iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, 2020) Order Thread

[macmedal]

As I posted a few months ago I got my i7 5700XT and put in 32GB RAM earlier this year just can't beat the 5k monitor at the current time (for the price) can't fault it. I use Mac OS for most things and bootcamp for casual gaming and it works great. Have even installed Windows 11 without too much drama, but will need to see how this fares in the long term with updates.

I am sure given a few more years I will switch to the new Mac chip and hope by then the gaming issue has been resolved one way or another. I see that the refurb store is also doing some great deals on similar spec machines at the current time, saving several hundred on what I paid four months ago.

 

[andydckent]

I've been thinking about it for a while and have just ordered a fairly well maxed out (not the RAM - don't worry) one of these machines. My old iMac is four years old and I use it for work so I wanted to replace it but I didn't want to loose to option to use bootcamp. The 2020 machine represents the pinnacle of development / refinement of this design of iMac and is reasonably powerful for my needs (lets face it, it will be more than I need). It also punts the decision on whether to stick with apple (which I'd like to) and move to Apple Silicon down the road by a few years, when it will be clearer how well Apple Silicon machines end up working with Windows ARM and indeed how Windows ARM progresses and whether the rest of the PC market moves towards it.

I am in the UK and delivery is not scheduled for well over a month so not sure what that says - if anything, but looking forward to receiving it.

 

[pshufd]

I've been thinking about it for a while and have just ordered a fairly well maxed out (not the RAM - don't worry) one of these machines. My old iMac is four years old and I use it for work so I wanted to replace it but I didn't want to loose to option to use bootcamp. The 2020 machine represents the pinnacle of development / refinement of this design of iMac and is reasonably powerful for my needs (lets face it, it will be more than I need). It also punts the decision on whether to stick with apple (which I'd like to) and move to Apple Silicon down the road by a few years, when it will be clearer how well Apple Silicon machines end up working with Windows ARM and indeed how Windows ARM progresses and whether the rest of the PC market moves towards it.

I am in the UK and delivery is not scheduled for well over a month so not sure what that says - if anything, but looking forward to receiving it.

I have a Windows desktop that's quite similar to the 2020 iMac 27, i7-10700, 128 GB of RAM though my GPU isn't as strong as the ones in the iMac. That's partially because GPUs have been so hard to get since 2020. It's definitely a system that has a long, useful life. I have two Apple Silicon systems and plan to upgrade my main production and office setup to them and use the i7-10700 as a NAS and for any additional compute that I need off of my main desk.

I had considered an iMac because I like the CPU and because of the screen.

Are you getting the i9 or the i7? The i7 has a lot of horsepower as it is; the i9 is just nice because it gives you 25% more.

 

[andydckent]

I have a Windows desktop that's quite similar to the 2020 iMac 27, i7-10700, 128 GB of RAM though my GPU isn't as strong as the ones in the iMac. That's partially because GPUs have been so hard to get since 2020. It's definitely a system that has a long, useful life. I have two Apple Silicon systems and plan to upgrade my main production and office setup to them and use the i7-10700 as a NAS and for any additional compute that I need off of my main desk.

I had considered an iMac because I like the CPU and because of the screen.

Are you getting the i9 or the i7? The i7 has a lot of horsepower as it is; the i9 is just nice because it gives you 25% more.

I am getting the i9. I am aware that the performance difference from the i7 probably doesn't justify the price but I am in the fortunate position that I can afford to spend a little extra and it may extend the life of the machine a bit and help the resale value when it is finally time to replace it.

 

[hoodafoo]

I am getting the i9. I am aware that the performance difference from the i7 probably doesn't justify the price but I am in the fortunate position that I can afford to spend a little extra and it may extend the life of the machine a bit and help the resale value when it is finally time to replace it.

great that you can afford the i9, but your logic makes no sense. When the 2020 iMac gets obsolete, it doesn't matter if you have an i7 or an i9 in it

 

[andydckent]

great that you can afford the i9, but your logic makes no sense. When the 2020 iMac gets obsolete, it doesn't matter if you have an i7 or an i9 in it

Though no one can predict the future, I am fairly confident that there will still be a second hand market for these machines in two or three years time and if the i9 gets me a few pounds more and makes it easier to sell then that is great but in the end it doesn't really matter. Until then I have a nice powerful, reliable machine that I'm sure I'll enjoy / benefit from and in the end we'll know more about how the Apple Silicon / Windows ARM thing / PC in general market has moved on, if at all.

