Apple Intel iMac review roundup

We're still gonna have to wait a little while to get word on just how good the MacBook Pro is, but the jury's not exactly out on Apple's new Intel Core Duo-based iMac -- it's pretty much unequivocally been declared a big step forward for the PC manufacturer, even despite it not actually being two times faster than its predecessor, the G5 iMac. But if you want to get a look at what everyone's saying specifically, here are some reviews we saw crop up since its release this week. (Be sure to leave more reviews in the comments for us to add!)

Read - Ars Technica
Read - TUAW
Read - Wall Street Journal
Read - CNET
Read - PC Mag
Read - Macworld
Read - MacInTouch
Read - Personal Tech Pipeline

[Jim F @ Jan 21st 2006 1:38PM]

The CNet review linked here is for the iMac G5, not the new Intel iMac...

[syadasti @ Jan 21st 2006 2:01PM]

It IS two times faster but not showing it cause the new hardware platform. It will take while to optimize the code and milk all the speed you can get out of it - thats just a fact of life with a brand new architecture. Think back on how long it took Apple to get OSX working well...

[George @ Jan 21st 2006 2:11PM]

"despite its not actually being two times faster than its predecessor, the G5 iMac"

Come on this is getting tiresome. Jobs stated it was 2X-3X faster on two CPU tests he showed. He was telling the truth. You people are distorting his claims by pointing to the full system speed which is plain wrong so please stop that and think correctly.

[Fisher @ Jan 21st 2006 2:28PM]

Alright - These stupid review sites need to FIGURE THIS OUT: Apple was using the best compilers for each CPU: IBM's compilers on the G5, and Intel's compilers on the Core Duo. (Direct Qoute from Steve J) These test that the review sites are doing are using gcc.

Not the same complier, not optimized for a specfic CPU like the ones Apple used are... So these amatures are not running the same test!

[t @ Jan 21st 2006 2:37PM]

The marketing slogan for the new computer is "2x faster. Twice as amazing." Jobs didn't say his own slogan at the keynote, George? Is the computer 2x faster?

I think a lot of the programs we've seen used as benchmarks are single threaded and this is why we've seen only slight increases in performance.

[Daley Wear @ Jan 21st 2006 2:47PM]

2006 beckons the dawn of the great Apple switch for me.
I've been debating it for a while now, but after seeing the new Macs, im gonna switch!

We could debate the speed tests etc for an eternity - my opinion - it's the first machine after the transistition, no it's not going to be the best Apple ever, but come on, it's still a shit-hot computer!!

[narco @ Jan 21st 2006 6:07PM]

Leo Laporte said on his KFI show today that he has an Intel iMac and that it wasn't a huge increase in speed. He said the one at Macworld was fast, but the unit he has to test was just a little improved.

Fishes,
narco.

[mike @ Jan 21st 2006 6:37PM]

Leo Laporte said on his KFI show today that he has an Intel iMac and that it wasn't a huge increase in speed.

---

Ah, funny, cuz, I heard him raving about it on TwiT.. he would NOT shut up about it. The reason is Rosetta emulation. Once that's out of the way, the thing is going to kick ass. In the meantime, just check iLife comparaisons between iPhoto06 on Intel and iLife06 on PPC... that seems like a logical place to start.. since iPhoto is one of the few native apps..

[mike @ Jan 21st 2006 6:41PM]

Leo Laporte said on his KFI show today that he has an Intel iMac and that it wasn't a huge increase in speed.

---

Ah, funny, cuz, I heard him raving about it on TwiT.. he would NOT shut up about it. The reason is Rosetta emulation. Once that's out of the way, the thing is going to kick ass. In the meantime, just check iLife comparaisons between iPhoto06 on Intel and iLife06 on PPC... that seems like a logical place to start.. since iPhoto is one of the few native apps..

[narco @ Jan 21st 2006 7:18PM]

Should have read the rest of my post Mike. He was raving about the Intel iMac, but the one at Macworld. The actual unit he received wasn't as fast as the Macworld unit. Or, the L.A. smog probably got inside my brain and made me believe I was listening to Leo Laporte on live radio, saying the new iMac isn't as fast. Who knows.

Fishes,
narco.

[James Rice @ Jan 21st 2006 9:06PM]

I bought a 20 Inch Intel iMac last night (my first mac), I've been a loyal PC user til now. I'm not "switching", I just want to be comfortable on both platforms. I'm also a web developer, so I needed a mac for testing anyway.

I was going to hold off for a MacBook, but I have a ThinkPad, so I really don't need a portable mac. I decided to get the iMac for less $ and more power. I also used my old ID from college to get the student discount. So I saved $150 total on the machine and applecare.

I like the iMac so far. It is not my primary computer, so it serves my purposes just fine. However, it will be nice once the Universal Binaries start rolling out!

[Ivan @ Jan 21st 2006 9:57PM]

So if the machine is barely any different than before why does having an Intel CPU suddenly change everything? People talking about switching now that its intel. Why not switch before?

[Matt @ Jan 22nd 2006 12:51AM]

Just placed my order, will be here on Tuesday :)

My first Mac, I can't wait. Got my 700m and Dimension 4600 on eBay right now. Probably going to pick up an iBook to go with the iMac soon too.

[Warren @ Jan 22nd 2006 12:59AM]

Compare....

