2017 5k Imac or Imac Pro

[joema2]

Thanks joe- I appreciate the detailed breakdown.

By the way, how is iMovie now in terms of exports of 1080?...

Sorry I rarely use iMovie, so am not familiar with recent performance or behavior. However it is widely used by professionals. I recently met a newspaper reporter who said iMovie is all they use for editing news videos. But FCPX gives a lot more options and flexibility.

 

[JasonMovieGuy]

Sorry I rarely use iMovie, so am not familiar with recent performance or behavior. However it is widely used by professionals. I recently met a newspaper reporter who said iMovie is all they use for editing news videos. But FCPX gives a lot more options and flexibility.

Yeah I'm excited about FCPX! I'm getting it in the fall.

 

[driftless]

I want to add to what joema2 has written. My current iMac is a late '14, first one with 5K. When it came out not only where there threads about fan noise, a lot of them, but how HOT the iMac ran. There was a long thread about the heat, with lots of comments from folks who did not own the machine. Lots of gloom and doom in the early threads. Well, I ordered the maxed out version and it is still a fine machine. I don't have as much storage as joema2 but I have two arrays and even when I am working on 4K video I can easily enjoy classic music in the background. FWIW - the router that came with my GB Comcast service is far louder than my iMac and externals.

I am going to order the iMac Pro. I use mainly FCPX and I am excited about not only the GPU and CPU changes but the ability to go to 64GB, and more, RAM along with a 4TB internal SSD. I am not a pro but I am currently working on a documentary with often multiple cameras, two shorts, and I do talking head videos for non for profits and churches.

 

[EugW]

FWIW - the router that came with my GB Comcast service is far louder than my iMac and externals.

That’s very strange. My Bell Gigabit router / gateway is fanless so it’s completely silent. Maybe it’s time Comcast updates its hardware for you.

 

[driftless]

Mine is noisy. I was one of the first adopters in the Chicago-area, I was number 5 in my area. It took half-day, the installers spent most of the time on the phone. I should check to see if there has been an equipment upgrade.

 

[Dave245]

Really it all depends on what you plan to do, if you are only doing light work then the new iMac would be great, but if you intend to edit a lot and or work on 3D or VR and push the machine a lot then you might want to consider the iMac Pro.

Im sure more details of the iMac Pro will come out as we get closer to December. It looks like a great machine however the price is high and if you don't nees that much power it might be a waste.

 

[joema2]

...Anyone with a 2014 or 2015 iMac 27 i7 will not be surprised at the 2017 from a noise standpoint. If anything it is a little quieter....

I've now done some testing of a top-spec 2015 vs 2017 iMac 27 i7. There are scenarios where the 2017 is louder, but it's doing much more work. In FCPX, when transcoding H264 4k video to proxy, the fan spins up quicker than the 2015. That's running the exact same job on both machines. To a casual observer it definitely sounds louder. But the 2017 is producing *twice* the performance, IOW it finishes a transcoding job in 1/2 the time of the 2015 i7.

Also, even though the fan spins up sooner, the 2017 CPU and GPU temps dont get excessively high. The CPU peaked at about 71C and GPU was about 50C. The 2015 i7 CPU was the same temp but the M395X GPU was 10C hotter than the 580 GPU on the 2017.

This is only one workload so the behavior may vary on others. The 2017 was staggeringly fast on this test vs the 2015, but it was also louder. The 2017 fan went to 2700 rpm and stayed there, whereas the 2015 fan ramped up slower, then stayed mostly around 1800-2100, with only brief periods at 2700. I'd personally take 200% better performance any day, but if this fan behavior is representative, I can see why it might bother some people.

When both 2015 and 2017 fans were at 2700 rpm, they sounded equally loud.

 

[EugW]

I've now done some testing of a top-spec 2015 vs 2017 iMac 27 i7. There are scenarios where the 2017 is louder, but it's doing much more work. In FCPX, when transcoding H264 4k video to proxy, the fan spins up quicker than the 2015. That's running the exact same job on both machines. To a casual observer it definitely sounds louder. But the 2017 is producing *twice* the performance, IOW it finishes a transcoding job in 1/2 the time of the 2015 i7.

Also, even though the fan spins up sooner, the 2017 CPU and GPU temps dont get excessively high. The CPU peaked at about 71C and GPU was about 50C. The 2015 i7 CPU was the same temp but the M395X GPU was 10C hotter than the 580 GPU on the 2017.

This is only one workload so the behavior may vary on others. The 2017 was staggeringly fast on this test vs the 2015, but it was also louder. The 2017 fan went to 2700 rpm and stayed there, whereas the 2015 fan ramped up slower, then stayed mostly around 1800-2100, with only brief periods at 2700. I'd personally take 200% better performance any day, but if this fan behavior is representative, I can see why it might bother some people.

When both 2015 and 2017 fans were at 2700 rpm, they sounded equally loud.

