I think the fact that some of the links off that article suggest that Q1 2019 will see Coffee Lake refresh desktop CPUs and Whiskey Lake 15w CPUs could point to another June 2019 super upgrade cycle. This could mean all-new products including the Modular Mac Pro coming out at WWDC 2019 if other CPUs are refreshed again quite quickly.
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.
8-core i7 and i9 in 2018 iMac
- Thread starter Appleaker
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, I guess if there was any doubt, they’ve just been announced:
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-9th-generation-coffee-lake-refresh,37898.html
Later than expected, but still on time. And there’s even more good news, as AMD are expected to release their RX 600-series cards this weekend, so perhaps we won’t be getting 5__X cards which makes sense:
https://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/122966-amd-radeon-rx-670-rumoured-launch-weekend/
Edit: Swapped the Verge link with the more informative Toms Hardware link in this and the original post.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-9th-generation-coffee-lake-refresh,37898.html
Later than expected, but still on time. And there’s even more good news, as AMD are expected to release their RX 600-series cards this weekend, so perhaps we won’t be getting 5__X cards which makes sense:
https://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/122966-amd-radeon-rx-670-rumoured-launch-weekend/
Edit: Swapped the Verge link with the more informative Toms Hardware link in this and the original post.
Last edited:
Great news! If these find their way into the iMac expect new cooling. I’d love it to happen in a completely redesigned machine. Please Apple...
The iMac Pro handles upwards of 140w from the basic (admittedly underclocked and potentially cooler running than stock) Xeon CPU. The base TDP of these K series Core CPUs might be 95w but despite the CPU being soldered (as opposed to using TIM) for performance reasons that the additional heat produced when these Coffee Lake Refresh CPUs turbo will mean a bespoke cooling solution may well be required. If Apple persist with the existing solution I genuinely fear for the heat death of the screens and the other internals.
The iMac Pro cooling solution seems the obvious thing to use there, but you lose easy RAM accessibility and also hard drives for storage unless Apple's solution is a half way house between that and the iMac Pro to continue to allow the use of laptop hard drives.
Those folks looking to build an iMac Pro on the cheap may have to buy the top SKU iMac to gain access to the i9, which may come with 16Gb of Apple RAM as standard, and possibly a higher end storage too - eg 3Tb Fusion or 512Gb SSD.
The motherboard may have to change if a pricier Z390 is required to run these new CPUs. I believe the cheaper B360 would have been used on the lower SKUs.
To keep the basic case design the same Apple could apply that cooling solution to all the iMacs, locking in the RAM.
All of this will obviously raise average selling prices putting the top end iMacs into the $3-4k price band and could leave a nice gap for an improved high spec Mac Mini to drop into.
Only the K series CPUs are out now of the 9th Generation CFL-R - you'd expect the rest to follow into early 2019.
The end of top end 64gb user installable ram would send these prices sky high. ugg. This should be interesting to see how they handle all of this. As far as drives, I think it is way past the time that imac should come with no spinners or fusions etc. If people want high capacity low cost spinners they can usb or TB them easily since this isn't a portable. We really need to move on with regard to storage options, even at the budget imac as far as I'm concerned.
They'll have to find a way to include a hard drive in this for storage reasons otherwise it just becomes a slightly cheaper iMac Pro which I have to say is still the biggest clue how the iMac will evolve this year.
I am sure there are 2.5" drives of 3Tb in size which could fit into a reorganised iMac and they won't be that much more expensive than a 3.5" version. Internally, if they can sort out cooling Apple may think they can get away with it and raise the iMac average selling price (and with it the share price).
It’s good that you are following leaks etc , but you have not provided as proof that these parts will come to iMacs . My point, you have argued with others on this thread as they are wrong, while your own opinion is an assumption at best .
If you are right, apple has to redesign the iMac, it already cannot cool the i7 top spec. They can also pull the Mac mini Move and gimp the iMac as the iMac Pro is now the performance segment ..... please consider this also as a valid opinion.
Appleaker knows absolutely nothing. He's a guesser, just like everyone else. He just likes to sound like he knows.
Retroactively altering thread titles to make himself look more prescient would be a more juvenile way to build yourself up.
The quoted prices of these parts is clearly going to make people gasp after Apple have had their way with them. We're heading into the $3k-$4k range if Apple choose to use them and I'd worry for the working life of of any iMac that contains one of these i9s if they don't adopt the iMac Pro cooling system and therefore lose the RAM access door.
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple goes in a more Apple (as of late) direction with the iMac. They will make it even thinner, and go with the a processor like the i9-8950HK which is a mobile 6-core processor at 45W. Just my guess on what I'm seeing from Apple lately.
It wouldn't surprise if the new iMacs specifications are very similar to the MBP. They will also have lots of videos about how great the new display is and how thin the enclosure is.
That being said, if they do announce an 8-core iMac I'm ordering one the day they are announced.
It wouldn't surprise if the new iMacs specifications are very similar to the MBP. They will also have lots of videos about how great the new display is and how thin the enclosure is.
