Roundup: All-In-One PCs : Apple iMac 24-inch, 2.66 GHz
5. Apple iMac 24-inch, 2.66 GHz
Display
A good display. We feel justified in complaining about the glossiness of Apple's LCD panels (and the ones on mobile computers in general), but we have to admit that this is a high-quality component when it's well adjusted. This panel - which probably uses IPS technology, given its wide viewing angles - had nice, true colors at its default settings. We didn't note any serious colorimetric drift; just a slight gamma shift in the darkest tones. But do keep in mind that for graphics professionals, calibration is always imperative.
The panel's response is also very good. Our test procedure gave it a rating of 4, putting it significantly ahead of the run-of-the-mill 5 ms TN panels found in the great majority of mobile computers. As for the contrast rate, the results were a bit less sterling. Black measured at 0.35 with white at 208 nits, for a contrast ratio of 594:1, an average score.
Widescreen Apple
Apple iMacs are computers whose components are all in the same housing as the display. That means there's no ugly computer case, and you can count on Apple to come up with smooth and snazzy design. This model has a 2.66 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor and is the entry-level model in this display size.
First impressions - design
There's no point in praising Apple yet again for its lovely visual design, but we will. We found a few points to be critical about with this model, but its looks and build quality aren't among them. The glass-and-aluminum housing looks great on a desktop, making this an object that's as aesthetically pleasing as it is functional.
Keyboard and mouse: Not very impressive
The keyboard and mouse, on the other hand, didn't win over all the members of our editorial staff. The keyboard is compact enough, but it has no number pad and the keys have been downsized like those on a small notebook PC. When ordering, you can opt for the wired version with number pad - the white Apple Keyboard - at no extra cost. We feel it's a much better choice.
Ultra quiet
We have to mention the operating noise of this unit. It's all but non-existent. You have to put your ear up against the screen to hear the low hum of the fan. It's really a very quiet machine. And that goes for the DVD drive too - it can sound like a vacuum cleaner on certain computers, but it's very discreet on this one. Do note that this is a DVD, and not a Blu-Ray drive, since Apple is still resisting the new disc format.
Webcam could stand improvement
The webcam has a few faults. It's responsive enough, but it has a tendency to burn (white patches) the brightest areas of the image. The microphone worked well, picking up voices but no background noise.
Connectivity
The iMac has the following interfaces: 6 USB ports (two on the keyboard, four on the computer itself), 1 FireWire 800, 2 optical mini-jacks, 1 RJ45, 1 Mini DisplayPort. The following are lacking: e-SATA, HDMI, and a memory-card reader.
Accessibility
Is it possible to access the insides of the machine? Not unless you have a big suction cup to lift off the LCD panel and get to the components underneath. Only the RAM is user-accessible, via a trap located under the shell, between the speakers.
Performance
4 GB of RAM, an Intel Core 2 Duo processor clocked at 2.66 GHz, and a 640-GB hard disk... If I were looking for a mobile computer with equivalent components, I'd look to the Fujitsu-Siemens Amilo Xi 3650. Its CPU is slightly less powerful, but its technical characteristics are fairly similar.
Test results for the new and the old version of the 24-inch iMac are shown in orange and red, respectively. The Xbench scores for the hard disk have hardly changed, and for 3D only slightly. But the memory and CPU scores show sharp increases. You can thank the jump from 2 to 4 GB and 2.4 to 2.66 GHz for the improved scores.
Games
An Nvidia 9400M GPU is a legitimate choice for gaming in a 13-inch model. But in a 24-inch (with a resolution of 1900x1200 pixels), it just isn't. So you'll want to stay with 2D games and 3D ones that don't have heavy resource demands.
A choice of three graphics cards
With the high-end versions of this box, there's a choice of three GPUs - the Nvidia GT120 and GT130 and the ATI HD4850. We'll decode the Nvidia chips for you: The first is an 8600GT, renamed as 9500GT, then as GT120; the second is a 9600 GT renamed as GT 130.
Clean sound
To find the iMac's speakers, you have to look on the bottom edge of the shell, behind the perforated aluminum. It's a very aesthetically pleasing solution, but acoustically it gives rise to a lot of problems. That's because the sound is directly affected by the vertical angle the screen is set to, the properties of the surface the computer is placed on, and the proximity (or lack thereof) of a wall behind it. That's a shame, because Apple has made a point of rolling off the bass fairly high - as they do with their notebook computers -, avoiding premature speaker damage, vibrations in the shell, and other such problems. The headphone jack also delivers very clean sound. Note that the line in and headphone outputs also serve as optical audio input and output. That's not necessarily indispensable, but it's a good thing to have.
