iMac Pro How a new iMac might fit in Apple's lineup between MBP and iMac Pro?

[danwells]

A friend of mine (photographer with a 500,000 image Lightroom library) needs a new Mac. His present machine is a 2014 27" tapered edge iMac with the top processor for the year and 32 GB RAM (the 64 GB option was introduced the next year, which is too bad, because his biggest problem is that that huge Lightroom library runs out of RAM). This got me thinking about the present and near future state of the iMac and iMac Pro lineup.

Right now, the 27" iMac is REALLY showing its age - it's only a bit faster than the 2014 - if you believe Geekbench, about 15% (largely Intel's fault, but Apple hasn't used the substantially faster 6-core chips that came out earlier this year). It's actually slower at many tasks than a current MacBook Pro, which is a 6-core. It DOES offer a 64 GB RAM option, but it feels like upgrading the entire machine to upgrade the RAM.

Jumping up to the iMac Pro (8 or 10 core) is the other option in the current lineup, and what I'd recommend if not for potential upgrades - that is a substantially faster machine with all those cores (and it can accept even more RAM if he manages to run out of 64 GB). Lightroom will use the extra cores much of the time, and he often runs multiple applications in addition to LR.

What's put Apple in a corner as they think about the iMac line is that the 8-core i7 or i9 coming out in a month and a half will probably perform a lot like an 8-core iMac Pro. It won't have the very high RAM limit, it may not have the Radeon Vega, and it may not have quite as fast a SSD, but the base and turbo processor frequencies will be very similar, with a potential slight advantage to the Xeon because of more power headroom.

How many people will want to pay a couple thousand bucks extra (even compared to an iMac with a PCIe SSD instead of a Fusion Drive) for a faster GPU, an expensive potential upgrade to 128 GB of RAM (and maybe even 256 GB - the processor can handle it), and an extra Thunderbolt bus? That's essentially the value proposition of the lower-end iMac Pros if Apple upgrades the top 27" iMac to 8 cores.

Apple could do one of three things (and maybe more - these are what I could think of):

1.) Update the iMac late this year or early next (using chips current at the time), accepting that they're blowing away the bottom of the iMac Pro lineup (they might discontinue the 8-core iMac Pro). If they're inclined to do that, this is a terrible time to buy an 8-core (or maybe even a 10-core) iMac Pro, not to mention a quad-core iMac.

2.) Release a redesigned iMac that essentially uses a 15" MacBook Pro motherboard, with an option for 64 GB RAM (the mobile chips can handle it - some HP and Lenovo workstation laptops offer the option) and probably higher-end mobile GPUs than the MBP has. The 6-core mobile chips, especially the i9, are quite a bit faster than the present quad-core desktop chips. It'll be a little faster than the MacBook Pro, due to cooling. Since it's all mobile parts, it can lose some bezels and some of the chin - no need to fit a 3.5" hard drive or cool a 90 W processor. It's a significant upgrade over the current iMac, and it stays away from the iMac Pro, but it'll disappoint people who have come to expect top desktop chips in iMacs.

3.)Refuse to touch the iMac until a new generation (or an increase in the lineup) of Xeon-W chips suitable for the iMac Pro arrives, then update the iMac to 8 cores and the iMac Pro to a 10 or (preferably) 12 core base configuration, with 22 or 24 cores at the high end. This keeps top desktop chips in the iMac AND keeps the iMac separated from the iMac Pro, but it means not updating the iMac until the chips are ready for the iMac Pro as well.

 

[Strider64]

It all depends on how the iMac Pro sold if they upgrade the other iMacs to close to iMac Pro (bottom end model) specs for their high end model in my opinion. I think Apple's first intention for the iMac Pro was it to be a stop gap measure until the new Mac Pro is introduce. Though I not so sure and with Apple you never know what they're planning. However, I get this gut feeling that they want to shrink the iMac lineup, maybe update the iMac Pro a little (though I doubt) and definitely coming out with a new mac Pro. As for the iMac, I can see an i9 with 6-core iMac though not necessary using the MacBook Pro motherboard and having few options for the iMac. In any scenario I don't think they are really going to cater to the normal iMac user other than keeping them happy or trying to. I think if Apple had their choice they would get rid of the iMac and just concentrate on the professional user (iMac Pro / MacBook Pro / Mac Pro).

