Decision time i7 vs i9 for new 2020 iMac?

[mlykke]

Again, and separate from the rest of this post, my calculation (and many others') is: I have workflows that use multiple instances of single-threaded and multi-threaded programs so for $400 or however much it cost –since I'm using this machine to produce work that generates an income– I just pay for more cores and call it a day. Whether I'm wrong or right about how much faster this will "make my stuff go" is offset by the $400 "insurance" that I probably didn't leave performance and efficiency on the table.

And getting the i9 is in no respect a bad thing, especially not if the $500 doesn't matter to you and that you earn a living from the machine. Unfortunately just not a lot faster than the i7 which we could have hoped for, but that doesn't make the i9 a bad processor. It's still a beast

 

[mlykke]

I viewed them as having a 20% difference but guess I'm wrong.

Well it's 25% if you increase from 8. But it's 20% if you subtract from 10. 😄

 

[ADGrant]

And getting the i9 is in no respect a bad thing, especially not if the $500 doesn't matter to you and that you earn a living from the machine. Unfortunately just not a lot faster than the i7 which we could have hoped for, but that doesn't make the i9 a bad processor. It's still a beast

Well its actually only $400, even less if you get some kind of discount as I did through my employer.

As to how much faster it is that is a very difficult question to answer. Most of the video editing benchmarks You Tubers show don't really test the CPU, some don't even test the GPU. Testing performance under thermal load matters for a video export that takes 45 minutes but not at all for a 2 minute compile.

Even those which do test the CPU are also testing the SSD performance because most real world tasks involve writing something to file system.

The theoretical 25% performance improvement would only hold if each core at full utilization on the 10 core was equivalent to each core on the 8 core. We know this isn't true of course. It also assumes every thread can run independently of every other thread, which is possible but not that common (depending on the workload).

OTOH the 10 core does have a somewhat larger L3 cache and more cores means less context switching which will reduce cache misses. This will help performance somewhat.

In most cases though, the 10 core certainly won't your computer slower unless you opted for the 10 core instead of a GPU, SSD or Memory upgrade. If you have specified say a 5700XT, a 2TB SSD and installed 64gb of RAM, the 10 core is pretty much the only upgrade left.

 

[mlykke]

Well its actually only $400, even less if you get some kind of discount as I did through my employer.

As to how much faster it is that is a very difficult question to answer. Most of the video editing benchmarks You Tubers show don't really test the CPU, some don't even test the GPU. Testing performance under thermal load matters for a video export that takes 45 minutes but not at all for a 2 minute compile.

Even those which do test the CPU are also testing the SSD performance because most real world tasks involve writing something to file system.

The theoretical 25% performance improvement would only hold if each core at full utilization on the 10 core was equivalent to each core on the 8 core. We know this isn't true of course. It also assumes every thread can run independently of every other thread, which is possible but not that common (depending on the workload).

OTOH the 10 core does have a somewhat larger L3 cache and more cores means less context switching which will reduce cache misses. This will help performance somewhat.

In most cases though, the 10 core certainly won't your computer slower unless you opted for the 10 core instead of a GPU, SSD or Memory upgrade. If you have specified say a 5700XT, a 2TB SSD and installed 64gb of RAM, the 10 core is pretty much the only upgrade left.

The short answer is that the i7 is 99,9% identical in performance to the i9. Also for things that is not related to video rendering. In some tests the i7 is faster. Just see the video below which just proves everything I've been saying - And it's not the only video that shows it.
It's quite simple - the i7 has a higher base clock, maintains a higher turbo clock causing it to offset the difference in cores on the i9 which is limited by the cooling potential of the iMac. So basically, don't waste your money on the i9 - Just get the i7.

I think I've said enough on this subject.

 

[CE3]

This sort of reminds me of the first i9s in the MacBook Pro. These 10-core chips aren’t being thermally throttled like that cpu was, but the thermal management still seems to be getting in the way of making it much of an upgrade over the i7.

There are still likely some applications and workflows where the extra edge the 10-core offers is worth it when time is money. In the Maxtech video @10:50 it’s interesting to see how much a software update can change how an application manages resources, with the old version using 91% of the CPU and the new update only using 12% for the same task. Who’s to say another update doesn’t completely change it again down the road.

