Is it the general consensus that we will see the i9 in the iMac next week? In the link above Ming predicts a "minor update"...would the i9 be considered a "minor update" to the iMac?
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.
No 2018 iMac?!
- Thread starter Internet Enzyme
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 2018 2019 configuration imac
- Sort by reaction score
That's just beautiful. With horrible thermal management in the iMac already, we are in for a new ThrottleGate.
Ugh, another “minor update”? How many years of “minor updates” are we going to have before Apple decides that the iMac is worth a “major update”?
Maybe this will be like macOS, where there will never be a macOS 11: the iMac has reached its final design and it will be discontinued before it is physically changed.
Maybe this will be like macOS, where there will never be a macOS 11: the iMac has reached its final design and it will be discontinued before it is physically changed.
To me, a minor update means updated cpus, probably updated gpus if available, probably the T2, perhaps true tone, and probably some different storage/memory configurations. But no major changes to the overall design. I can't see them using a desktop version of the i9 in the current design. For that matter, I can't really see them using an i7-8700k either. Both of those cpus are reported to use more power than the i7 7700k, and that created significant heat issues. But none of us know the definition of minor or what Apple really has in store. They could basically use the iMac pro case or some variant with better cooling. Without some kind of improved cooling I probably wouldn't buy an iMac with a k chip.
I'd opine that no, the i9 will not be a part of the iMac's update, since it would mandate an upgraded cooling system which would make it not a minor update but a redesign; also the price that Apple would charge for such a top of the line chip, along with ample RAM and an SSD would push it pretty close to an iMac Pro. I'd like to be wrong about my opinion however.
This is a tough one to answer because I could see it going two ways. While the 9900K is a powerful CPU, it produces an insane amount of heat. The 8700K could also be used at the top BTO option, and it also produces a lot less heat at full loads.
However, both options will undoubtedly need a new cooling system. The 9900K would require the iMac Pro cooling system, which is an option, but it may be too expensive for the iMac. If this is the case, I could see them creating a lower cost 2-fan cooling system for the iMac which would be just enough for the 8700K but not enough for the 9900K. This seems like the more realistic approach.
Whatever approach they go with, they’ll most likely stick with the same cooling/layout for all 27in models since it’s cheaper to mass produce. All that’s swapped out is the CPU and GPU. For this reason, having the iMac Pro cooling seems excessive if you’re only using an i5 and RX 670. My bet is for an updated 2-fan system with the 8700K or 9700K as the top BTO option.
Last edited:
True. I don’t mind waiting until ARM Macs for Face ID, but I at least want Apple to implement the same Apple Watch unlocking found in the MacBook Pro in the interim.
The MBP got new model numbers for this year's update while the '16 and '17 models used the same. The iMac has had the same model numbers since 2012. The report from the database indicates that there are new computers with numbers A2115 and A2116. If these are for the new iMacs I expect there to be a fairly substantial change internally, probably looking more like the iMac Pro cooling-wise.
This is unfortunately likely closer than any other scenario. Hope I'm wrong and they step up soon. There is a market for it, so who knows.
[doublepost=1540406122][/doublepost]
How is a fan design too expensive especially since it is already designed?
To make matters worse, they could put the same thermals as the iMac Pro into the 5K to compensate. Great for thermals, bad for us. Why? Say goodbye to the user-accessible RAM slots.
My only expectation is 6 core with decent single core performance. Reasonable RAM prices. Upgraded cooling. No kernel panic or WiFi issues.
That is about the only thing that I care about.
Somehow I don’t think I will be seeing my expectations come trough.
Even if apple does great job on cooling the CPU I am afraid of the kernel related issues that are passed from iMP and MBP.
It is sad that MBP can not be purchased as a reliable machine today.
I’ve just had one in my hands few minutes ago. I am really tempted to buy it... but I do not need another problem in my life. I’ve got plenty already.
That is about the only thing that I care about.
Somehow I don’t think I will be seeing my expectations come trough.
Even if apple does great job on cooling the CPU I am afraid of the kernel related issues that are passed from iMP and MBP.
It is sad that MBP can not be purchased as a reliable machine today.
I’ve just had one in my hands few minutes ago. I am really tempted to buy it... but I do not need another problem in my life. I’ve got plenty already.
It’s not closer than any other scenario. Mac is a $20bn business that Apple wants to grow. It makes no sense that they would just pull out of that.