 

[danwells]

Interesting possibility you raise of Macs for pro and prosumer users only... Do you see them really pushing iOS hard into the education (and home) market? When you look around a university library, you see MacBooks and MacBook Airs all over the place (along with 13" MacBook Pros). Could they turn all of those into iPad Pros or some hybrid with a built-in keyboard? Leave the Mac as a niche beast for people who need the power? If so, that could explain the "A-series chip in Macs" rumor - what if that ran a glorified iOS, and there were pro Macs with Intel chips and OS X?

The problem with that idea (at least to me) is whether software developers will keep bothering with the Mac if the line starts at $2000? Could they really survive with no desktop under $4000 (assuming a price cut to the bottom of the iMac Pro line)? A lot of Mac sales are the consumer models between $900 and $2000 - those lower-end Macs aren't running the Adobe Creative Cloud (at least not frequently), but many other Mac applications rely on a combination of sales from everything from the 21.5" iMac and the MB Air up to the iMac Pro and the MacBook Pro i9.

Apple would love to drive the lower end of the Mac market to iOS, but I'm not sure they can...

 

[cwanja]

May I point you here, for over 500 replies to a thread specifically around this:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/no-2018-imac.2121604/

In my opinion, I see the following happening. Apple upgrades the current iMac to the new Intel CPUs coming out this year and either drops the 8 core iMac Pro or drops the entire iMac Pro next year when they release the Mac Pro. Let the updated iMac eat at the iMac Pro sales, you are going to kill it off anyways. And you appease the Mac Pro community that wants a modular mac.

I am sitting around, waiting for a new iMac (because I can, I am in now rush). But I will be rather annoyed if the drop 6 - 9 month old CPUs in an iMac announced in September / October with the rumored new Intel CPUs. They have to be talking somewhat and there was a discussion in that thread above that discussed the last time Apple skipped a generation CPUs.

Here is another thread, with far less replies.
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/26344047/

 

[danielwsmithee]

The standard iMac will continue to use the Core I series desktop processor line it has always used. That means a 6-core iMac likely topping out at the i7-8700K 95W TDP processor. That is my guess.

I'm hopping they no longer support spinning disks inside the iMac, and instead have the improved cooling of the iMac Pro. It wouldn't surprise me either to see it adopt a T2 chip similar to the iMac Pro and MBP as well.

 

[redheeler]

The standard iMac will continue to use the Core I series desktop processor line it has always used. That means a 6-core iMac likely topping out at the i7-8700K 95W TDP processor. That is my guess.

That's likely what will happen, unless Apple brings the iMac Pro cooling system to the consumer iMac.

 

[cwanja]

That's likely what will happen, unless Apple brings the iMac Pro cooling system to the consumer iMac.

So I will only challenge that to ask - why has it not already happened? The MacBook Pro’s saw a pretty swift update from consumer release to silent update. The desktop CPUs has been out for a while. Why not update them at the same time?

 

[danwells]

I'd think that spinning disks in the 27" are very unlikely. Either they'll give it the iMac Pro cooling system or they'll slim it down (why? it's a desktop - but don't underestimate Jony Ive) and use mobile chips. iMacs used mobile chips for the first few years on Intel, and didn't see the fast K-series chips on the top end until 2014. A 45 watt mobile chip wouldn't be out of character for the history of the iMac.

I would be shocked to see a HEDT processor in the iMac - except for the iMac Pro, it's never used the big socket (Apple has, in fact, never used the big socket consumer processor - when they've used them in either the iMac Pro or Mac Pro, it's always been the Xeon version).

The problem comes in when you realize that the conventional desktop processors (LGA 1151, same type of socket they have been using for years) will be up to 8 cores in the 9th generation released in a month or so. The top two processors will both be 8 core parts, and should give the 8 core iMac Pro a run for its money.

Apple may be waiting to update the iMac until they see the whole 9th Generation lineup - the top CPUs are due in early October (maybe not in Apple quantities???), while the chips that might show up in the 21.5" are going to be a bit later (but also less important - it's the i7s (and the new i9) that get a core count bump - i5s remain at 6 cores like the 8th generation, and i3s remain quad core).

They'll have either desktop or mobile processor choices suited for the 27" in October (the mobiles are already here), while the 21.5" could use mobile quad-cores, desktop quad core i3s or desktop 6-core i5s (all of which exist). It would be tough marketing to use all desktop chips in the 27" while avoiding 8-core parts - all the 9th generation i7s and above have 8 cores. After 5+ years of having an i7 option, do they want to top out with an i5?