Low power consumption
The iMacs' slim lines are explained in part by their use of mobile components. They have the advantage of low power consumption. Our test model drew 105 Watts with Wi-Fi enabled and no application running, and 130 Watts when running an especially demanding Photoshop script. Compared to a "standard" notebook, that's double or triple the consumption. But compared to the average desktop computer, it's 1.5 to 2 times less (including the display).
Apple iMac 24 inch 2.66 GHz | |
|---|---|
| Pros | Cons |
|
|
Handsome, speedy, and with a well-adjusted display, the 24-inch iMac has a lot of strong points, but not everything is perfect. The GPU in the entry-level version is underpowered for games, Apple is still staying away from Blu-Ray, and the included mouse and the default keyboard really aren't up to the standards of the rest of the machine.
| Processor | Intel Core 2 Duo (2.66 GHz) |
| Memory | 4 GB |
| Graphics chipset | Nvidia 9400M |
| Display | 24 inches (1920x1200) |
| Hard disk | 640 GB |
| Optical drive | DVD burner |
| Dimensions | 520 x 485 x 189 |
| Weight | 20 pounds |
- iMac Desktop (2.66GHz...
Interesting that you chose the higher spec'd Apple then gave it the higher rating. Well...duh! Perhaps the HP IQ800 series with similar size screen and the same 9400M graphics (available with a Blue Ray player, even) would have been a better fit. Or compare the 20" Apple with it's lower resolution, comparable to the HP.
And why is the HP noted to be difficult to move around, but the same comment is not made about the 24" screen Apple?
Since you were demonstrating an array of products, the rating should have reflected price. If one only has $800 to spend, it doesn't make any difference how good the Apple is, you can only compare the Atom machines.
Frankly, these machines serve different purposes. The Atom machines are what netbooks are to the laptop world. They are not intended for the power user, and that should be considered in their rating. My mother would be well served by a simple machine that does email and a few simple tasks well, without taking up much space or cost.
But I have no use for such a basic machine. The HP and Apple are desktop alternatives, and really cannot be directly compared to the Atom machines, because they are not marketed to the same user. But, they do have to compete for my dollars with a full desktop, and they fail miserably, even compared to my current machine with its 8800GTS 320 graphics. I'm looking at upgrading my machine, and I can upgrade my box to I7 920, GTX260, 6GB (and a smattering of other stuff) for about $800 (I roll my own, in an aluminum case that's seen about 3 MBs so far).
This article reeks of Apple favoritism.
The iMac is applauded for its low power consumption, while the Asus uses only 1/4 as much power. The Asus and MSI are criticized for a lack of ports, but the iMac has the same shortcomings. Every "con" for the HP is true for the iMac as well, so how did Apple earn that extra star?
It sounds like the only thing the iMac does better is look pretty on a desk, and pack a little more power for twice the cost.
"...but only recently have they become PCs."
Oh really? I can remember playing around with a Compaq 486SX integrated with a 14" color SVGA display in the early 1990s (a 1993 model it was, I think).
On the other hand, the Macintosh name actually started with an all-in-one in 1984...
When was this article written? August 3rd? Seriously?
You could only manage to find a measely four All-in-Ones? What about Dell's Studio One? Or Avaretec's 22" D1005 or budget-minded D1100? How about Lenovo's Idea Centre A600? These are major competitors, and deserve attention.
I wanted an article that could help me discern the possible uses and values of each of these All-in-Ones so I could weigh the merits of each and make logical assessments. I have been eagerly awaiting such even-handed benchmarking from TomsHardware...
Instead, I got a poorly written iMac ad.
Fanboy = Fail.
Mac > PC = True
Don't forget that the first mass selling all-in-one was the Commodore PET.
since all the others have touchscreen as a plus, shouldn't apple having no touch screen be a con?
I've always thought the huge bulky PC towers that people like myself love so much will be on their way out of the mainstream very soon. In fact, most people I know own micro-towers or laptops now. Even I haven't turned my own tower on in weeks, as my laptop works as a desktop replacement box.
Still though, not sure if I like the AIO PC concept, I'm gonna stick with my laptop.
There are quiet a few calls of Apple bias and on the surface it seems to be correct. There needs to be a weighing system that is clearly defined before hand so in the readers mind the comparison are oranges to oranges. Cause it is somewhat unfair to compare an atom and core duo on the same scale with out some de-rating concept as they really are two different types of CPU