Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

New iMac with ThunderBolt ... Plausible to Use?

Oh, man... I'm not ready to write-off the possibility of 6Gbps support just yet. It could be crippled in the EFI. If it is a hardware choice, then I am shocked -- the chipset's primary SATA host is in fact 6Gbps x 2. So makes one wonder, if it is indeed a hardware limitation, why Apple would have chose to do this? I can not come up with one single reason that could explain this... Never mind that the new Macbook Pro systems have 6Gbps internal connections...

That said, 3Gbps is still plenty fast for any internal HDD. And even fast enough for most SSDs as far as sustained speeds are concerned. Like Tom says, the real benefit is in the TB ports and external RAID storage to really make these systems perform. I'm anxious to see what the new Mac Pro systems will bring. I think most of us here will be looking more that direction or to building a comparable PC workstation ourselves.
 
i'm superbly psyched about all the TB products on the horizon. not just raids, but pci expansion, break out cables for esata, multi port hubs, LTO maybe? lots of possibilities with that much bandwidth. if new mac pros come out with dual 10 g TB ports. you can easily dedicate one port for your raid, one port for every connection you'd ever want, even I/O units like the black magic ultrastudio, and start freeing up some PCI E slots at last.
 
iMacs are fine for editing on, although Redcine doesn't have enough ram with my 3ghz dual core, 4gb, 256mb ati machine..unless I run it in 32bit xp with bootcamp.. go figure.. probably should have got the nvidia model with 512mb..never mind

The big drawback is/was external storage I/O speed, but thunderbolt may have fixed that so.. get the best gfx card , and a decent screen res., the larger screen models may use up valuable gfx memory.. and it will be fit for purpose..
 
One thing that's a bit frustrating about Thunderbolt -- and this is probably not the case but still -- it seems like developers got access to Thunderbolt at the time of it's official release. Or right before. Otherwise, how else can you explain ZERO hard drives being ready for Thunderbolt yet? NEARLY 2 MONTHS AFTER RELEASE?? To me, that's a bit crazy. And the only drive I've been able to find out about is the LaCie one that is supposed to be released "later this year."

Anyway, I'm just venting. I'm sure there's more -- but it really seems like a snafu on Intel (and perhaps Apple's part) to make such a big deal about Thunderbolt, get everyone excited, and then have no compatible products ready and available at launch.
 
AnthonyFlores said:
One thing that's a bit frustrating about Thunderbolt -- and this is probably not the case but still -- it seems like developers got access to Thunderbolt at the time of it's official release. Or right before. Otherwise, how else can you explain ZERO hard drives being ready for Thunderbolt yet? NEARLY 2 MONTHS AFTER RELEASE?? To me, that's a bit crazy. And the only drive I've been able to find out about is the LaCie one that is supposed to be released "later this year."
Click to expand...

That's pretty much what happened. Intel only let a couple hardware makers know about TB before its release (only just before, we're talking days) and everyone else found out as it went out with the new Macbook pro systems. It was kinda odd, but I think between Intel and Apple they wanted the big surprise unveiling. Which did kinda work, but you're right, the lack of available products to plug into those ports does suck.

G-Tech, Sonnet, BMD, AJA and a few others announced TB products at NAB. Promise and LaCie announced along with the MBP release. G-Tech, Sonnet and Promise all had working products on the NAB show floor to demo. It's all coming real soon. I haven't made a big deal about it, but I have a pre-release TB unit here that holds 2x2.5" devices. I currently have two 750GB 7200rpm HDDs in it and it's nice and snappy. I bet it would scream with some good SSDs. Internally, it has dual 6Gbps SATA connections and an onboard controller that supports RAID-0, 1, JBOD or span. I'm running RAID-0. It is not from any of the above manufacturers I listed, but I can't say any more than that. Hardware is finalized, firmware still needs some work -- there are a couple small issues to iron out yet. They're saying it should be in production by the end of next month. I have to send this unit back soon. :(

Personally, I'm really looking forward to the RAIDs with 4+ drives from G-Tech and Promise. These are going to make the new MBPs and iMacs truly viable for a lot of editing tasks.

Carey Lee Coffey said:
Joe, can you, or someone else here, please post a link to this $200 RAM you're talking about. Thanks!
Click to expand...

OWC has good memory products, great warranty and support. They are highly recommended for Mac memory. They currently have 16GB kits for $207.99 --
http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other World Computing/1333DDR3S16S/
 
Eventually, I'm sure RED will have a thunderbolt version. If not, they need to contact me so we can get them going with thunderbolt.
 
This is such a bizarre product. The configuration is similar to competitors' laptops in a similar price range - I have never seen that before! (Granted, the iMac has a bigger screen, etc. etc.) A 4 thread 2.5 GHz CPU and a laptop 6770M GPU are simply not one would expect from a $1200 desktop. It does look nice, and I think that's the focus of this product. They have compromised by adding in LV CPUs and laptop graphics - just to keep it sleek and thin. Fair enough, but I don't think an iMac is a viable option for any post production work, or indeed, any high performance work/play. It is aimed squarely for consumption.
 
Not a viable option for ANY post production work? That's a strong statement. It may not be for color correction or heavy graphics work, but I think it will be just fine for basic editing.
 