 

[pshufd]

Though no one can predict the future, I am fairly confident that there will still be a second hand market for these machines in two or three years time and if the i9 gets me a few pounds more and makes it easier to sell then that is great but in the end it doesn't really matter. Until then I have a nice powerful, reliable machine that I'm sure I'll enjoy / benefit from and in the end we'll know more about how the Apple Silicon / Windows ARM thing / PC in general market has moved on, if at all.

I'm still using my 2015 MacBook Pro in my living room. My son has borrowed my 2014 MacBook Pro for work while he waits for his new 2021 MacBook Pro 14 from the office (it looks like he'll get it around mid-December the way custom configurations are shipping). I run into people using 2011 and 2012 MacBook Pros. There are lots of people that just need a computer for web browsing and email.

The 2020 i9 is actually a monster of a system right now that's capable of doing a lot of work. It will have value for quite some time. I still watch the iMac market locally as I wouldn't mind an old Retina just for the display. I run office stuff like everyone else and it doesn't need a ton of compute power.

 

[sir grotius]

I have the iMac maxed out 3.6 10 core i9 with 64 GB RAM and the Radeon Pro 5700 XT 16 GB for about a year and love it.

I recently purchased the new 14" MBP with the M1max chip as well as 64 GB ram and 2 TB of space. Very similar specs except that little processor thing. Will be fun to see how it performs on the go.

 

[Phil77354]

I always find it interesting to notice how pricing evolves as specs also improve.

My late 2014 iMac, i5 with 16GB RAM and 500GB SSD, cost me $2999 plus tax almost exactly 7 years ago.

Today that i9 iMac that you are discussing here, which is the top of the line iMac and substantially more powerful than my current iMac, would be about the same price if not less - $2899 with 512GB SSD or $3099 with 1TB SSD.

Similar comparison could be made for my old 2015 MacBook vs the new M1 MacBook Air that I just purchased.

I always think about this whenever I see discussions here talking about about prices for new computers. As far as I'm concerned they are better deals every year, as performance and specs keep increasing and you can get so much more for your money.

 

[sir grotius]

That's a great point and even more so in this inflationary period (at least in the US) and with the global dearth of chips.

 

[pshufd]

I always find it interesting to notice how pricing evolves as specs also improve.

My late 2014 iMac, i5 with 16GB RAM and 500GB SSD, cost me $2999 plus tax almost exactly 7 years ago.

Today that i9 iMac that you are discussing here, which is the top of the line iMac and substantially more powerful than my current iMac, would be about the same price if not less - $2899 with 512GB SSD or $3099 with 1TB SSD.

Similar comparison could be made for my old 2015 MacBook vs the new M1 MacBook Air that I just purchased.

I always think about this whenever I see discussions here talking about about prices for new computers. As far as I'm concerned they are better deals every year, as performance and specs keep increasing and you can get so much more for your money.

My 2007 MacBook Pro 17 with a base configuration was about $2,800. The 2021 MacBook Pro 16 base configuration is $2,499 so there is some level of deflation there. The 2007 MacBook Pro came with 2 GB of RAM and a HDD. It was a great machine and I used it as a desktop until 2018 when it died.

 

[Phil77354]

My 2007 MacBook Pro 17 with a base configuration was about $2,800. The 2021 MacBook Pro 16 base configuration is $2,499 so there is some level of deflation there. The 2007 MacBook Pro came with 2 GB of RAM and a HDD. It was a great machine and I used it as a desktop until 2018 when it died.

Yes. And I think that we could find all kinds of similar comparisons.

(I also remember the first HP-35 scientific calculator that came out in 1972 - $395!!! Not wanting to take this thread off on a whole different direction . . . )

 

[PBG4 Dude]

The $1999 13” MBP comes with 1TB SSD.
The $1999 14” MBP comes with 512GB SSD.

The 2,499 16” intel MBP comes with 1TB SSD.
The 2,499 16” M1Pro MBP comes with 512GB SSD.

I thought this storage drop was weird myself.

 

[pshufd]

Yes. And I think that we could find all kinds of similar comparisons.

(I also remember the first HP-35 scientific calculator that came out in 1972 - $395!!! Not wanting to take this thread off on a whole different direction . . . )

HP calculators have a cult following. My HP-67 was $450. I still have it and it still works.

