To those who decided to buy the Intel iMac 2020: what argument prevailed?

[Yebubbleman]

This decision drives me crazy. My situation:
-my iMac 27 2013 i7 died few months ago (GPU failure);
-now I use Macbook Pro 15 (2015), which is substitute of failed iMac but only in part (Internet, Office - it's to weak to carry my audio works);
-I have a lot of software for Intel iMac: for example audio production software (Native Instruments Komplete Ultimate, Propellerhead Reason, Presonus Studio One, a lot of VST and synths etc etc);
- I'am afraid: a) many vendors will not re-release ARM software versions I already have; b) even if they release, I will have to pay again.

So, please give me advice: to buy Intel iMac 2020 or wait for ARM?
Thanks in advance!

I'm not particularly in the market for that particular Intel Mac, but I am in the market for an Intel Mac. For me, it's all about Boot Camp ability and x86 virtualization (we'll get the ability to virtualize other ARM architecture OSes in droves on Apple Silicon, but it doesn't help when all of the OSes that I want to virtualize are x86-64 only and likely to stay that way for the foreseeable future).

That being said, since you are on the Mac platform (and not on Windows), the likelihood of your older software working with future Intel releases of macOS will gradually diminish. Even if it still runs, you may find that it runs in a reduced capacity. You won't have this problem as severely with macOS as older oft-neglected iOS apps have on newer releases of iOS/iPadOS. But it's much more of a potential issue on macOS than it is on Windows (where stability and backwards compatibility are much bigger priorities when pushing that platform forward than it is for Apple with macOS). All that to say that your need to buy newer versions of your software is inevitable.

Do I think you'll need to do this imminently? No. If forestalling the inevitable repurchasing of your apps is important to you, then getting a 2020 Intel based 27" iMac now might be the best course of action as, by the time you get ready to naturally replace that machine with an Apple Silicon successor, you'll know much more about what to expect regarding the Apple Silicon/Universal Binary 2 versions of your apps.

THAT BEING SAID: The lower-end Macs are likely making the jump to Apple Silicon first. The 21.5" iMac not having been updated at the same time as the 27" iMac (which, barring the transition to 4K and 5K Retina displays, has never happened in the iMac's long history of having multiple display sizes) is telling. It will likely make the jump first, along with a host of other lower-end Macs (MacBook Air, 13" MacBook Pro, and possibly Mac mini as well). All that to say that the likelihood is strong that there will be other Apple Silicon Macs that are getting released safely before the 2020 Intel 27" iMac gets discontinued. All that to say that you will likely know, at the very least, much more about how your current Intel software runs under Rosetta 2 (as there will be Macs in the wild that can do so). For all we know, it may run smooth enough for you to transition to Apple Silicon Macs before having to upgrade your software.

I'd advise checking with your software vendors though. It's not unreasonable to ask whether or not you'll get patches or whether you'll have to shell out four figure amounts for whole new versions things.

 

[Abazigal]

This decision drives me crazy. My situation:
-my iMac 27 2013 i7 died few months ago (GPU failure);
-now I use Macbook Pro 15 (2015), which is substitute of failed iMac but only in part (Internet, Office - it's to weak to carry my audio works);
-I have a lot of software for Intel iMac: for example audio production software (Native Instruments Komplete Ultimate, Propellerhead Reason, Presonus Studio One, a lot of VST and synths etc etc);
- I'am afraid: a) many vendors will not re-release ARM software versions I already have; b) even if they release, I will have to pay again.

So, please give me advice: to buy Intel iMac 2020 or wait for ARM?
Thanks in advance!

If you need one now, get one now. Nobody knows how smooth the ARM transition will be or how long it will take. It sounds like your work depends a lot on the status quo staying and it may be better to stick with what you know works and ride out the transition.

Getting an iMac now will also give you enough time to observe the situation as if unfolds and by the time you are ready to upgrade again in the future, everything you need will hopefully have been ported over or at least give you enough time to start sourcing for alternatives.

 

[cltd]

I'm not particularly in the market for that particular Intel Mac, but I am in the market for an Intel Mac. For me, it's all about Boot Camp ability and x86 virtualization (we'll get the ability to virtualize other ARM architecture OSes in droves on Apple Silicon, but it doesn't help when all of the OSes that I want to virtualize are x86-64 only and likely to stay that way for the foreseeable future).

Thanks for detailed answer - it reminded me of virtualization. Yes, I need to virtualize not only Windows but also Mac Os which can run 32bit software (probably Mojave).