Carey Lee Coffey said:
Not a viable option for ANY post production work? That's a strong statement. It may not be for color correction or heavy graphics work, but I think it will be just fine for basic editing.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Sorry Subhadip, I will trust Jeff Kilgroe before your opinion ... obviously it has it's limitations, but I know people who travel with these things -- I have myself before for writing projects. So that can be useful in certain instances. And for less, than $3,000 if you upgrade wisely, that's cheaper than a loaded MBP laptop -- not a bad deal. I may get one, in addition to the new towers which I hear are definitely going to be refreshed this year with TB as well.
 
Gee, uh, thanks... Anthony. ;) Not trying to get in the middle of any opinion wars here, but Subhadip made some valid points. The new iMacs are a bit strange in their positioning within the market. But I do disagree about them not being viable for production or post-production work. They have their place. There are lots of PCs or Mac Pro options that are better suited for certain tasks. I would not reach for an iMac if I were spending any serious amount of time in AfterEffects, Maya, Nuke, etc.. That's not what they are for. They're not powerhouse systems for transcoding or final render of anything, etc.. But they're good for primary edits, basic color work, general design tasks, many 3D modeling tasks and more. They just are what they are...

And Apple sorted the 6Gbps SATA question today with an EFI update. So they do have 6Gbps support...
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
Oh, man... I'm not ready to write-off the possibility of 6Gbps support just yet. It could be crippled in the EFI.
Click to expand...
haha, how did you know?

With the EFI-Update everything seems to be fine with SATA III (all ports despite one for the optical drive are 6Gbps now)...
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2011/05/05/in-the-final-analysis-there-is-sata-iii-on-the-imacs

I always wonder why they fix that stuff after the release... it's not the first time.

edit: too slow... :(
 
Last edited:
honestly i still think a single 6g port for your boot disk isn't really all that impressive, nor is it that important. fastest SSD's at 3g sata is smoking fast as is, the real performance would still come from the TB and your raids. It's gonna be a bigger deal with the new mac pros if every port in there is 6g. now that's some super zippy speeds!

but i guess if you could theoretically double the speed of your boot drive, your programs and multi tasking are just that much faster, but i still think it might be overkill for just a simple boot drive. I'd never use my boot drive for a scratch disk...
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
Gee, uh, thanks... Anthony. ;) Not trying to get in the middle of any opinion wars here, but Subhadip made some valid points. The new iMacs are a bit strange in their positioning within the market. But I do disagree about them not being viable for production or post-production work. They have their place. There are lots of PCs or Mac Pro options that are better suited for certain tasks. I would not reach for an iMac if I were spending any serious amount of time in AfterEffects, Maya, Nuke, etc.. That's not what they are for. They're not powerhouse systems for transcoding or final render of anything, etc.. But they're good for primary edits, basic color work, general design tasks, many 3D modeling tasks and more. They just are what they are...

And Apple sorted the 6Gbps SATA question today with an EFI update. So they do have 6Gbps support...
Click to expand...

I do agree - I think they will do fine for a lot of quick post production work. I just don't think they are suitable as a primary post production machine. The entry level iMac with laptop-class processing power is simply not good enough for most heavy duty work. The 27" iMac with the 3.4 GHz / 8 thread i7 (presumably Core i7 2600) offers decent hardware, but at that price we are in the Mac Pro region.

In my opinion, Apple are missing a Mac Pro Light - something with a Core i7 six-core CPU - at least the Core i7 970 - to bridge the gap between the iMac and the Xeon based Mac Pros. However, on a purely performance level, this config will surely outdo the entry level Xeon quad core Mac Pro.
 
i think apple needs to just give up, and allow MAC OS to be completely open to be installed on any hardware set up you want legally, and offer up the hardware and drivers support too. :D


Hell I'd pay a yearly licensing fee to be able to do that.
 
KETCH ROSSi said:
Really need a computer to take to Italy and sure was hopping for the new MAC PRO tower to be out in time, now dilemma dilemma,
should I get the top of the line iMAC or deal with my new MBP??

No doubt need to use the Red Rocket Card.
Click to expand...

as of now, there wouldn't be a way to hook up a rocket to the imac, unless you wanna give the sonnet thunderbolt pci slot adapter a chance. but that's 4x only i believe. if you want full use of rocket just go with a tower. having a few more cores or a TB port won't really speed up rocket transcoding THAT much. at the end of the day even when the new ones come out, the tower you get now can always be dedicated to rocket transcoding, which is super fast, sometimes even faster than real time, and get a different set up for editorial and or color work. TB ports just offer up more options for fast raids, and expansion, but it won't cripple workflow not having it. that's what standard sas and raid cards are for. I'm still busting a 2009 8 core tower, and it's making me money all the same as if i took the plunge for a 12 core. and when i get the new one whenever this comes out, i'm still keeping this tower cause it will keep making me money till it blows up/melts/disintegrate :)
 
Tom.Wong said:
i think apple needs to just give up, and allow MAC OS to be completely open to be installed on any hardware set up you want legally, and offer up the hardware and drivers support too. :D
Click to expand...

Apple are the second largest computer manufacturer in the US. If they licensed Mac OS X, chances are they'd slip right back down. Apple's business model is working very well for them, and I doubt that they'd be very interested in doing it the Microsoft way (just compare how Apple stock has changed over the last 10 years compared to MS stock).

Although, of course, for a while they actually did licence Mac OS. It didn't work and was one of the first changed Steve Jobs made when he came back to the company.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top