That being said, if they do announce an 8-core iMac I'm ordering one the day they are announced.
Performance numbers would go south with a switch to mobile CPUs. Apple even use K series Intel CPUs in the 27" models without overclocking them just to be able to get the headline base performance figures.
If Apple want to go thinner they should do that to the 21.5" iMac but the bulkiness of today is partly because of the hard drives that Apple have to fit for consumers who need storage. Without a hard drive, they need to cool the NVME SSDs (and CPU/GPU) they have in the package - and that's where the prices go up.
Apple already have an 8 core iMac. It's the iMac Pro. What's making you ignore that and jump immediately on a 2018 iMac with 8 cores? (semi-Rhetorical question as most respondents here might know from my own opinion in this thread and other threads).
Last edited:
It's important to clarify here that only the higher-end 27-inch models with either a 3.8 GHz Intel Core i5 or 4.2 GHz Intel Core i7 are K-series.
It's fair to say that's the top SKU of the 2017 model that we are discussing here. With the i7 being a BTO option for the mid and top SKU models.
You're clearly an opinionated dude, if you are half as intelligent as you are acting you already know the answer to that question...
The Xeon-W in the iMac Pro is a $1250 processor. The iMac Pro also has a bunch of other things I'd be willing to give up for a cheaper price point, ECC Memory, dual NVME for higher performance, 4 TB3 ports, and Vega graphics.
The 9th gen i9 that could be used in an iMac is ~$520. An 8-core 27" iMac based on the Core i9 should be about $1K-$1.5K less than the iMac Pro.
My point is that Apple could just be eliminating the high end 27" iMac now that the iMac Pro is available and selling fairly well. I don't want them to do that, but I will not be surprised at all if they do.
My bet would be 9700k is the most they’ll go on the iMac. Unless they use the cooling solution from the iMac Pro then maybe we will see the i9? That’s assuming the i9 generates a lot more heat than the i7, though, which we don’t know since there are no reviews yet.
Hence the use of the word 'rhetorical'.
Apple are probably charging close to $650 (on list prices alone) for having an i7 by the time you have factored in the cost of the upgrade in my opinion. Yes that's still a sizeable uplift and still notably cheaper than the Xeon but we don't know how much discount Apple get off any Intel CPU. The Xeon in particular could be a cheaper part because it's clocked lower than the stock part - Apple could be getting lower grade Xeons that haven't made the grade for example.
The addition of the cooling system and locked in RAM are the points you missed off. There's every chance the entire iMac 27" range will inherit those from the iMac Pro if Apple actually care about the heat increase with extra cores. Or you can fear the consequences if they leave the RAM door alone and you can still buy Fusion drives on top.
The main take-away I get from this speculation at the moment is that Apple are going to be filling the $3-4k range with these boutique BTO spec iMacs.
The i7-7700K is currently a $200 uplift when optioned with the top SKU 2017 iMac. The replacement option at the same price should be the i7-9700K which is 8 cores, no hyperthreading where the 2017 i7 is 4 cores, 8 threads. That's a more logical uplift from the i5 with 6 cores and no hyper threading and would sit nicely under the iMac Pro though for segmentation purposes.
The 2019 Mac Pro may also start with the same 8 core, 16 thread CPU (only faster) so perhaps Apple don't want that to muddy that water.
Weirdly, though, the i5-9600K which would be available round at roughly the same speed (3.7GHz vs 3.6GHz on the 8 core upgrade). But it'll be fairly easy for Apple to market on the extra cores or even deliver a mild overclock to even up the numbers on the i7.
The i9-9900K would represent an extra $150 by list price alone before we even discuss the requirement to use a Z390 chipset which will bump the price even more for all these 9th generation parts. At base clock it's the same speed as the i7-9700K so very slightly slower than the i5 but obviously offers 8 cores, 16 threads. You'll also note that it's faster than the 3.2GHz Xeon part in the iMac Pro 8 core SKU so there we have a problem immediately which benchmarks will probably illustrate too.
It's therefore looking possible that the top SKU iMac could actually be its own model, with a new motherboard (Z390 chipset required), 9th generation CPUs, iMac Pro cooling scheme, locked in RAM, SSD only, and possibly the only way to get an AMD 580X.
...Or Apple could ignore the 9th generation altogether as it's arrived too late for the 2018 iMac
.There's a big gap which could be filled by iMac SKUs first. My question concerns the possibility that a second 27" SKU appears and that becomes an SSD only version of the iMac (starting at 512Gb for example) to accommodate the iMac Pro cooling system. And this SKU is the only one that lets you upgrade to the best CPU option.
So we have a low end SKU, a mid range SKU which could be upgradable to i7-8700K - potentially with accessible RAM, and then a special top end SKU which comes with SSD only - starting at 512Gb, 9th generation CPUs with the potential to upgrade to i9. This SKU has that cooling system, the T2 CPU, AMD 580X, and locked away RAM - 16Gb as standard - and starts at $2799 based on existing pricing.