 

[ADGrant]

This sort of reminds me of the first i9s in the MacBook Pro. These 10-core chips aren’t being thermally throttled like that cpu was, but the thermal management still seems to be getting in the way of making it much of an upgrade over the i7.

There are still likely some applications and workflows where the extra edge the 10-core offers is worth it when time is money. In the Maxtech video @10:50 it’s interesting to see how much a software update can change how an application manages resources, with the old version using 91% of the CPU and the new update only using 12% for the same task. Who’s to say another update doesn’t completely change it again down the road.

There was a post from mlykke earlier in this thread demonstrating exactly that. This graph compare the multi-core performance of MySQL 5.6 and the previous version 5.5. MariaDB is a fork of MySQL.

 

[slicktromboner]

I originally ordered the i9, but decided to return it after seeing the benchmarks for the i7.

Actually, I would have just kept the i9 if they let me exchange the AirPods Pro that were included in my EDU order. Apple would not exchange the AirPods Pro for a pair of regular AirPods and said that I needed to return the $4k BTO computer that was shipped from across the planet and order another one. Insanity.

I took the opportunity to change the i9 to an i7 ($360) and AirPods Pro to regular AirPods ($90). My new order went straight from "Processing" to "Preparing to Ship", so hopefully I'll have it soon!

 

[creativityrules]

I originally ordered the i9, but decided to return it after seeing the benchmarks for the i7.

Actually, I would have just kept the i9 if they let me exchange the AirPods Pro that were included in my EDU order. Apple would not exchange the AirPods Pro for a pair of regular AirPods and said that I needed to return the $4k BTO computer that was shipped from across the planet and order another one. Insanity.

I took the opportunity to change the i9 to an i7 ($360) and AirPods Pro to regular AirPods ($90). My new order went straight from "Processing" to "Preparing to Ship", so hopefully I'll have it soon!

You don't like the AirPods Pro?

 

[slicktromboner]

I like how they sound and love the noise cancelling but they ache after about 20-30 minutes, which is a deal breaker.

 

[rkuo]

Only if those cores where 100% identical - They are not. And raw benchmarks have shown around a 10% difference - So thats going to be your maximum in an optimal situation where the software is highly optimized to run with 10 cores/20 threads. In practice it's most likely going to be lower than that. A benchmark of Logic gave around 3% difference between the i7 and the i9 and what is a purely CPU driven load. Other tests have shown 100% identical performance in a bunch of tasks as well.

Thats the entire point of this discussion. A lot of people are still claiming or expecting the performance to be much better on the i9, just like you are talking about 25% which is very far from the actual numbers. This causes people to spend money on something and not getting what they expect.
If an increase of, most likely, 2-5% in some very specific cases is of great importance to you, then go with the i9. This makes sense if the iMac is your bread and butter machine and those few percent will end up saving a substantial amount of time during your workday. And if you want the i9 just to say you got the highest spec possible, then go ahead. But for 99,9% of even power users, the i9 won't make any difference.

Yes, I was speaking based on the theoretical 8 -> 10. But looking at these benchmarks more, I'm swinging back towards the i7.

The i7 benchmarks in the iMac seems to line up closely with the desktop 10700k, but the i9 is nowhere near the desktop 10900k. The desktop 10700k -> desktop 10900k scales how I would expect, but not in the iMac. So yeah, I guess we really are seeing some limits being hit on the iMac 2020 i9.

I think from a work perspective I can easily still justify the 10 core even at a 5% bump and will get it when we are all back in the office. And short bursts of more linear scaling will still be useful during incremental builds and tests, etc.

 

[theDanielJLewis]

Since MaxTech released their 8-core vs. 10-core video, I’ve been questioning my choice for the 10-core. And after reading every comment here, I’m still not sure. So maybe I just need someone to make some some hot cocoa, give me a hug, and say “you made the right choice.”

I do many things on my computer: video editing (currently 1080p, but 4K next year), programming, designing, and soon gaming again. I usually have a Vagrant VM running Ubuntu for my SaaS local dev environment along with Local running a WordPress site or two. I sometimes use Parallels Desktop for testing, demonstrating, or screen-recording things in Windows, Android, macOS High Sierra, and macOS Big Sur beta.

I always have Brave Browser, Slack, and Evernote open in the background.

While being a full-time business-owner, I’m also a full-time daddy to a toddler, so I get precious little time to work each day (3–5 hours). So I often need to render a video in Adobe Media Encoder while continuing to edit in Premiere Pro.