Mac G5
2.1 (faster)
Bigger processor
1 month older

Mac Core Duo
2.0 (slower by not much)
Laptop processor, less power/other stuff.....
same processor as the laptop.....

[Matt @ Jan 22nd 2006 3:37AM]

washington post - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/21/AR2006012100163.html
"new imac dazzles, but hold that purchase"

[AK Mac @ Jan 22nd 2006 5:39AM]

Be careful what you read!!! Half of the review pages and forums I have read, have some idiot claiming how slow the new iMac really is, and how 2x the speed of a older imac G5 is a lie, and how Intel is horrible for video. These guys are so stupid! A lot of the reviews and the "benchmark" info they have gathered are based on the G5 quad with 4 GIG's of ram VS the new iMac with 512 of ram, and they say "wow the new Intel Mac is slow". OF COURSE it is slower than expected and when compared! HOLY CRAP, don't believe everything you read. I want to see these "benchmark" tests done with 4 gig and 256 video mem on the new iMac vs the G5 quad, then we will see what Steve was talking about. Level the hardware specs then compare the processors, its simple logic! Ram makes a huge difference in the speed tests. The New iMac is AMAZING! It will only get better!

[adverlicious @ Jan 22nd 2006 9:51AM]

While somewhat of a tangent to the larger iMac with Intel story, I've been archiving Apple's online advertising for review and commentary:

http://adverlicio.us/tags/296

I'll be adding more ads to this tag -- here's the RSS feed to stay current:

http://adverlicio.us/tags/296/feed

You can also catch up on the mini-controversy about how liberally Apple "borrowed" the creative concept for the campaign:

http://wiredblogs.tripod.com/cultofmac/index.blog?entry_id=1385523

[Patrick Dodds @ Jan 22nd 2006 1:48PM]

Holy monkeys the Apple crowd are a sensitive bunch. Looks like they got a nice new toy to play with though, very nice indeed. And when there is a machine that can run both mac and msft OSs, that is when the fun will really start.

[Heryo @ Jan 25th 2006 11:01AM]

http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20060118/112448/?ST=english

intel mac might be nice when proffessional apps like photoshop run native speeds.

[s r fella @ Feb 6th 2006 8:21PM]

Enough! I own a Mac Quad that came from Apple -- 1Gb RAM, GeFroce 7800GT, Hitachi 500 Gb HD . I think some "real" real world tests are in order -- along side other Mac Quads. Provide a link to benchmarking software and testing methodology and, I'll post the results.

[Roy @ Feb 16th 2006 5:38AM]

I've bought a new iMac Core Duo 20". I love it very much...

Btw, anyone out there can help me with this short survey? Really appreciate if you can help. Below is the link. Thanks.

http://fs7.formsite.com/designcolourcom/form823843100/index.html

[Jack Teh Ripper @ Mar 1st 2006 5:46AM]

Just watched both versions of iMacs run the same file in Photoshop. What a joke! Intel machine sucks big time. Better buy a G5 Power iMac while they're still available in stores.

Still amazed Apple chose Intel over AMD, when AMD X2 procs own Intel duo core all the way through the lineup.
But what really bothers me is I won't be able to have a G6 Power chip run Mac next year when IBM releases those chips capable of shattering every speed barrier ever set. Somewhere between 4ghz to 5ghz, with even more to follow all the to 6ghz due to ground breaking technology developement. IBM just anounced:
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/feb2006/tc20060207_066742.htm

Sorry Apple fanboys, but Stevey's propaganda machine is running at full speed trying to defend his move to Intel. IBM is even anounced it will be broadening their market to other applications including the embeded market. NOT JUST SERVER MARKET!

[Tyler @ Jun 18th 2006 6:45PM]

Whoa! I'[m so confused now after reading this fourm i don't know what to believe! I'm thinking of getting a mac. now after being a "loyal" pc user for years i'm sick of all the hardware conflicts and errors with windows (they don't take long to fix but they are annoying). Now that mac has intels i figured i'd buy a mac because worst case sinario i could install xp or vista (when released) on the mac and just have a really cool looking pc. but i also like to try new things. the mac os x tiger looks gggrrreat! (lol). but how could it be that fast if the processor is an core duo isn't that the new laptop thing i mean i used to think that mac cores were the fastest thing out there becasue of the fork processing power and i never bought one mostly becasuue pc's were cheaper. to sum up i really dont know what to think now and i might still get a mac to figure it out on my own but if ibm is really putting out a 4,5,6+ghz? processor next year i might just wait.

[Ian Godfrey @ Aug 23rd 2006 3:33PM]

I am sick of all the hype surrounding Mac's new Intel offerings. My wife and I purchased a new Intel iMac Duo Core 1.83 GHz with 1GB of SDRAM... We have been consistantly dissappointed, in fact from the very first day that the new machine arrived it has failed to convince us - the 15" Powerbook with the same amount of SDRAM is as fast and does not unexpectedly 'hang' like a Windows maching - the Intel iMac is regularly letting us down, regularly programs are crashing, the spinning wheel of death is a far more regular part of our lives, and this is not only with non-Universal programs - The machine seems altogether less able to multi-task than the PPC.

We switched to Mac in 2003 because I was convinced by the OS X operating system, we are not 'diehard' apologists for Apple computers, we just want something that works - with the advent of my intel Mac I am getting back the same kind of inconsistant behaviour that I was used to experiencing with my old XP machine and that is the truth - without any Hype.