 

[Vladimir Rikowski]

Hi there .. hope ya all are doing well .. I'm an 2d artist(and 3d apprentice ) I have always been working
working with windows pc .. and with time I get fed up with mad/bad experiences, crazy unfortunate timing updates ,.and so on.. I always wanted to shift to mac os . but it was an expensive idea.. but since I bought a 2018 ipad pro and tried for a brief time mac os in a intel 5k imac .. I really 'REALLY''!! like it .
to sum up why Im writing to you guys here .. on 2020 imac thread specifically ..with all the M1 buzz and fuzz
thing is .. I don't have my pc anymore .. and I don't have much $$ right now to buy something brand new .. .

what I want is to ask you guys .
if there are any 2020 27 5k imac users here working with 2d 3d software ( Blender, Photoshop, corel painter, Maya, Zbrush, substance painer, Marmoset toolbag . 3DCoat ) no need to be a pro user .. I just want to hear feedback/expereinces.. I have a chance to get a base 27 5k imac *I will upgrade ram myself ) but since apple shifting to arm M1 .. Im bit confused .. for one hand there are almost none info about users using that kind of softwares/apps with 2020 imac's .. I mean photoshop I guess will be fine ,..

IM NOT a hardcore professional 3d artist .. just an apprentice so my target are not super fast renders .. ( I do have some experience with blender and with Zbrush that's the only software Im not a newbie )
I really looove the 27 5k lcd .. and I think it would be a great screen to use it for 2d purposes ..

of course I could get an m1 mac mini but I would really like to wait to m2 version .. also 16 gb ram seems not enough (?)
and the Radeon Pro 5300 4 GB gpu on the imac seems bit more powerful than the one in the M1 chip .
thanks in advance !

 

[RachelAL]

My first post, yay! I ordered the 2020 model to replace my i7 7700k version. I got the 10910 version this time, to ensure the maximum longevity of the machine. This will be the last gaming Mac, as the ARM versions don't run Intel Windows. With Microsoft's purchase of Bungie, Apple's AAA gaming presence is basically non-existent. I've used Bootcamp to game with Macs since it was first introduced. Having the ability to natively switch between the OS's was a blessing as the long deployments I used to go on, I'd only need to carry the MacBook Pro.

I do not believe Apple has really considered the impact of gaming on the current deployment of their ARM chips. For now, the systems seem to be selling, but to me, the Intel chip version of the Mac will always be more desirable, as its dirt simple to game. I'm sure some engineering types aren't particularly impressed with the move away from Intel, either as many software packages, dongles, specialized hardware only had Intel drivers. The Mac, just became impossible to use in those scenarios, too. I wish Apple all the best (I'm a stockholder too), but I think supporting x86 in hardware should have been a very high priority in the move to ARM. We can emulate all day long, but that's not remotely the same. Even if Microsoft does choose to do Windows for ARM as a public release, their emulator won't be much better if at all to what the ARM Macs already accomplish.

In any case, I've been rummaging through the specs for this chip, and it seems that Apple may have had an idea in their head that Intel would deliver a lower power version of the i9, but with the same or similar clock speed at the 10900k? Is that why we're stuck with this odd version? From the spec sheets on ark.intel, this 10910 draws the same power as the 10900k (I've observed mine peak at 155W using the Intel Power widget), and can run DDR4 2933 RAM:

Intel® Core™ i9-10910 Processor (20M Cache, up to 5.00 GHz) Product Specifications

Intel® Core™ i9-10910 Processor (20M Cache, up to 5.00 GHz) quick reference guide including specifications, features, pricing, compatibility, design documentation, ordering codes, spec codes and more.

ark.intel.com

Apple stuck with the 9900k's memory spec for this system too, despite the 10910 being capable of supporting the higher speed RAM. I suppose on their side, they thought they'd only have these systems available for a short time, and there was no sense in creating a new part number. I'm just wondering if anyone has considered dropping the 10900k into one of these machines, and whether anyone has bothered with the faster memory this 10910 supports? I was going to make a separate thread, but I reckon someone with some experience with these machines might see it here quicker. I've not seen any of the typical YouTubers speak on either topic, so I'm not sure anyone has noticed?