This will be my primary workstation PC, replacing my maxed-out 2014 MacBook Pro. I already invested in the 5700 XT, 64 GB of third-party RAM, 2 TB SSD, 10 GBe, and the Magic Trackpad 2. While cash flow is currently tight, I can afford the extra $360 the i9 cost me (after discount and taxes), but it really comes down to this question:

Did I make the right choice for me, or did I waste $360?

 

[ZacksWorld]

Since MaxTech released their 8-core vs. 10-core video, I’ve been questioning my choice for the 10-core. And after reading every comment here, I’m still not sure. So maybe I just need someone to make some some hot cocoa, give me a hug, and say “you made the right choice.”

I do many things on my computer: video editing (currently 1080p, but 4K next year), programming, designing, and soon gaming again. I usually have a Vagrant VM running Ubuntu for my SaaS local dev environment along with Local running a WordPress site or two. I sometimes use Parallels Desktop for testing, demonstrating, or screen-recording things in Windows, Android, macOS High Sierra, and macOS Big Sur beta.

I always have Brave Browser, Slack, and Evernote open in the background.

While being a full-time business-owner, I’m also a full-time daddy to a toddler, so I get precious little time to work each day (3–5 hours). So I often need to render a video in Adobe Media Encoder while continuing to edit in Premiere Pro.

This will be my primary workstation PC, replacing my maxed-out 2014 MacBook Pro. I already invested in the 5700 XT, 64 GB of third-party RAM, 2 TB SSD, 10 GBe, and the Magic Trackpad 2. While cash flow is currently tight, I can afford the extra $360 the i9 cost me (after discount and taxes), but it really comes down to this question:

Did I make the right choice for me, or did I waste $360?

As a business-owner, you're going to waste $360+ of your time thinking about it lol... No second-guessing, just go compute ****!

 

[ZBoater]

Did I make the right choice for me?

Yes you did. Enjoy your i9.

 

[BuCkDoG]

Since MaxTech released their 8-core vs. 10-core video, I’ve been questioning my choice for the 10-core. And after reading every comment here, I’m still not sure. So maybe I just need someone to make some some hot cocoa, give me a hug, and say “you made the right choice.”

I do many things on my computer: video editing (currently 1080p, but 4K next year), programming, designing, and soon gaming again. I usually have a Vagrant VM running Ubuntu for my SaaS local dev environment along with Local running a WordPress site or two. I sometimes use Parallels Desktop for testing, demonstrating, or screen-recording things in Windows, Android, macOS High Sierra, and macOS Big Sur beta.

I always have Brave Browser, Slack, and Evernote open in the background.

While being a full-time business-owner, I’m also a full-time daddy to a toddler, so I get precious little time to work each day (3–5 hours). So I often need to render a video in Adobe Media Encoder while continuing to edit in Premiere Pro.

This will be my primary workstation PC, replacing my maxed-out 2014 MacBook Pro. I already invested in the 5700 XT, 64 GB of third-party RAM, 2 TB SSD, 10 GBe, and the Magic Trackpad 2. While cash flow is currently tight, I can afford the extra $360 the i9 cost me (after discount and taxes), but it really comes down to this question:

Did I make the right choice for me, or did I waste $360?

You wasted money, sorry.

 

[BuCkDoG]

Yes you did. Enjoy your i9.

I Love how you are factually incorrect but you still try to defend your nonsense lol. I bet you're just totally hooked because the number 10 is higher an 8 and 9 is higher than 7 lol.

 

[ADGrant]

Since MaxTech released their 8-core vs. 10-core video, I’ve been questioning my choice for the 10-core. And after reading every comment here, I’m still not sure. So maybe I just need someone to make some some hot cocoa, give me a hug, and say “you made the right choice.”

I do many things on my computer: video editing (currently 1080p, but 4K next year), programming, designing, and soon gaming again. I usually have a Vagrant VM running Ubuntu for my SaaS local dev environment along with Local running a WordPress site or two. I sometimes use Parallels Desktop for testing, demonstrating, or screen-recording things in Windows, Android, macOS High Sierra, and macOS Big Sur beta.

I always have Brave Browser, Slack, and Evernote open in the background.

While being a full-time business-owner, I’m also a full-time daddy to a toddler, so I get precious little time to work each day (3–5 hours). So I often need to render a video in Adobe Media Encoder while continuing to edit in Premiere Pro.

This will be my primary workstation PC, replacing my maxed-out 2014 MacBook Pro. I already invested in the 5700 XT, 64 GB of third-party RAM, 2 TB SSD, 10 GBe, and the Magic Trackpad 2. While cash flow is currently tight, I can afford the extra $360 the i9 cost me (after discount and taxes), but it really comes down to this question:

Did I make the right choice for me, or did I waste $360?

You did. You didn't give up anything else for the i9 and think how much you saved not buying an iMac Pro.

I don't edit video but if I did I would probably try to learn FinalCut. According to all these YouTube benchmark videos, it really is much faster on a Mac than Adobe software.

 

[BuCkDoG]

You did. You didn't give up anything else for the i9 and think how much you saved not buying an iMac Pro.

I have to disagree. Think about how much more he could have saved and gotten the same performance with the i7...

 

[ADGrant]

I have to disagree. Think about how much more he could have saved and gotten the same performance with the i7...

Only another $360.

 

[theDanielJLewis]

Here's something I haven't seen discussed much. What do you think are the chances Apple might release a firmware update that improves how the i9 performs? (Yes, I know there are certain hardware limits, but there are obviously some imposed or accidental limits, too.)

 

[iemcj]

This year's Mac, meet last year's cables. Thanks Apple.

Er what? Those are the thunderbolt 2 cables, last computer that had that was the 2015 imac. Heck my 2017 imac is moved onto the T3 ports.

 

[pldelisle]

Since MaxTech released their 8-core vs. 10-core video, I’ve been questioning my choice for the 10-core. And after reading every comment here, I’m still not sure. So maybe I just need someone to make some some hot cocoa, give me a hug, and say “you made the right choice.”

I do many things on my computer: video editing (currently 1080p, but 4K next year), programming, designing, and soon gaming again. I usually have a Vagrant VM running Ubuntu for my SaaS local dev environment along with Local running a WordPress site or two. I sometimes use Parallels Desktop for testing, demonstrating, or screen-recording things in Windows, Android, macOS High Sierra, and macOS Big Sur beta.

I always have Brave Browser, Slack, and Evernote open in the background.

While being a full-time business-owner, I’m also a full-time daddy to a toddler, so I get precious little time to work each day (3–5 hours). So I often need to render a video in Adobe Media Encoder while continuing to edit in Premiere Pro.

This will be my primary workstation PC, replacing my maxed-out 2014 MacBook Pro. I already invested in the 5700 XT, 64 GB of third-party RAM, 2 TB SSD, 10 GBe, and the Magic Trackpad 2. While cash flow is currently tight, I can afford the extra $360 the i9 cost me (after discount and taxes), but it really comes down to this question:

Did I make the right choice for me, or did I waste $360?

You did the right choice. Enjoy your i9. It was justified.

I didn't know this browser. I always use Safari. I find it best optimized for macOS.

 

[mlykke]

Since MaxTech released their 8-core vs. 10-core video, I’ve been questioning my choice for the 10-core. And after reading every comment here, I’m still not sure. So maybe I just need someone to make some some hot cocoa, give me a hug, and say “you made the right choice.”

I do many things on my computer: video editing (currently 1080p, but 4K next year), programming, designing, and soon gaming again. I usually have a Vagrant VM running Ubuntu for my SaaS local dev environment along with Local running a WordPress site or two. I sometimes use Parallels Desktop for testing, demonstrating, or screen-recording things in Windows, Android, macOS High Sierra, and macOS Big Sur beta.

I always have Brave Browser, Slack, and Evernote open in the background.

While being a full-time business-owner, I’m also a full-time daddy to a toddler, so I get precious little time to work each day (3–5 hours). So I often need to render a video in Adobe Media Encoder while continuing to edit in Premiere Pro.

This will be my primary workstation PC, replacing my maxed-out 2014 MacBook Pro. I already invested in the 5700 XT, 64 GB of third-party RAM, 2 TB SSD, 10 GBe, and the Magic Trackpad 2. While cash flow is currently tight, I can afford the extra $360 the i9 cost me (after discount and taxes), but it really comes down to this question:

Did I make the right choice for me, or did I waste $360?

Yes, you "wasted" your money. At least you didn't really get anything out of those $360.

Even after all the stuff a bunch of us has written and the countless benchmarks showing the i9 basically performs identical to the i7, people are still trying to convince themselves that it might still be a better choice. It's clear - The i7 is identical to the i9 in performance and that is not going to change with a future software update, since even the raw performance difference is around the 9-10% mark, which is the absolute best you would be able to see. But all real-world benchmarks show identical performance and sometimes that the i7 is faster than the i9. Max showed 2 benchmarks where the i9 was faster by roughly 4-5% and one test where the i7 was faster. Everything else was identical.

 

[mlykke]

Here's something I haven't seen discussed much. What do you think are the chances Apple might release a firmware update that improves how the i9 performs? (Yes, I know there are certain hardware limits, but there are obviously some imposed or accidental limits, too.)

I've been thinking quite a bit about that. I don't think it's likely. When you look at the behaviour of the i9 and how fast it reaches 100 degrees which is it's operating limit. I only see two ways they could change that - Either by having it run at an even lower clock, lowering the performance even further. Or by running the fan at higher rpm, in which case the noise level would increase.
Apple did do this one time in a previous model, but that model was showing a much different behaviour than the current i9. That model was having the CPU run at a speed even lower than its base clock due to thermal throttling. This years model does run at its base clock and also turbo boosts to a certain level. I think this is just a pure thermal issue with the iMac not being able to cool it sufficiently to run at its full potential. If they had given us the cooling system from the iMac Pro, we would most likely have seen a more clear performance difference between the i7 and the i9.

I can't say anything for certain, but I don't think its likely they can do anything about it.
But then again the i7 is already faster than last years i9 and is more CPU power than just about anybody needs. At least if you're at the point where you truly know that you will use ALL of the CPU power of the i7 or i9, then you're most likely a person that should consider the Mac Pro instead.

 

[oneafour]

Yes, you "wasted" your money. At least you didn't really get anything out of those $360.

Even after all the stuff a bunch of us has written and the countless benchmarks showing the i9 basically performs identical to the i7, people are still trying to convince themselves that it might still be a better choice. It's clear - The i7 is identical to the i9 in performance and that is not going to change with a future software update, since even the raw performance difference is around the 9-10% mark, which is the absolute best you would be able to see. But all real-world benchmarks show identical performance and sometimes that the i7 is faster than the i9. Max showed 2 benchmarks where the i9 was faster by roughly 4-5% and one test where the i7 was faster. Everything else was identical.

no. you're wrong.

 

[filmgirl]

Since MaxTech released their 8-core vs. 10-core video, I’ve been questioning my choice for the 10-core. And after reading every comment here, I’m still not sure. So maybe I just need someone to make some some hot cocoa, give me a hug, and say “you made the right choice.”

I do many things on my computer: video editing (currently 1080p, but 4K next year), programming, designing, and soon gaming again. I usually have a Vagrant VM running Ubuntu for my SaaS local dev environment along with Local running a WordPress site or two. I sometimes use Parallels Desktop for testing, demonstrating, or screen-recording things in Windows, Android, macOS High Sierra, and macOS Big Sur beta.

I always have Brave Browser, Slack, and Evernote open in the background.

While being a full-time business-owner, I’m also a full-time daddy to a toddler, so I get precious little time to work each day (3–5 hours). So I often need to render a video in Adobe Media Encoder while continuing to edit in Premiere Pro.

This will be my primary workstation PC, replacing my maxed-out 2014 MacBook Pro. I already invested in the 5700 XT, 64 GB of third-party RAM, 2 TB SSD, 10 GBe, and the Magic Trackpad 2. While cash flow is currently tight, I can afford the extra $360 the i9 cost me (after discount and taxes), but it really comes down to this question:

Did I make the right choice for me, or did I waste $360?

I really don’t think you did. Everyone’s value of $360 is going to be different — but since you can afford it and since this is going to be your machine for years into the future, I don’t view potentially overspending as a problem at all.

Worst case, the performance gains aren’t worth $360, which amortized over three years is $10 a month or 30 cents a day. It happens.

Best case? Software updates to the apps use use in the ensuing years will make them better optimized to take advantage of higher core counts, giving you more performance gains than we see right now. Oh, and if you want to sell the machine in the future, you’ll be able to command even more for it.

Most-likely case? You got an amazing machine that is going to serve you well and the cycles spent worrying about a potential loss of $360 would be better spent enjoying what you got.