By the time the rest of the 9th generation CPUs get released we could be a looking at a situation where the RAM door gets removed within 2 refreshes if Apple are concerned about heat from the extra cores or care about protecting the iMac Pro in terms of price.
Last edited:
I'd very surprised if Apple created a new SKU for a different configuration of the 27" iMac.
The over all market is showing a reduction in personal computer sales. If anything I think Apple will simplify their product offerings. Currently there are 3 21" configurations, 3 27" iMac configurations, and the iMac Pro. I wouldn't be surprised if this gets reduced to 2 of each going forward. There also upgrading the Mac mini, and supposedly releasing a Mac Pro.
The 21.5" systems will be based upon the 8th Gen. i5-8305G to i7-8809G processors and not include an option for separate discrete graphics. Example configs:
1) Budget EDU Focused model based on legacy design.
2) i5-8305G, 8GB of RAM, 128GB NVME
3) i7-8706G, 16GB of RAM, 256GB NVME
The 27" systems will add options to get to the 9th gen i7/i9 processors. Storage starting at 256GB NVME with 16GB of RAM.
1)i5-9600K, 16GB of RAM, 256GB NVME, RX570
2)i7-9700K, 32GB of RAM, 512GB NVME, RX580 (upgrade options to i9, 64GB, 1TB or 2TB).
They will all be all NVME designs without a RAM door, with cooling similar to the iMac Pro.
I can see them also spec bumping the iMac Pro to make the 10-core chip the base configuration moving forward.
It's the desktop market which is receding (80/20 split with laptops according to the 2017 briefing), and Apple may have decided that anyone still seriously considering a desktop is a power user and therefore prepared to spend more on increased specification.
The prices on your suggested SKUs are going to send the iMac starting price through the roof though. Especially if you lose the 8 core iMac Pro.
If you want to consider another way to do this we could see the iMac Pro become more affordable by using the Xeon W-2135 for example - 6 cores, 12 threads and possibly up to 3.7GHz and maybe start at 16Gb with 512Gb SSD.
It then makes sense for the regular iMac range to top out with the i5-8600K but still offer the hard drive options and keep the RAM access door open while the iMac Pro starts with Vega 56.
Somewhere in all this the 'more professional' Mac Mini will have to feature. If the iMac is going upmarket then there might be the basis of a gap for the Mini to fit into.
To throw a complete curve ball into proceedings, Apple could also look at the Xeon E range - which sports higher base frequencies than the i5/i7 series - to finish off the 27" range
I believe Apple can and should justify higher price points for their SKUs as many of the remaining desktop user are looking for better performance. They still have the cheap budget config to target lower price points though based on a legacy design with SATA drives.
I don't think the 21.5" configs will increase in price that much. The upgrade price currently to got to 256GB is ~$200, that will be much less if that is the standard configuration where components are procured and assembled in mass. I could see the impact being as little as $100.
The 27" configs would likely be more expensive. Maybe the base 27" config is based on a processor like the i5-8500 instead to keep the price points down.
I don't see Apple adopting the Xeon E range in the iMac. That would just drive up cost with very little benefit. I would expect the Mac Pro to be based on the Xeon Scalable processor range (platinum, gold, silver, bronze) and be a multi socket design and be very expensive. I could see for example the Mac Pro being a tower that support 4 CPU socket, and has a bunch of TB3 or TB4? interfaces with very little else.
Xeon Scalable is going to be galactic money and it's mainly for servers - not something I'd expect top class professional workstation users to be leaping on in numbers initially given Apple's recent reputation with professional Macs. What I mean by that is would you drop deep into 5 figures on a Mac which Apple could abandon for 5 years before discontinuing without communicating with their power users? I would need Apple to create a track recording of supporting their professional users before I advise following it up and a tower Mac with 28 cores and powerful built-in GPU with eGPU options could be a good start but it's certainly not a promise of better things to come until I've seen one or two refreshes down the line.
Apple used dual processor sockets to get more cores when the Mac Pro was a young machine just to achieve the number of cores required but with single socket machines achieving upwards of 28 cores (W-3175X) now I think that would be a better stopping off point.
Apple have to hit a specific price point at the entry level for each of their products. While I think introducing the T2 CPU to more expensive Macs is inevitable, I think they'll hide the cost of that inside higher standard specs because the T2 for me is Apple's way to decimate Hackintosh in 5 years time when that version of macOS will require a T series ARM CPU to be present.
They've already done it for the MacBook Pros that have the Touch Bar, and the obvious thing to do with the iMac is to make 16Gb standard on the 27". Whether Apple lock away the RAM due to cooling requirements or simply make more money out of people buying the iMac specifically to add their own RAM to the spare RAM sockets it would make sense.
The same could happen to the 21.5" iMac too and somewhere the Mini slips in with minimum 8Gb spec and potentially better storage options.
The only thing that will settle this is an announcement from Apple. Despite all the back and forth, we don't actually know that a 2018 iMac revision is forthcoming.
As I need to buy before the end of the year, I'd very much like it if Apple would get off the stick and tell us something.
As I need to buy before the end of the year, I'd very much like it if Apple would get off the stick and tell us something.