 

[Yebubbleman]

Thanks for detailed answer - it reminded me of virtualization. Yes, I need to virtualize not only Windows but also Mac Os which can run 32bit software (probably Mojave).

That would seem to dictate a need for the Intel based 2020 27" iMac then.

If it were me, I'd probably buy said 27" iMac (I'd buy one tier of storage larger than you think you'll need as you won't be able to upgrade it later) and then replace your 2015 15" MacBook Pro with the eventual Apple Silicon 16" MacBook Pro that's due out in the second half of 2021 and that way, you'll be able to more gracefully go through this transition.

Alternatively, you can also do what I'm doing and flirt with the idea of staying with Intel until the bitter end and then switching to Windows where you won't have to upgrade expensive software nearly as much (due to Microsoft not nixing support for frameworks older versions of stuff need in order to run smoothly). Realistically, I'll probably always own at least one Mac (it's kind of hard to just ditch 26 Apple IT certifications like that). But I bring up Windows solely to address the initial concerns about continuing to use older software.

 

[cltd]

If it were me, I'd probably buy said 27" iMac (I'd buy one tier of storage larger than you think you'll need as you won't be able to upgrade it later) and then replace your 2015 15" MacBook Pro with the eventual Apple Silicon 16" MacBook Pro that's due out in the second half of 2021 and that way, you'll be able to more gracefully go through this transition.

Alternatively, you can also do what I'm doing and flirt with the idea of staying with Intel until the bitter end and then switching to Windows where you won't have to upgrade expensive software nearly as much (due to Microsoft not nixing support for frameworks older versions of stuff need in order to run smoothly). Realistically, I'll probably always own at least one Mac (it's kind of hard to just ditch 26 Apple IT certifications like that). But I bring up Windows solely to address the initial concerns about continuing to use older software.

1. Good point with eventual ARM Macbook Pro. The question is: which iMac? Mid tier i5 (3.3 ghz) will be enough for virtualization?

2. I'm permamently on Mac since Performa 6200, since Mac Os 7 till Sierra. But Catalina (64bit) and then ARM transistion makes me think about jumping on Windows platform. I would like use virtual Windows to get acquainted to that OS.

 

[retta283]

Need wide range of app support and Windows. Rosetta I'm sure is fine for most things but I want to make sure my machine is performing at 100% in more intensive Intel apps (light gaming included, if this is anything like PPC-Intel then Intel games will perform poorly). Also, my hand was forced by my iMac failing on me, so a replacement was required.

 

[pldelisle]

1. Good point with eventual ARM Macbook Pro. The question is: which iMac? Mid tier i5 (3.3 ghz) will be enough for virtualization?

With virtualization, the more cores the better since you can allocate more cores to the VM. I’d take the top tier with 8 cores.

 

[filmak]

Except for hard drive size (my 2017 had a 1TB SSD and I got a 2TB with my 2020) and the fact that I had 48GB of RAM in the 2017 by the end, this is exactly what I switched from and to too! My only other change was to get the VESA setup this year. High-five fellow 128GB friend (though it was an accident in my case — lost Amazon order wound up in my favor)!

I do a mixture of creative work and code so I'm making a similar calculus as you. And honestly, I sold my iMac to a friend for $1500, even though I could have gotten more — I just wanted to get rid of it. I no longer think about my computers in terms of resale value, partially because I’m very lucky that I can afford what I want, but also because I’ve become concerned with always having the latest and greatest (getting a new iPhone each year notwithstanding) and instead am happy to use a computer until a real successor came along. Last year, I was really tempted by the 2019 iMac but getting less than half what I paid for my machine just didn’t make sense. This year it was different. After three years, this was the right machine, irrespective of what I got for my 2017. I’m hoping whatever desktop I replace this 2020 machine with will follow the same calculus.

(Even if a big part of me still hates that I got a loaded 2017 iMac in July, only for the iMac Pro to come out a few months later.)

Can you please hep me a bit please?

As I see we have similar use cases and thoughts regarding VMs and Adobe CC plus all the other stuff, I also have a 2017 iMac and I'm thinking of upgrading to a new 2020, i7 or i9 one, can you please inform me what are your impressions regarding the performance gains of the VMs on your new iMac (i7 or i9?) and Lr, Ps, Ai, ID in general?

 

[filmak]

With virtualization, the more cores the better since you can allocate more cores to the VM. I’d take the top tier with 8 cores.

Why not the 10 core one?

 

[pldelisle]

Why not the 10 core one?