 

[redheeler]

So I will only challenge that to ask - why has it not already happened? The MacBook Pro’s saw a pretty swift update from consumer release to silent update. The desktop CPUs has been out for a while. Why not update them at the same time?

No one outside of Apple knows the answer to that, yet. It may not be related to the CPU or cooling, but rather Apple wanting to move the iMac to a True Tone or 120 Hz display.

 

[Nismo73]

I'm thinking about replacing my 2012 iMac. Would if it has the following:

9th gen intel
true tone
updated internals like iMac pro
updated Radeon
bluetooth 5.0
the faster SD card reader

 

[danielwsmithee]

That's likely what will happen, unless Apple brings the iMac Pro cooling system to the consumer iMac.

I think even if they do they will just leave the standard iMac at 95 Watt TDP CPUs max. Currently the iMac runs very quite with a ~60W i5 CPUs and gets kind of noisy under heavy usage with 95W i7s.

Using the same TDP design with better cooling would allow the iMac to be a quite operator, and still have reasonable price point. Once you get into 150W TDP chips like the iMac Pro and the larger i9 chips the price goes up substantially. They'll likely leave that market for the iMac Pro and Mac Pro. 9th Gen Intel consumer desktop processors should support upto 8-cores with a 95W TDP at a very reasonable price. Which is just about perfect for an updated iMac. Even the 8th Gen 6-core CPUs would be great.
[doublepost=1534284524][/doublepost]

So I will only challenge that to ask - why has it not already happened? The MacBook Pro’s saw a pretty swift update from consumer release to silent update. The desktop CPUs has been out for a while. Why not update them at the same time?

Apple has traditionally, at least the last 4-5 years updated the MBP more often than the iMac. It is as simple as that Apple didn't invest the resources into updating the iMac with the latest processors.

The overwhelming majority of Apple's revenue comes from iPhone so that is where most of its focus goes. For Macs the majority of Apple's revenue comes from laptops, so in the Mac line the MBP gets most of the focus. The iMac is a 2nd class citizen in a second class market segment.

Don't even ask where the Mac mini is on the totem pole.

 

[danwells]

There are three new 9th generation Intel chips scheduled for release on Oct. 1. The highest-end model has Core i9 branding, despite being a standard 95W LGA 1151 chip.

The i9 (9900K) is 8 core/16 thread, 3.6 gHz base, boost to 5 gHz (can boost to 4.7 gHz on all 8 cores).

The i7 (9700K) is 8 core/8 thread, 3.6 gHz base, boost to 4.9 gHz (can boost to 4.6 gHz on all 8 cores) - note lack of hyperthreading.

The i5 (9600K) is 6 core/6 thread, 3.7 gHz base, boost to 4.6 gHz (can boost to 4.3 gHz on all 8 cores).

These three are the unlocked models of a 9th generation lineup, the rest of which will turn up over the next several months. They'd be a nice set for the 27" iMac - base model gets the i5, top model gets the i7, CTO for the i9. The chips for the 21.5" aren't coming Oct.1, but the improvements over the 8th generation aren't as important (no core count bumps below the i7)

That i9 (and maybe the i7, depending on how a particular benchmark uses hyperthreading) should handily beat the 8-core iMac Pro at pure processor power - the clock is higher, and it's a somewhat optimized architecture. For poorly threaded tasks, it might also beat higher core count iMac Pros - note the high boost clocks. Of course, the iMac Pro has quad-channel memory, and might very well have faster SSDs and graphics (depending on what Apple does with those things in the new iMac), so it's not as simple as pure clock speed.

A current iMac 27" with the CTO top processor, 32 GB of RAM and a 1 TB SSD costs $3699. Right now, top-end 27" iMacs are not a good value because of the quad-core CPU (of course, it's actually slightly cheaper, because you wouldn't buy the RAM from Apple). You can find $500 or more off on the iMac Pro, meaning that there's only a $800 difference for twice the cores, better graphics, quad-channel memory and far superior cooling. If the present quad-core machine is replaced by an 8-core for similar money, it's the iMac Pro that becomes a questionable value.

 

[danielwsmithee]

If the present quad-core machine is replaced by an 8-core for similar money, it's the iMac Pro that becomes a questionable value.

I wouldn't be surprised if they do price point update on the iMac Pro if they release a standard iMac like you describe above. I could see them just eliminating the base 8-core configuration, and go straight to a 10-core/64GB standard config for the iMac Pro at $4999. With the discounts you can find currently, that price point wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility.