewed the mouse and liked it but it was not without flaws. Read that if you’re considering buying an iMac, because it’s the only option Apple offers.)

The one detail I found problematic specifically with the Magic Mouse as it pertains to the 27-inch iMac is that even when the pointer sensitivity is set to the highest level, a swipe of the wrist at a moderately fast speed goes only 2/3 across the giant pixel landscape. Only by whipping my hand across my mouse pad can I trigger enough mouse acceleration to get across the screen. They should turn up the sensitivity, frankly. Software update please!

The keyboard is also changed, going from the old wired numeric keyboard, which was stamped out of the screen cutout of the chassis, with a keypad-less wireless Bluetooth model. Apple states that the keyboard’s narrow profile makes it a better fit next to the mouse. I think it also makes sense as a remote control for the computer from afar when watching media, since this is the biggest iMac ever that doubles as a monitor. But it looks a little small and out of proportion with the machine itself, since the Mac got wider and the keyboard got shorter.

Oh, the white plastic remote that used to ship with all the laptops, AppleTV and iMacs has been replaced by an elliptical, aluminium remote with black rubber buttons. It’s longer, and shaped like an iPod nano but no longer comes with the iMac. It costs $US19. I think when you buy a computer that is this expensive, they should THROW IN THE DAMN REMOTE.

What it still does

HP’s Windows Home Servers are exceptional because they take the standard Home Server build and add a bunch of extras on top of it. For example, HP was the first one to introduce support for Apple’s Time Machine, which has been improved here so that you can do a complete restore in the event that you have to start your Mac up from scratch.

They’ve also still got the media streaming (DLNA compliant), web/iPhone streaming and iTunes server built in, as well as a media collector that sucks in media from all your regular machines on the network into one place on the server. All of this stuff is just improved.

What it does even better now

The greatest group of improvements is how the EX495 now works with Macs. Time Machine functionality was there before, but ran into problems when your Mac went down and you tried to do a fresh restore directly off the network. Now you get a separate disc to use so you can treat the Time Machine backup on the server as a standard Time Machine backup for restores.

But the most important feature on a day-to-day basis is the fact that the Home Server console works natively on Macs — even though it’s just a remote desktop connection to the server anyway. You can now do on your Mac all the management actions you could on the PC, like setup new users, update your Home Server, perform diagnostics or configure video conversions.

Then there is the added ability to do media collecting on Macs, basically sucking off any videos or music you’ve accumulated into one network-accessible place so other machines can access it. It beats having to remember to manually place those things on the server yourself.

Of course, Macs can also access the web interface for Home Server management just like PCs can.

More power, more storage and better processing

Shoving a Dual Core 2.5GHz or a 2.2GHz Celeron processor and 2GB of RAM on these machines might seem like overkill for something that’s just used to hold stuff and stream it around the network, but HP puts that to good use.

In our tests, the EX495 was able to convert a DVD movie into a full resolution h.264 and a phone-streamable 300MB movie in about an hour and a half, give or take. Very useful for not sucking up your main machine’s horsepower to convert videos when you can just vomit them onto the network and have it be done by a slave machine.

The improved processor is very noticeable from just using the remote console. Clicking around to set up the photo publisher, or the media server, or adding BitTorrent plugins were much faster than the previous generation EX485 and EX487 machines. It’s not even comparable to the LX195 budget versions.

At $US700 and $US550 respectively ($899 and $599 in Australia), the MediaSmart Servers definitely aren’t cheap. If you’ve got an older version, like the 485/487 series, the improvements probably won’t be enough to warrant you spending so much for another machine that has similar functionality. If you’re new to the Windows Home Server realm, this has pretty much everything a PC or a Mac user would want to hold their data, stream their media and backup their information. [HP EX495 and HP EX490]

The Apple logo integrates the AirPort antenna. Metal impedes wireless signals, which is one reason the plastic white MacBook has historically had a better Wi-Fi range than the unibodies.

Beyond that point, iFixit’s teardown reveals that in order to cool the desktop-sized processor, the CPU and GPU were placed on complete opposite ends of the computers and fitted with their own heat sinks. The entire system includes “six temperature sensors, three fans, and two gigantic heat sinks”.

And one piece of disappointment: the iMac’s mini DisplayPort is run through its logic board, meaning the computer needs to be on if you want the iMac to serve as a second monitor. [iFixit]