The 27-inch Apple iMac Review (2011)
by Anand Lal Shimpi on May 27, 2011 2:30 AM ESTFunky Cables and SSDs
Apple doesn't just use the extra chassis volume in the iMac for heat dissipation, the system also comes equipped with a single 3.5" hard drive rather than the smaller 2.5" drives you find in notebooks. With the exception of the entry level iMac which comes with a 500GB drive, the remaining iMacs ship with a 1TB hard drive. By today's standards 1TB isn't anything to be excited about, particularly if you're storing a lot of music, photos and videos. The drives are all 7200RPM and come from either Seagate or Western Digital.
Retail drive cost is around $65 and the cost to Apple is likely even lower than that as an OEM ordering in bulk. With less than 3% of the cost of the high end 27-inch iMac being devoted to the hard drive it's clear that Apple doesn't view storage as anything other than a commodity. This philosophy extends to Apple's take on SSDs as well. While my review system didn't come with a SSD, Apple tells me that the 2011 iMacs use the same SSDs that the 2010 iMacs offered as an option (apparently a Toshiba based SSD - confirmed it's the same Toshiba SSD used in the 2011 MacBook Pro). The SSD isn't available on the $1199 iMac.
There's only one drive offered: a 256GB Apple branded drive for $500 in lieu of your internal hard drive. If you want it in addition to the 1TB hard drive it'll be $600 or $750 if paired with a 2TB hard drive. I don't have to tell you that while I believe an SSD is worth that much money, the drive Apple will sell you isn't exactly worth its upgrade cost.
While it's possible to add an SSD on your own, doing so requires a pretty lengthy teardown process. There are great tutorials online that help show you the way as well as provide you links to all additional cables that you'd need. There's no tray for the SSD to live in by default so you either have to cleverly adhere it to the inside of the chassis or order a part specifically designed to do so.
Apple opted for high quality fairly standard SATA cables for the iMac so I don't believe we'll see the compatibility issues on the iMac that we've seen in the MacBook Pro. In typical Apple fashion there are no spare power cables just laying around inside the iMac, instead you'll have to split power off from the hard drive to power both it and your aftermarket SSD. The whole process looks doable with a bit of patience and the right tools.
Apparently Apple likes to query HDD temperature quite frequently and uses that data in determining fan speed. In order to keep those requests off the SATA bus Apple supplies a custom power cable with surprisingly low gauge wires to not only power the hard drive but also return temperature data to Apple's fan controllers. The cable looks like this:
The standard SATA power cable is five pins. There's one pin for each voltage rail (3.3V, 5V and 12V) and two pins for ground. Apple's custom cable has seven pins, the remaining two are for temperature data. If you replace the iMac's internal hard drive with a drive that doesn't provide the appropriate temperature data, Apple's fan controller will go bonkers and try to cool what it assumes is an overheating drive.
When presented with this information, our own Brian Klug had a simple suggestion: short the two temperature pins to fool them into thinking all is good. It turns out that Apple provides a similar suggestion if you have a SSD-only iMac. Awesomely-named-site Hardmac.com has the scoop.
On the iMac, HDD power is provided through a proprietary connector on the motherboard. Short pins 2 and 7 (just connect the two using a simple wire) and you'll be able to run the iMac with no HDD plugged in and avoid the uber-spinning-fans. I'm guessing if you want to run with your own 3.5" drive in there that doesn't work with Apple's sensor setup simply short those two pins on the power cable itself (you'll have to tap into and modify the cable for this to work) and you should be good to go. Given that this is a review sample from Apple, and that Apple isn't too fond of me taking their review samples apart, I haven't tried the solution. But if shorting pins 2-7 on the motherboard header works, then shorting those two pins on the cable should work as well.
Now it's a pain that we even have to have this discussion, in fact it's the lack of easy upgrades that makes me so uncertain about the iMac. It's a fast machine with a great display but what happens in a couple of years when I need a faster GPU or even sooner when I want an SSD or larger HDD. At least the latter is possible.
With PCIe it's completely feasible to bring some modularity to these components. If anyone is willing to break the mold and explore something unique it's Apple, unfortunately I'm just not seeing that here.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
139 Comments
View All Comments
KoolAidMan1 - Sunday, May 29, 2011 - link
iMacs don't use mobile CPUs. My gaming PC and my 2009 iMac have the exact same CPU, a Core i7-860boop - Saturday, May 28, 2011 - link
anand, i used to have the same dilemma you face regarding the syncing of files across multiple machines. i even did the same thing as you and tried to use an macbook pro as a desktop replacement. it didn't work out so well. a notebook that's powerful enough to be a desktop replacement isn't portable enough -- and a notebook that's particularly portable just isn't powerful enough to be a desktop replacement.The solution I found was to use google docs and other related online services to store all my work files. as you know you can access the files on any machine, and even be logged in on multiple machines simultaneously; documents can be shared with others for collaborative work; and it also solves the problem of data back ups and laptop theft since nothing is locally stored. my current Mac setup is a 13" macbook pro and the 2011 21.5" base model imac and with all my work stored in the cloud i've finally found an optimal solution to my workflow woes. hope this helps!
ananduser - Saturday, May 28, 2011 - link
Apple packages tech real well. Good display, reasonable PC, all'n'all a good looking AIO that especially does not compromise on the display side of things. Glad I am not in need for the OS or the hardware flexibility of the laptop combined with the mobility of the desktop.Even if Apple gets so much marketing coverage everywhere I am still glad that I see my own kind keeping criticism alive.
Hrel - Saturday, May 28, 2011 - link
That display is worth 400 bucks tops; it's insane to me that anyone would pay a grand for a display barely above 1080p. I can get a good ISP 27" 1080p display for 300, so that thing is worth 400 tops; which makes that whole system 300 dollars too expensive to even consider. Then there's all the laptop parts and non-upgradeability and Appleness to ruin the experience.Kristian Vättö - Saturday, May 28, 2011 - link
Find a similar display for 400$ then. It's ridiculous to argue that the display can't be worth more than 400$ when similar displays cost 1000$. If you don't think it is worth it, then that is your thing. It doesn't change the fact that the display is worth ~1000$.I also doubt that you can find a good 27" IPS display for less than 300$. Most of the good ones are either ~22" at that price range or you have to pay more.
donnyg - Saturday, May 28, 2011 - link
You can get a Hazro, which is literally the same panel as the current Apple CInema Displays minus the aluminum casing, for around $500 USD.Shipping will make it cost considerably more however.
KoolAidMan1 - Sunday, May 29, 2011 - link
There is a massive different in pixel density between a 27" display at 2560x1440 and 1920x1080, HUGE. Then there's the fact that your display is using a crap TN panel instead of an IPS, isn't LED backlit, etc etc.A good 24" IPS display from HP or Dell is going to cost $400-$500, and a 27" with the same panel from Dell or NEC is going to cost $1100-$1400.
For a site with a "techie" readership, it is amazing how little some people know about tech, or how much they are willing to excuse purely based on price. Yeah you can save money on a cheaper display, but it is going to be totally inferior in every way except for price. You get what you pay for.
MadMacMan - Saturday, May 28, 2011 - link
That's exactly right. DO YOUR RESEARCH, people. There is NO equivalent in the 27" category of HIGH-END displays and by that I mean not part but ALL of the following:LED back lighting (No CCFL bulb, thank you), in-plane switching (IPS); not your average (READ: average, as in mid-range, as in lame, as in cheap, as in what a lot of you might buy and post BS about how you're not getting ripped off by Apple because you're so much smarter; you know who you are). Finally, and perhaps even more problematic to find is its high RESOLUTION! 2560x1440. That's 78% more real estate than you get on a standard 1920x1080 display.
I dare anybody to Google me up a 26"-29" monitor with the aforementioned specs, but ALL of them, not one or two. Now go to Best Buy and buy yourself a cheap HP or order up an Acer and make sure you don't forget to rub it in. ;-)
donnyg - Saturday, May 28, 2011 - link
http://www.hazro.co.uk/HZ27WA.phphttp://www.hazro.co.uk/HZ27WC.php
IPS monitor: Check
2560x1440 resolution: Check
LED backlighting: Check
Price: 569 AUD for the the one with extra inputs/scalar,
Kristian Vättö - Sunday, May 29, 2011 - link
I don't know where you got your 500$ as 443£ is equal to 731$. That seems to be without shipping. Cheaper? Sure, but not that much.You can always save a few bucks if you do some shopping and build it yourself. The iMac, or any Apple product, has never tried to be the cheapest option or best bang per performance on the market. I would still say the new iMac is great value. I already mentioned why an OEM PC and a homebuilt one are not always comparable, especially when we get into an Average Joe level. Hardcore gamers will never be satisfied with Apple's offerings but to be honest, I don't get it why they complain then. Nobody is trying to sell them an iMac.