[doublepost=1540454150][/doublepost]
Assuming you mean “redesign” as a redesign of the physical chassis, then it’s not correct that an upgraded cooling system requires a redesign - the iMac Pro already demonstrates that Apple has alternate cooling solutions in the existing iMac chassis.
[doublepost=1540454493][/doublepost]
Apple will decide the iMac is worth a “major update” not after a given number of years of “minor updates”, but when there is a business case for doing a “major update”, based on sales data, market pressure, etc. Which is pretty much how all businesses plan their products. A product gets a major update when it needs it.
Why would there never be a macOS 11?
I could see this going 2 ways...
1) They do an iMac Pro style iMac with redesigned/upgraded internals.
2) They do a spec bump now, keep the internal design the same and release a redesigned external at WWDC.
1) They do an iMac Pro style iMac with redesigned/upgraded internals.
2) They do a spec bump now, keep the internal design the same and release a redesigned external at WWDC.
I would agree with this. I had awful throttling on my maxed out iMac but the iMac pro smooth as butter. If it is not engineered like the pro, i would stay away from the higher end CPU’s.
[doublepost=1540456497][/doublepost]
Never had a single Kernel issue with my iMP...... just saying.
Agree with this.
Although I would like to purchase a desktop computer, and have considered the iMac Pro, I have been waiting for an iMAC update. If its the same internals then I will pass and continue my wait for a redesigned Mac Pro instead. My MacBook is chugging away just fine for the moment....
For work purposes, I think a iMP cooling system with strong GPU and i9 processors are highly desirable endpoints.
For home use, I wish for a thin and light design that seems to float in the air with essentially the latest MBP internals but better GPU.
It is not easy to design one iMac that is for everyone!
At any rate, I am looking forward to the event.
For home use, I wish for a thin and light design that seems to float in the air with essentially the latest MBP internals but better GPU.
It is not easy to design one iMac that is for everyone!
At any rate, I am looking forward to the event.
the 21.5" for the cpu quad core are still fine with mid dGpu like 55X or 560X inside
I'm going to spin this thread round and ask; what's the point of the iMac at all if the Mac Mini is released with upgraded specs equal or very similar to an iMac, and it can be hidden under a desk easily and connected up to 1 or 2 ultra thin monitors of the users choice? Surely, for this reason alone the iMac would have to up it's game to have a USP ?
the mac mini will never can be spec out like an iMac....cpu Ram or dGpu...
I have a 2012 MacMini and a 2017 21" iMac.
I doubt I'll go back to the mini anymore. Reason: the iMac package and monitor is MUCH NICER than a mini and a monitor.
The mini is good as a low-priced crapputer for a quick office set up or a kid, etc. It's also perfect for a small server set up or something industrial which fits within a compact space and doesn't need constant monitoring from inside the room.
The MacBook Pro and iMac are much much more convenient and stylish.
If Apple updates the Mac mini with comparable specs to the 27" iMac (meaning desktop CPU and dedicated graphics), the starting price will likely go up by $300 at a minimum, with a form factor that is considerably taller and harder to hide than the current Mac mini. Add a 5K display, and the total cost of both is comparable to that of the iMac.
Some interesting replies...
to answer; the mac mini is definitely getting an update considering Tim said there’s still interest in it and Kuo said significant updates coming.
Kuo also rumoured that the selling price will rise, which suggests it might have similar specs to intel skull canyon.
I would play devils advocate and say it’s more convenient to have the mini, because I’d much rather crack that open to fix/upgrade something a few years down the line that peel off a 5k panel. It might well be slightly larger this time round, but no bigger than say an Xbox that’s easily slipped under the desk to be forgotten about?
When you compare the latest ultra thin bezel 24/27” monitors to an iMac, the iMac looks prehistoric with its massive chin and bezels, and can’t be adjusted by height or rotation.
to answer; the mac mini is definitely getting an update considering Tim said there’s still interest in it and Kuo said significant updates coming.
Kuo also rumoured that the selling price will rise, which suggests it might have similar specs to intel skull canyon.
I would play devils advocate and say it’s more convenient to have the mini, because I’d much rather crack that open to fix/upgrade something a few years down the line that peel off a 5k panel. It might well be slightly larger this time round, but no bigger than say an Xbox that’s easily slipped under the desk to be forgotten about?
When you compare the latest ultra thin bezel 24/27” monitors to an iMac, the iMac looks prehistoric with its massive chin and bezels, and can’t be adjusted by height or rotation.