Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
2017 iMac refresh wish list [merged]
- Thread starter Sirmausalot
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I was adamantly in favor of 16:10, but now that I have a 5K iMac with a pair of 2560x1440 external monitors, I have plenty of vertical space on the screens and I no longer am vexed about the 16:9 ratio.
Can anyone explain to me the benefit of Xeons CPU when i7s can come with 6 cores already? What is the benefit of ECC for a machine that is hardly ever used for mission-critical computations?
(actually I'm not sure why ECC even exists. The arguments for it all sound highly theoretical, and I've never seen a concrete example. Can standard memory return wrong results sometimes? How often are system crashes because of memory errors?)
EDIT: how reliable is this source anyway? Do they have a good track record? To me pikeralpha is the one who provided the boot.efi file that enables recent OS X versions on old Mac Pros, but I don't know their connections with Apple.
Last edited:
The main benefit of Xeons is they're "better binned" (so they're the best of the production lot) and therefore should be able to perform at maximum all the time and would be least susceptible to errata (not bug) and that they can work with ECC memory. As to the need for ECC memory, if you are doing something like financial or scientific computing where any error would corrupt the results, then you want memory that can handle the most common corrupting memory errors so you can trust the data being output.
As to the source, I kind of feel they are guessing. On the flip side, it's possible the "iMac Pro" is designed to take the place of what was the entry-level Mac Pro - 4 core Xeon with lowest-end workstation graphics. So the new Mac Pro would have a 6-core or 8-core Xeon as it's entry level model with a better baseline GPU and higher-end options.
As to the source, I kind of feel they are guessing. On the flip side, it's possible the "iMac Pro" is designed to take the place of what was the entry-level Mac Pro - 4 core Xeon with lowest-end workstation graphics. So the new Mac Pro would have a 6-core or 8-core Xeon as it's entry level model with a better baseline GPU and higher-end options.
Seriously, I don't like this rumours about Xeons in iMacs, especially the bit about the next models being more expensive than "normal" iMacs, as the blog author says in a reply to a question.
For an iMac, "Xeon" is only a marketing term. It's more money for the same power an i7 can provide. Let's not fool ourselves. No one needs ECC in an iMac. It's like "Fire Pro" in a Mac Pro. On macOS, a Fire Pro does nothing that a radeon cannot do. I know what ECC is supposed to bring, but I've yet to hear about a case where non-ECC ram has given wrong results. And who's doing mission-critical computations requiring ECC on an iMac?
As for the chip reliability. Yeah I don't know if Xeons are more reliable than i7s. Are there any statistics on that?
I fear that Apple might do just like they did with the latest MacBook Pros. Release models that are at least 500$ more than the current ones (cause, you know, they have USB-C and OMG! Xeons) and leave the current ones, which will be 2 years old by them, at they initial price.
What I really don't like about the whole Mac product like, is that if you want some particular feature, you have to go for the higher-end model. Want the VEGA AMD GPU and not the piss-poor Intel Iris? Here, take that 4000$ iMac that comes with a 6-core Xeon. I don't need a Xeon thank you.
For an iMac, "Xeon" is only a marketing term. It's more money for the same power an i7 can provide. Let's not fool ourselves. No one needs ECC in an iMac. It's like "Fire Pro" in a Mac Pro. On macOS, a Fire Pro does nothing that a radeon cannot do. I know what ECC is supposed to bring, but I've yet to hear about a case where non-ECC ram has given wrong results. And who's doing mission-critical computations requiring ECC on an iMac?
As for the chip reliability. Yeah I don't know if Xeons are more reliable than i7s. Are there any statistics on that?
I fear that Apple might do just like they did with the latest MacBook Pros. Release models that are at least 500$ more than the current ones (cause, you know, they have USB-C and OMG! Xeons) and leave the current ones, which will be 2 years old by them, at they initial price.
What I really don't like about the whole Mac product like, is that if you want some particular feature, you have to go for the higher-end model. Want the VEGA AMD GPU and not the piss-poor Intel Iris? Here, take that 4000$ iMac that comes with a 6-core Xeon. I don't need a Xeon thank you.
Last edited:
As has been noted already, Intel charges the same price for the Xeon E3 equivalent of the i7s currently in the Mac. Apple might decide to charge more to increase margins, but they're not going to have to due to higher component costs.