With video encoding (to h.265) in Handbrake, my 2017 i7-7700K was hitting 100C and then dropping into the mid-90s. The fan was pegged at 2700 rpm. It hit 2700 rpm well within the first minute, and then never budged from there until the encoding stopped.

Also, while this may not be a relevant test for most, it hit max fan way faster than my 2010 Core i7 870 2.93 GHz machine. But of course, the 2017 i7 was also way more powerful than the 2010 i7. Over twice as fast. And eventually, the 2010 i7 did hit max fan.

In contrast, my 2017 i5-7600 has never budged beyond 1200 rpm, even after I tried 10 minutes of h.265 encoding. But, it's quite a bit slower at encoding than the i7.

 

[Jack Burton]

I am going to order the iMac Pro. I use mainly FCPX and I am excited about not only the GPU and CPU changes but the ability to go to 64GB, and more, RAM along with a 4TB internal SSD. I am not a pro but I am currently working on a documentary with often multiple cameras, two shorts, and I do talking head videos for non for profits and churches.

I dunno, man. That sounds like a pro to me: you use your machine to do heavy video work and want to speed up the process.

The iMac Pro is perfect for you since you spend so much time in FCPX.

 

[driftless]

I've now done some testing of a top-spec 2015 vs 2017 iMac 27 i7. There are scenarios where the 2017 is louder, but it's doing much more work. In FCPX, when transcoding H264 4k video to proxy, the fan spins up quicker than the 2015. That's running the exact same job on both machines. To a casual observer it definitely sounds louder. But the 2017 is producing *twice* the performance, IOW it finishes a transcoding job in 1/2 the time of the 2015 i7.

Also, even though the fan spins up sooner, the 2017 CPU and GPU temps dont get excessively high. The CPU peaked at about 71C and GPU was about 50C. The 2015 i7 CPU was the same temp but the M395X GPU was 10C hotter than the 580 GPU on the 2017.

This is only one workload so the behavior may vary on others. The 2017 was staggeringly fast on this test vs the 2015, but it was also louder. The 2017 fan went to 2700 rpm and stayed there, whereas the 2015 fan ramped up slower, then stayed mostly around 1800-2100, with only brief periods at 2700. I'd personally take 200% better performance any day, but if this fan behavior is representative, I can see why it might bother some people.

When both 2015 and 2017 fans were at 2700 rpm, they sounded equally loud.

Wow, that is a big performance gain.
[doublepost=1499884284][/doublepost]

I dunno, man. That sounds like a pro to me: you use your machine to do heavy video work and want to speed up the process.

The iMac Pro is perfect for you since you spend so much time in FCPX.

I am looking forward to the iMac Pro. Even if the iMac Pro was not released I would be purchasing a new machine at roughly the same time. The release time for the iMac Pro worked out nicely for me.

 

[Jack Burton]

I am looking forward to the iMac Pro. Even if the iMac Pro was not released I would be purchasing a new machine at roughly the same time. The release time for the iMac Pro worked out nicely for me.

 

[propower]

Also, even though the fan spins up sooner, the 2017 CPU and GPU temps dont get excessively high. The CPU peaked at about 71C and GPU was about 50C. The 2015 i7 CPU was the same temp but the M395X GPU was 10C hotter than the 580 GPU on the 2017.

This seems very odd to me. On my 2017 i7 (when I had it) fans would never spin up if the CPU was <~95degC. Full fan and 71degC CPU - never seen that.

 

[joema2]

This seems very odd to me. On my 2017 i7 (when I had it) fans would never spin up if the CPU was <~95degC. Full fan and 71degC CPU - never seen that.

I was reporting the "CPU proximity" number, which is misleading. I should have reported the "CPU core" number which was around 95C to 98C. This was iStat Menus. Even then I don't fully trust that number since I've seen various tools report different values. Ideally the same group of people reporting results should use the exact same parameter of the exact same tool.

 

[mpe]

I am a Freelance Graphic Designer working in London. I work mainly in CC versions of Photoshop, Illustrator and Indesign..

I think you'll be more than happy with quad-core iMac 5k if using this.

 

[Trahearne]

Hey there,

I wonder if I could ask for a little advice on the suitability of the Imac 2017 or the Imac Pro.

I am a Freelance Graphic Designer working in London. I work mainly in CC versions of Photoshop, Illustrator and Indesign.

The most taxing projects I work on are large events, so stage sets and wall sized posters things like this. Large multilayered Illustrator and Photoshop files. And large multipage Indesign documents with plenty of high res imported images. The largest files can sometimes hit 3 or 4 GB +. I usually have Multiple apps running, all of the above plus MS PPT, Excel and Word, flicking between all these constantly.

I am toying with pushing the button on a fully loaded 5K IMac now or an IMac pro when they arrive. I think I know the answer but wanted to fully confirm it with people who know their stuff far more than I.

The main Q here, or at least i think so is, would the 8 Core Imac pro be significantly better than the full fat i7 5K IMac 2017 in these apps or not. I am finding it tricky to get detailed definitive sourced information on how many cores Illustrator, Photoshop and Indesign use these days. I don’t mean some odd filters here and there but real world day-to-day use of the programs.