 

[RachelAL]

My first post, yay! I ordered the 2020 model to replace my i7 7700k version. I got the 10910 version this time, to ensure the maximum longevity of the machine. This will be the last gaming Mac, as the ARM versions don't run Intel Windows. With Microsoft's purchase of Bungie, Apple's AAA gaming presence is basically non-existent. I've used Bootcamp to game with Macs since it was first introduced. Having the ability to natively switch between the OS's was a blessing as the long deployments I used to go on, I'd only need to carry the MacBook Pro.

I do not believe Apple has really considered the impact of gaming on the current deployment of their ARM chips. For now, the systems seem to be selling, but to me, the Intel chip version of the Mac will always be more desirable, as its dirt simple to game. I'm sure some engineering types aren't particularly impressed with the move away from Intel, either as many software packages, dongles, specialized hardware only had Intel drivers. The Mac, just became impossible to use in those scenarios, too. I wish Apple all the best (I'm a stockholder too), but I think supporting x86 in hardware should have been a very high priority in the move to ARM. We can emulate all day long, but that's not remotely the same. Even if Microsoft does choose to do Windows for ARM as a public release, their emulator won't be much better if at all to what the ARM Macs already accomplish.

In any case, I've been rummaging through the specs for this chip, and it seems that Apple may have had an idea in their head that Intel would deliver a lower power version of the i9, but with the same or similar clock speed at the 10900k? Is that why we're stuck with this odd version? From the spec sheets on ark.intel, this 10910 draws the same power as the 10900k (I've observed mine peak at 155W using the Intel Power widget), and can run DDR4 2933 RAM:

Intel® Core™ i9-10910 Processor (20M Cache, up to 5.00 GHz) Product Specifications

Intel® Core™ i9-10910 Processor (20M Cache, up to 5.00 GHz) quick reference guide including specifications, features, pricing, compatibility, design documentation, ordering codes, spec codes and more.

ark.intel.com

Apple stuck with the 9900k's memory spec for this system too, despite the 10910 being capable of supporting the higher speed RAM. I suppose on their side, they thought they'd only have these systems available for a short time, and there was no sense in creating a new part number. I'm just wondering if anyone has considered dropping the 10900k into one of these machines, and whether anyone has bothered with the faster memory this 10910 supports? I was going to make a separate thread, but I reckon someone with some experience with these machines might see it here quicker. I've not seen any of the typical YouTubers speak on either topic, so I'm not sure anyone has noticed?

Curiosity got the better of me, and I placed an order for 2933MHz DDR4 Memory, to see if the 10910 would recognize the upgrade and utilize it. It didn't. I suppose its due to Apple's ROM and/or chipset. I'm pretty sure Northbridge chips are way in the past, and the memory controller itself lives on the CPU, so it had to have been a conscious choice by Apple to ignore the 10910's spec'd memory capability. I could only assume that Apple didn't want another part number in their inventory from the 9xxx generation iMac's. Very strange choice, unless the Intel ARK page is wrong (which I doubt very much).

I think if I were to make the purchase over again, I'd just skip this super strange i9 altogether. There's no advantage regarding power consumption from the standard 10900k, at least according to the ARK site. Why Apple wanted a special i9 for just this final Intel iMac, makes no sense to me. The only difference I can find on the marketing pages is a lack of support for "Turbo Boost Max 3.0" on the 10910. From what I can glean from the PC universe, the 10900k (and the 10900) have secure boot features too, which means they can run Windows 11, whereas Apple has their own ideas in the T2 chip regarding how to keep the Intel architecture at bay. That very well could be the primary reason for this odd chip, although as others have already figured out, the 10900 is perfectly happy living with an Apple motherboard in the 21.5 inch versions of these 10th gen iMac's. So strange.

So, the other outstanding question is, will a 10900k work in the 27 inch model? Its 100MHz faster on the base clock, and 300MHz quicker for the turbo frequency. It is rated with the same TDP, and the previous iMac 9th gen used the 9900k (actually from the 6th gen, these 27 inch iMacs have been utilizing the overclock versions of the Intel line). I'd -love- to be rich enough to just tear into my own iMac and go for it, but I'm not. Maybe one of the Youtube channels might be persuaded to answer that question? Its not a massive performance boost, just more of an academic question.

