Apple Updates the iMacs

As predicted, Apple released new iMacs today. The new iMacs include faster processors bringing the low end up to 2.4GHz and with the top end reaching 3.06GHz. The high end 24" 3.06GHz iMac also introduces the NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS (512MB) video card.

"The iMac's gorgeous aluminum and glass all-in-one design has been an incredible hit with our customers and is just one of the reasons Mac sales are growing three and a half times faster than PC sales," said Philip Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of Worldwide Product Marketing. "With the latest Intel processors, a faster new graphics option and more memory, customers now have even more reasons to love the iMac."

The iMacs also incorporate the latest Intel Core 2 Duo processors with 6MB L2 cache and faster 1066 MHz front-side bus (up from 800MHz). Specs are listed below:

  • 20", 2.4GHz, 1GB RAM, 250GB Hard Drive, ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT 128MB. $1199
  • 20", 2.6GHz, 2GB RAM, 320GB Hard Drive, ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO 256MB, $1499
  • 24", 2.8GHz, 2GB RAM, 320GB Hard Drive, ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO 256MB, $1799
  • 24", 3.06GHz, 2GB RAM, 500GB Hard Drive, NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS 512MB, $2199

The new iMacs are available at the Apple Store.

View: MacRumors
Link: Neowin Forum Discussion

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Hundreds of Thousands of Microsoft Web Servers Hacked

Next Story

Team Fortress 2 Medic Achievements / Loading/Equip Screens

50 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Wow. The Apple fans can't contain their excitement while the PC users can't seem to stay awake long enough to hear their justification for their overpriced "experience".

What'd I'd love to know is... you never see Dell, HP, or any other manufacturer make a huge spectacle over such a tiny product line update. Apple glossing over their computers with technical terms like "gorgeous" would be funny if it weren't also so sad.

The sad thing is, $400-600 of the price of the large models is tied up in the monitor, and that monitor goes when you upgrade the machine.

Someone needs to develop some way to salvage those displays. A good I/O device can last for longer than almost any other computer part.

I recently retired my old 21" CRT (actually, I sold it to a co-worker). It was made in 2000.

In the lifespan of that monitor, I went through about eight processors on as many mainboards. If I had to buy a new monitor every time, what a collossal waste of money and resources.

I cannot see a future upgrade path for most users with a 24" LCD-- response times are now fast enough for most users, resolutions aren't getting higher, the screens aren't improving dramatically (in some cases, TN panels are actually making newer models in some respects worse than older ones), but you expect me to replace the monitor when I replace the box?

Why not an iMac as monitor "dock". The monitor could be removed in the event of damage or for reuse, and the machines could be sold sans-monitor for upgraders, or to allow for special-purpose markets (i. e. display on an extended cable for kiosk mounting, touch-screen monitor alternative, LED backlit/OLED monitor alternative, odd resolution alternative), or with a matching monitor for new purchasers.


Whats the big deal... i buy a computer with monitor (Imac) and i sell a computer with monitor... its a complete package...
I dond get emotionaly attached to the monitor :)
+ the mac prices keep holding high a lot longer than pc prices

I love the optimism. "Mac sales are growing three and a half times faster than PC sales" this means nothing, hence the comment above "build a PC three times faster" . let's see: 3.5 x 1 = 3.5; 1.0 x 1000 = 1000. which number is bigger? There are certain things that really don't need to grow anymore, e.g. your ego.

I think Apple knows they're not selling more Macs than PCs. You're losing the whole point : they're just happy to see the sales growing a lot faster than PCs. It's as if they stole PC sales.

If you were a small company with a very different kind of vision, you'd be very glad to say the same thing, especially if your company has quotes...

I ordered the 24" 2.8ghz one. And purchased 4gb of crucial ram. So I will have 2 1gb sticks to sell in the next week or so haha.

Wake me up when ya get that stand-alone OS done. Not paying 2x what I paid for my computer, and it's got double the RAM, drive space and OS quality.... :yawn:

If your actual OS has double quality, why do you want us to "wake you up when they sell Leopard as a stand-alone OS"?

(PsykX said @ #6.1)
If your actual OS has double quality, why do you want us to "wake you up when they sell Leopard as a stand-alone OS"?

Oops. I meant double everything and the OS was quality. Windows, OSX and Linux all seem to work well to me.

OS quality is already there. It's OS X Leopard. Doesn't get any better than that.

And standalone OS isn't gonna happen. Then it'll be something akin to Windows in terms of stability and driver issues.

(LTD said @ #6.3)
OS quality is already there. It's OS X Leopard. Doesn't get any better than that.

And standalone OS isn't gonna happen. Then it'll be something akin to Windows in terms of stability and driver issues.

Hmm... I don't have any stability or driver issues with my Windows machine... Perhaps Apple's Boot Camp drivers are flaky?

(Galley said @ #6.5)
You do realize that Leopard runs fine with only 1GB of RAM, don't you?

But, like Vista with 1 gb of ram, you can't run any professional applications worth a damn on iOS X either with that little bit of memory. :)

PS I'm running a Vista machine with 512mb as a media center PC and it works just fine thanks. I'm sure OS X could do the same. Oh ah, the crowd goes wild...ahem.

they top end doesn't even have 4gb of ram. You can get 4gb of ram for less then $100 and it makes a huge difference. Especially how everyone claims these are movie/music/art whatever machines. That would be a huge factor.

This is the only thing that I call a ripoff in this update. But hey, they follow the market, I don't think anyone sells a normal computer with 4GB. You have to customize it to get it. (correct me if I'm wrong?)

(PsykX said @ #4.1)
In terms of performance? I'd say they're either equal or in advance. Certainly not way behind.

You do realise that they use the exact same parts now, right? Since they just started using these particular parts now, and the fact that they came out months ago, shows just how behind they are.

(ivanz said @ #4.2)
You do realise that they use the exact same parts now, right? Since they just started using these particular parts now, and the fact that they came out months ago, shows just how behind they are.

You do realise the new iMac utilizes Montevina (Centrino 2), a platform that won't be officially released by Intel in another month? Same goes for the 3.06 GHz mobile Penryn CPU.

(.Neo said @ #4.3)

You do realise the new iMac utilizes Montevina (Centrino 2), a platform that won't be officially released by Intel in another month? Same goes for the 3.06 GHz mobile Penryn CPU.

The stuff listed in the articles is definitely not new. Another month? Oh no, I guess the OEMs that got the platform months ago wont release laptops based on the same platform as soon as Intel announces the "official" release....right when Apple will release it

(FusionOpz said @ #2.4)
Yes but it breaks the OS X EULA and the law.

OMG, heaven forbid anyone would break the EULA...ffs.

/sarcasm

(excalpius said @ #2.6)

OMG, heaven forbid anyone would break the EULA...ffs.

/sarcasm

Yeah...

Because you are so much cooler if you warez stuff.