I have the budget for either, cost isn’t the issue, however I don’t want to waste my budget for little gain.


Thanks for all your advice in advance.

All these in general neither scale with many cores, nor particularly GPU taxing, especially when you are presumably working in 2D graphics design. They may contain features that can scale, e.g. various kinds of complex Photoshop filters, or exporting batches of images, but those are unlikely frequently used in your workloads I'd assume.

Getting an 27" iMac with SSD, and upgrading the memory on your own, should end up with the same day-to-day performance as an baseline iMac Pro in your case.

 

[JasonMovieGuy]

Doesn't the iMac 27 also have virtual reality / 360 video capabilities ? It states it in the overview on Apple's site.

Surprised many are saying they're going to just get the iMac Pro and maxed out at that. Won't that be like $7-8k?? Not knocking it- if I had the money I certainly would've have gotten it. But it's interesting that people are quick to buy this but there's a long thread about fusion vs SSD and people on those threads refuse to spend the extra $ on the SSD because it's "too much".

The 4TB SSD on the iMac Pro for configuration sounds like heaven. As do the processors. Oh well, I'll be content with what I have for now.

 

[driftless]

I think that a maxed out iMac Pro will be $10 - 11K. I think that a 10 core, 64GB RAM, 2 TB SSD, and max GPU will be $8K.

 

[fathergll]

I want to add to what joema2 has written. My current iMac is a late '14, first one with 5K. When it came out not only where there threads about fan noise, a lot of them, but how HOT the iMac ran. There was a long thread about the heat, with lots of comments from folks who did not own the machine. Lots of gloom and doom in the early threads. Well, I ordered the maxed out version and it is still a fine machine. I don't have as much storage as joema2 but I have two arrays and even when I am working on 4K video I can easily enjoy classic music in the background. FWIW - the router that came with my GB Comcast service is far louder than my iMac and externals.

I am going to order the iMac Pro. I use mainly FCPX and I am excited about not only the GPU and CPU changes but the ability to go to 64GB, and more, RAM along with a 4TB internal SSD. I am not a pro but I am currently working on a documentary with often multiple cameras, two shorts, and I do talking head videos for non for profits and churches.

joema2 mentioned earlier "For H264 video editing the iMac Pro uses Xeon so will not have Quick Sync so (like the Mac Pro) that's a significant limitation. "


Is that going to be a limitation for your work in FCPX?

 

[EugW]

Depends on the Xeon, but most of the recent Xeons actually do have QuickSync.

My main question is not just if they will have QuickSync, but if their version of QuickSync will support h.265 well, because only the very recent ones will do that well.

 

[driftless]

joema2 mentioned earlier "For H264 video editing the iMac Pro uses Xeon so will not have Quick Sync so (like the Mac Pro) that's a significant limitation. "


Is that going to be a limitation for your work in FCPX?

I do not know yet. I am looking forward to serious reviews. I am guessing that there will be the equivalent of Quick Sync as Apple uses it for FaceTime, Airplay, etc. as well.

 

[joema2]

Depends on the Xeon, but most of the recent Xeons actually do have QuickSync...

No Xeons have Quick Sync except for a few E3 4-core versions. This is a major problem any workstations in the video editing market which will ever touch long a GOP codec like H264, H265, VP9 or AV1. It means you can't have a 6-core or above workstation with Quick Sync. That's why a MacBook Pro can out-perform a 12-core Mac Pro D700 when importing, rendering or exporting H264.

 

[driftless]

Does Apple have any other options?

 

[joema2]

Does Apple have any other options?

The only option they have (for their own software, like FCPX) is enhance that to use AMD's VCE logic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_Coding_Engine

I don't know how feasible that is and it wouldn't help other non-Apple software vendors unless they also wrote to that API. Intel really needs to add Quick Sync to Xeons and i7 and i9 CPUs with over 4 cores.

 

[driftless]

Thanks.

Edit: I am guessing that there will be a work around as Apple is promoting the iMac Pro as a video editing machine. Looking forward to the details and review.

 

[mcomp112]

My personal opinion, having owned several Macs over the years and working in several agencies that use Macs extesively: the iMac is not made to be outfitted with a 91W i7 CPU. The i5/Radeon Pro 575 configuration is really its limit in terms of providing decently quiet operation while performing well. The i5/Radeon Pro 570 is what most people should get, in my opinion.

The iMac Pro, which is constructed to house an 18 core CPU, should easily be able to cool the lowest tier configuration, which I believe is 8 core. If you really need the power, go for the iMac Pro.

For 99.99% of all users, the i5/Radeon Pro 570 of the regular iMac is more than enough. In case you like spending more on your machines for occasional gaming and bragging rights, the i5/Radeon Pro 575 upgrade could be justified. I work with creators who put out world class material using 13 inch MacBook Pros! If you truly are one of the few who needs even more power, the iMac Pro is the way to go.