iRumor: quad-core and new dual-core iMacs due within weeks

Not soon after there were some rumors that the company has told its resellers that supplies of iMacs will be constrained in the immediate future, we have another analyst speculating that new models of iMacs are a few weeks away!

It's been 280 days since Apple updated the last iMac, more than the 211 average number of days between updates. Kaufman Brothers analyst, Shaw Wu gives the latest status update of new iMacs with the help of his supply chain sources. According to him dual-core and quad-core iMacs are likely to be available within a few weeks as Apple has cut short its supply of existing models of iMac.

Wu estimates in his report that iMacs account for 25% of Apple's Mac business and could increase to 36% after the new iMacs enter the market. He also expects the release of new version of Mac Pro with 2 Nehalem 8-core processors(enabling a 16-core). Wu quotes sources and indicates that the iMacs are due in March or June despite his belief of iMac refresh in a few weeks.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Panasonic rolling out WirelessHD in Japan

Next Story

Bang On: Firefox, you're kind of ugly

30 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

The lack of a non-Xeon quad-core Mac (of any sort) has been rather telling, especially with the cheapness of LGA775-based quads. (Seriously, does *anyone* believe that the very reason that Q6xx0/Q8xx0/Q9xx0 are in such large supply is for ANY reason other than because none whatsoever are going to Apple?) Right now, Apple's line-up has no real *middle* in terms of desktops. You have the Mac mini (low-end) then the iMac, and then that big jump to the Xeon-based Mac Pro. Where's the middle (between iMac and Mac Pro)? Apple in particular used to thrive in the middle (the original Power Macintosh and the Performa) were designed, built, and sold as middle-end computers. I had even thought up the idea of an LGA775-based Performa II as the new middle-end Mac (based mostly on known components that Apple was already using, either in the existing iMac, Mac mini, and Mac Pro; the case would have come from the Mac Pro, for example, and the motherboard would have been a modified version of a system board still in use today from Apple partner Intel); yet Apple didn't go there.

The question still begs - why not?

rakeshishere said,
*sigh*

Quad core is so outdated


Yeah, we're all on Oct- and hexadec-core computers... Oh wait, no we're not...

d4v1d05 said,

Yeah, we're all on Oct- and hexadec-core computers... Oh wait, no we're not...

Yeah, I mean, it's definitely news-worthy that Apple is finally updating to tech that has been available elsewhere for...years.

d4v1d05 said,

Yeah, we're all on Oct- and hexadec-core computers... Oh wait, no we're not...

Well there are 8-core computers. I don't know if all of them are supported by Windows, but the Mac Pro comes standard with 8 cores of fun.

DanielZ said,


Well there are 8-core computers. I don't know if all of them are supported by Windows, but the Mac Pro comes standard with 8 cores of fun.


The idea is a quad to come in below the Mac Pro (which will likely get a XEON based on the i7); however, Apple SHOULD have done this back when Kentsfield was weighing down Intel inventories like an albatross made of sand.

Apple's lack of a middle-end desktop (which the iMac really is not) is rather embarrassing for a company that helped DEFINE the middle-end (have we forgotten the Performa and the original Power Macintosh, which replaced it?). However, after Apple killed off the clones, they also killed the middle-end that they defined.

And why Kentsfield? Simply put, there would need to be NO re-engineering (in terms of hardware OR software) required. Apple would not have needed to make really anything in the way of changes, as, except for the processors themselves, they had EVERYTHING to build such a system in their blasted parts bins already! (Other than the socket design, there is NO difference between Q6600 and X3220. The operating system can't tell them apart. The apps can't tell them apart. The frigging *utilities* can't tell them apart. One didn't need to be Apple to know that; Intel itself whacked everybody over the head at their own IDF in 2005, then whacked us system-builders upside the noggin with the followup at ICC later that year.) However, other than (of all people) Dell, nobody bit.
Not HP.
Not even the middle-tier system-builders.
And especially NOT Apple.
Result: Q6600 languished like a lead weight.
It was a humungous opportunity for Apple; they actually had Intel over a barrel! OS X (Tiger and Leopard) is tailor-made for multi-core, as the iMac and the C2D Mac minis (and the Mac Pro, of course) rather ably prove, and a Q6600-driven Performa would have been a "workstation for the rest of us". (Most of the middle-end Hackintoshes are, by and large, based on the Q6600; they are proving to be blistering fast, and not horribly expensive. In short, the same hallmarks of the original Performa and Power Macintosh.)

If that is indeed the case, I have to ask: What kept you, Apple?

Remember i7 is different arichtecture they'll have to do a major hardware refresh for it. Chances are it'll be kentsfield or yorkfield quadcores if any same as you see in mac pro.

I hate Apple just for the fact they don't give roadmaps.

"Oh lets keep the release of the product a secret till the very end moment so we sell as much obsolete hardware as possible"

On another note, why do we have to get spammed with every single apple-related "news" piece?

It's a slight improvement, but nothing to awe about. Maybe if they put i7's in those Macs, I'd consider it.

And when can we expect dual and quad-core processors computers from other manufacturers? When will Neowin post news releases for Dell's dual and quad-core computers?

C_Guy said,
And when can we expect dual and quad-core processors computers from other manufacturers? When will Neowin post news releases for Dell's dual and quad-core computers?


Neowin has done just that (two years ago, in both cases). Dell's Inspiron 530 has been primarily a quad-core-based computer since its launch nearly two years ago; the same is true of the Pavilion Media Center and Pavilion Elite (which, despite the name, is actually a middle-end desktop). A year ago, both desktops made news by going with Windows Vista 64-bit (mostly Home Premium, with Ultimate as an option) as the standard (also, both desktops went with 3 GB as the minimum loadout, with big-box retailer Best Buy pushing 6 GB versions of both machines at sub-$1K prices).

but these may not be the Penryn core 2 quads but in fact the Nehalem quads.

should be interesting to see the changes in performance.

Soldiers33 said,
they update thier products like every month.

Nah, not that frequently. They gotta string their users along and create hype. Make it seem revolutionary and amazing...when they cram typical PC hardware into a pretty shell.

Infusion- said,
Nah, not that frequently. They gotta string their users along and create hype. Make it seem revolutionary and amazing...when they cram typical PC hardware into a pretty shell.


That's the most accurate description of Apple I've heard.
+1 Internets to you.

Infusion- said,
Nah, not that frequently. They gotta string their users along and create hype. Make it seem revolutionary and amazing...when they cram typical PC hardware into a pretty shell.

Haha. So true. Well done.

Orlando Rays said,
This is just a processor upgrade. The latest dual-core processors. Not sure yet if they'll be Core 2's or Core i7's though.

Core i7s are only quad cores so far...