I'd really love to know -why- Apple wanted this one off i9, and why they believed it was 'better'. The fake 5700XT chip is another question. Its a 'pro' version, that's at least 30% slower than the standard 5700XT PCI card found in a PC. If Apple were concerned with thermals, they should have soldered the considerably more power thrifty 5600M with its HBM2 memory to this motherboard in the iMac. A lot of strange tradeoffs were made in this machine, probably because it would have outshone the Mac Pro had they gone 'all in', 10900k with a full version (or even the anniversary) 5700XT. Kinda sad really.

---

The images are the memory report of my system. At first, I plugged in the 2933MHz memory by itself in A/0 B/0 config. It reported 2667 on power up, however. I reinstalled my original 32GB, and then it went down to 2133. That's a known issue, however, regarding mixing CAS latency (original memory is 18, and the faster is 17). I then put the like memory together into their A/0, A/1 and B/0, B1 then they reported back as 2667MHz across the board. The other shots are from ark.intel.com, and compare the 10900, the 10910, and the 10900k. There's another panel on the website that speaks to the turbo boost differences, that I didn't snap. In this configuration, I get about 1300 for single core, and about 10k for multicore in Geekbench 5.

 

[g0ren]

I've been really happy with my 2019 iMac, but I made a fatal flaw at purchase when I only put a 512 GB SSD in it. And as much as I like Apple Silicon, there are apps I know that are not making the jump and that I'll need in the future. I'm also increasingly finding myself needing Windows and virtual machines just aren't good enough. So, I bit the bullet and maxed out a 2020 order with the i9 and 5700 XT with 16GB of GDDR6 (I'll be using the 64 GB of RAM in my 2019 iMac and transferring the sticks over) and 2 TB SSD (which will be split in half for Windows and MacOS. With a trade-in for the 2019 one, it's actually not going to end up costing me as much I feared and I'll have a machine that's going to be my workhorse for a while with both operating systems.

I have a M1 Mac Mini that I use as a file server and my base model 14" Macbook Pro (with 1 TB) to use for remote work so I think I finally have all my bases covered for the foreseeable future. Can't wait to ditch the Vega card and try out RDNA finally.

 

[PBG4 Dude]

Excepting the stuttering issue that affects every version of Elden Ring, my 5700XT-equipped iMac plays the game at 1440p max settings at 60fps. It can play in 4K, but I can’t get frame rates out of the 40s.

 

[g0ren]

I've been really happy with my 2019 iMac, but I made a fatal flaw at purchase when I only put a 512 GB SSD in it. And as much as I like Apple Silicon, there are apps I know that are not making the jump and that I'll need in the future. I'm also increasingly finding myself needing Windows and virtual machines just aren't good enough. So, I bit the bullet and maxed out a 2020 order with the i9 and 5700 XT with 16GB of GDDR6 (I'll be using the 64 GB of RAM in my 2019 iMac and transferring the sticks over) and 2 TB SSD (which will be split in half for Windows and MacOS. With a trade-in for the 2019 one, it's actually not going to end up costing me as much I feared and I'll have a machine that's going to be my workhorse for a while with both operating systems.

I have a M1 Mac Mini that I use as a file server and my base model 14" Macbook Pro (with 1 TB) to use for remote work so I think I finally have all my bases covered for the foreseeable future. Can't wait to ditch the Vega card and try out RDNA finally.

Now I'm REALLY glad I put that order in before the Apple Event.

 

[pshufd]

Now I'm REALLY glad I put that order in before the Apple Event.

Is the Intel model gone? I'm sure that they still have them in the refurb store.

Update: yes, it is gone.

 

[g0ren]

Yeah, I guess I could, but buying it new meant getting it in the exact spec I wanted. If this is the last Intel iMac, I wanted to be sure it's exactly what I want.

 

[minik]

Although the 27" iMac is gone from the consume facing store, both the 21.5" and 27" models are still showing up on business store portal. I have the 2020 model at home and it has been solid, the current 24" model is just off-putting. We have some at work and I think it's a very poor design product especially the small stand.

 

[Jeff Flowerday]

Just ordered the 27”, nano, 8gb, i7, 2TB, 5700XT 16GB from the referb store.

Not much hope for one more Intel mac anymore.

64GB crucial RAM on the way.

 

[pshufd]

Just ordered the 27”, nano, 8gb, i7, 2TB, 5700XT 16GB from the referb store.

Not much hope for one more Intel mac more.

64GB crucial RAM in the way.

I started buying A-Tech since I saw it on the Max Tech channel. It's half the price of Crucial and it's performed fine in two of my iMacs.