Nobody else find it comical entry-level 4K is now i3?

[strawbale]

I think the problem here is that "successor" means whatever the person arguing wants it to mean.

The other problem is that the i3/i5/i7 denomination is branding not specification and represents price-point and intended market segment, not absolute performance. Its also a highly unsatisfactory, dumbed-down system that totally fails to communicate the half-dozen or so variables that determine the processor's performance - like most modern marketing, a cynic might think that it was deliberately designed to make it hard for customers to objectively compare products.

So, in terms of intended market position and price point the "successor" to the i5-7400 is the i5-8400 because that's why Intel stuck that label on. In terms of absolute performance - well, looks like the i3-8100 might even be an i5-7400 (in an industry where the only difference between a 3GHz part and a 4GHz part may well be that the latter has been tested at the higher frequency).

Really, i3/i5/i7 is no different to "standard/premium/pro" - and the complaint is that, with the 8th generation processors, Intel started offering 6 cores instead of 4 at the "premium" price point but, instead of passing that improvement on, Apple decided to downgrade from a "premium" to a "standard" processor and pocket the savings. This is technology, not the price of a loaf or bread. Technology advances, and after two years it is entirely reasonable to expect significantly better specs - such as more/faster cores - for the same price.



Yes there is and its already been explained to you. Its never been valid to use i-number branding to compare low-power mobile and desktop chips. The iMac could have had the i5-8400 as a straightforward (maybe even drop-in) replacement for the i5-7400. The innards of the new Mac Mini have been changed beyond recognition to accommodate desktop-class processors - different socket, different power, different cooling.

Still, It is entirely arguable that - in branding/price point terms - that even the entry-level New Mac Mini is not a cheap computer and it should come with a "premium" (relative to today's range) i5 processor, not an i3.

Its equally true that the new entry-level i3 Mini substantially out-performs the top-end 2014 model - but that's because (a) its a 65W desktop processor vs. a 25W mobile processor and (b) 4 years have passed and processors have more, and faster, cores for the same price.

By your argument, Apple should have put a 2-core Celeron or similar in the new mini, as that would quite likely be just a little bit better than a 4-year-old i5. I don't think that would have gone down very well unless they had also slashed the price.

Not at all - If you've read my comments carefully, my only argument is and has been: don't look at the label, look at the specs.

 

[theluggage]

Not at all - If you've read my comments carefully, my only argument is and has been: don't look at the label, look at the specs.

Look at the specs and a current MacBook Air is more powerful than an old MacBook Pro, if you go back in time far enough. That doesn't make it a MacBook Pro today.

People reasonably expect specs to improve with each generation. Maybe that won't be true forever as the tech matures, but Intel have been able to deliver that with the 8th/9th gen ranges c.f. the 7th gen. In the case of the base iMac 4k, Apple have decided not to pass that on to customers.

Moving from desktop i5 to desktop i3 is going downmarket - end of, full stop because that's what i3 and i5 mean.

 

[fgengineer]

It’s simple. AMD forced Intel to stop gouging their customers and finally gave customers more cores for less.

Apple, being the greedy little company they are, pocketed the savings instead of passing it on to their customers.

 

[strawbale]

Look at the specs and a current MacBook Air is more powerful than an old MacBook Pro, if you go back in time far enough. That doesn't make it a MacBook Pro today.

People reasonably expect specs to improve with each generation. Maybe that won't be true forever as the tech matures, but Intel have been able to deliver that with the 8th/9th gen ranges c.f. the 7th gen. In the case of the base iMac 4k, Apple have decided not to pass that on to customers.

Moving from desktop i5 to desktop i3 is going downmarket - end of, full stop because that's what i3 and i5 mean.

i3 and i5 don't mean a lot - the actual specs do

 

[russofris]

i3 and i5 don't mean a lot - the actual specs do

Indeed. The new i3 iMacs look great compared to Apple's past offerings.

It's only when you compare them to current-day commodity PC manufacturers' competitive offerings that they look a woefully under-powered, overpriced, anemic joke.

There's no need to defend Apple here. The recently released base-model iMac is two years old. If I didn't have to endure compliance audits, I'd have a hackintosh.

 

[macrem]

I’ve got my eye on the 2019 iMac with hard disk for ~$1500, am just holding back to see if Apple will reintroduce floppy drives in 2020

 

[curmudgeonette]

Finally found the message threads (elsewhere) where this was discussed: The key clue is a B0 stepping level for the early Coffee Lake quad cores. Kaby Lake is also B0. Meanwhile hex core Coffee Lake's are U0. Thus i3-8350K is a rebadged i5-7600K; and i3-8100 is a rebadged i5-7500.

Finally noticed something: Apple configures the i3 with 2666MHz memory even though the Intel spec is for 2400MHz max. This implies that Apple is getting U0 stepping i3-8100's, i.e. quite likely hex core Coffee Lake's with a defective core (or two).

 

[strawbale]

Indeed. The new i3 iMacs look great compared to Apple's past offerings.

It's only when you compare them to current-day commodity PC manufacturers' competitive offerings that they look a woefully under-powered, overpriced, anemic joke.

There's no need to defend Apple here. The recently released base-model iMac is two years old. If I didn't have to endure compliance audits, I'd have a hackintosh.

Not 'defending' anything, just stating the obvious ("i3 and i5 don't mean a lot - the actual specs do").
Reluctantly bought the overpriced upgraded new Mac Mini myself, only because I prefer macOS to Windows 10 (for my usage) - am happy with it (i5-8500/8GB/256GB), fast & dead silent.

 

[Spectrum]

Finally noticed something: Apple configures the i3 with 2666MHz memory even though the Intel spec is for 2400MHz max. This implies that Apple is getting U0 stepping i3-8100's, i.e. quite likely hex core Coffee Lake's with a defective core (or two).

The i3 mac minis is the same - also 2666

 

[AlexJoda]

So this generation i3 is better than last generation's i5. It is a successor. Stop treating i3s as if they are still dual cores. Intel finally got off their butt and did a massive improvement across their ENTIRE LINE. I can FINALLY get a decent i7 with 6 cores at a reasonable price.

...but sadly not from Apple as a 27" iMac....The i7 would make much more sense than the two i5s.....

 

[StarShot]

If you want the 2019 equivalent of the 2017 entry-level 4K imac, you gotta pay an extra $250 Canadian. That is just a crazy level of greed.

No, it's not greed. It's business. If you don't want one, don't get one. IF you need a 4K iMac like you need to eat, maybe then it would be greed.