I see plenty of iMacs in financial and scientific installations and both of those disciplines benefit from ECC memory. I expect the iMacs are not used for tasks that cannot allow memory corruption because of the risk, but if they had ECC, I would expect those institutions to buy more iMacs (I assume they're using Xeon PCs with Linux for those tasks now).
Apple didn't give any hints or specifics on what the iMac Pro would contain. We're just discussing analyst supposition.
Listen to the man. MAKE IT THICKER SO IT HAS A GOOD GPU. Make IT THICKER so the iMac has better cooling pipes and more fans instead of one. Make it thicker so it can have more ram and better speakers. Make it thicker so we can swap out the disk. Make it Thicker because of desktop that does not move does not need to be thin just to look pretty.
Wish list:
27" 5k iMac
Same great screen as current model or better
Intel i7 7700
64 GB of non-ECC DDR4 memory
NVIDIA 10 series GPU
4 Thunderbolt 3 ports
SD Card slot
Ethernet port
Improved cooling
Touch bar magic keyboard as an add on
27" or 30+" 5k iMac
Screen needs same or better specs as 27"
Intel Xeon E3 1280 V6
64 GB of ECC DDR4
NVIDIA Quadro Pascal (P3000M or higher)
4 Thunderbolt ports
SD card slot
Ethernet port
Extreme cooling
Touch bar magic keyboard standard.
27" 5k iMac
Same great screen as current model or better
Intel i7 7700
64 GB of non-ECC DDR4 memory
NVIDIA 10 series GPU
4 Thunderbolt 3 ports
SD Card slot
Ethernet port
Improved cooling
Touch bar magic keyboard as an add on
27" or 30+" 5k iMac
Screen needs same or better specs as 27"
Intel Xeon E3 1280 V6
64 GB of ECC DDR4
NVIDIA Quadro Pascal (P3000M or higher)
4 Thunderbolt ports
SD card slot
Ethernet port
Extreme cooling
Touch bar magic keyboard standard.
Sounds just what I would want.
To be honest though would rather see these higher specs in the Mac Pro where it can handle all the heat well when I max it out on rendering etc.
I was at an autodesk VR event recently and they had a Dell workstation with a GeForce 1080 in it and the fans made it sound like it was about to take off - they were on full. I am not sure I want an iMac running at this level unless the cooling is improved.
Xeon and Quadro don't mean higher TDP.
Plus the Mac Pro uses the Xeon E5 series, which is higher end than the Xeon E3 series that I mentioned in my above post.
I don't want no Quadro nor Fire Pro in an iMac, thank you. On macOS, they are just marketing terms. They bring nothing that equally powered Geforce or Radeon don't offer. Nothing. They're just an excuse to raise prices.
The FirePros in the MacPro are easily beaten by gaming Radeons or Geforces that you can use in a cMP or a 1000$ hackintosh.
The FirePros in the MacPro are easily beaten by gaming Radeons or Geforces that you can use in a cMP or a 1000$ hackintosh.
Last edited:
Apple didn't give any hints or specifics on what the iMac Pro would contain. We're just discussing analyst supposition.
Would seem more like the reason they even make a "Pro" model is the upcoming 6-core consumer CPU. So they can have a even more differentiated line-up of 21.5" skylake, 27" kabylake, pro model coffee lake, with the smaller models deliberately getting weaker hardware. I imagine Xeons get hotter, but could be wrong. If not they would have to make the iMac fatter like the old CRT model.
Strictly speaking it wouldn't have to be the size of the CRT iMacs, probably at least the size of the 2009 ones, sans disc drive.
My thoughts are the iMac should stay at a similar level it is at now with maybe a better GPU [maybe the 6 core I7 with an VR ready GPU], and the Mac Pro is the machine to buy when you need a Workstation [Xeon, Quadro etc]. I need the latter.
Just an increase in the GPU is all that is needed on the iMac really for it to be more 'pro' [plus the E3 xeon if same speed / TDP]. Be whisper quiet at higher loads would be great [so enlarged casing but not vastly increased specs].
Anything above this is mac pro territory.
Problem is for me is what to do in the meanwhile for the biz...... haven't got a clue. For 3D modelling, minor rendering, graphic design and photography. Plus I want to dip my toe into VR for future work. Not a single mac works for all this - probably only a maxed iMac and mac pro [6 core with D700]