Because it’s more expansive. But if you can afford then go for it, but it’s massive even when running VMs. I don’t know what you have to run in VM that requires a high core count like this but keep in mind it’s not a type 1 hypervisor, it’s not a proper VM server.

 

[filmak]

Because it’s more expansive. But if you can afford then go for it, but it’s massive even when running VMs. I don’t know what you have to run in VM that requires a high core count like this but keep in mind it’s not a type 1 hypervisor, it’s not a proper VM server.

Thanks, also the i7 seems to be a little faster in single thread tasks.
My VMs are running all day, while working, nothing intense, but there must be available. Dedicating 4 cores to the VM would let plenty of power for the Mac side-host, I think...

 

[cltd]

Dedicating 4 cores to the VM would let plenty of power for the Mac side-host, I think...

"
Myth 1: The more processors I assign to my VM, the better.
It sounds logical—more is better.
Well, that’s not exactly true.
One or two virtual CPUs is enough for most of the Windows applications you run. Assigning three CPUs can even slow down overall performance, especially if you have an older Mac model.
"

Virtual Machine Performance Myths in Parallels Desktop

If you've never worked in a VM before, don't believe everything bad you hear. This post dispels three common myths about virtual machine performance.

www.parallels.com

 

[barkmonster]

Ridiculous. Fan speed I could understand. Going eGPU with an iMac 2020 ? Just no. The iMac has plenty of GPU power and music production doesn't need an extraordinary GPU at all.

This is half the problem with Apple's line up. The 5,1 Mac Pro was the last truly upgradable and capable system that's great for audio. Everything since seems to be form over function, GPU power over CPU power etc... I can't even upgrade past 10.13.6 without wasting money on a Metal capable GPU just because that's Apple's focus. I run 2 HD screens, I'll never need more GPU power than the stock GPU for my needs. A couple of X5690s and I'm set for years to come and I'll have my SSD/PCie SSD storage and extra USB 3.0 ports on PCIe cards so when I do get a newer Mac, I'll have to make do with a Mac Mini with the fastest CPU option at the time, 3rd party RAM to save cost and then put the PCIe cards in a Thunderbolt enclosure. It's my only option because I don't need portability and won't pay a premium for a gimmick of a touchbar or settle for an iMac which I see as no more than a laptop for your desk with a desktop CPU.

 

[filmak]

"
Myth 1: The more processors I assign to my VM, the better.
It sounds logical—more is better.
Well, that’s not exactly true.
One or two virtual CPUs is enough for most of the Windows applications you run. Assigning three CPUs can even slow down overall performance, especially if you have an older Mac model.
"

Virtual Machine Performance Myths in Parallels Desktop

If you've never worked in a VM before, don't believe everything bad you hear. This post dispels three common myths about virtual machine performance.

www.parallels.com

Thanks , but I think that this is only in the case you have an old CPU with ~ 4 cores (or a new one with 4 cores too) and you assign 4 to the VM, this way you are making the host OS to suffer and of course the VM. Assigninig more than 2 cores when you are having an 8, 10 or 16 core CPU is not a problem, it's a benefit.

Also thank you for the link you have provided but it opens the "buy Parallels" site, but no worries, I have read the article you mentioned in the past.

P.S. This is Parallels advice in QA under the article you mentioned "Hey Sasan, We recommend you assign maximum half of the cores and half RAM to your VM for best performance. However, you can “play around” with it and see how it works best for you – you won’t harm your Mac as you can always change the settings. Let us know if you have further questions. Thanks"

 

[rambo47]

.... I can use that money I’m saving building a fun AMD system when the next chips come out. Or on something else.

Those Rizen processors are seriously impressive. I can't wait to see what's next from AMD. I remember when the G3 processors came out and everybody geeked out at the performance. Yeah, I go back a ways. My first Mac was a G3 PowerBook with 292MHz processor and the uber-hot 83MHz system bus. We are several orders of magnitude beyond that.

 

[pldelisle]

I can't even upgrade past 10.13.6 without wasting money on a Metal capable GPU just because that's Apple's focus.

The entire windows subsystem is Metal accelerated. This is the only reason why. It allows fast, smooth windows and transparency. It’s not because Apple wants it. It’s to provide good visuals that doesn’t impact performance. It offloads the CPU that is not good enough to render these effects.

 

[cltd]

Also thank you for the link you have provided but it opens the "buy Parallels" site, but no worries, I have read the article you mentioned in the past.

Sorry, I didn't mean to.
Anyway, standard Parallels version is limited to 4 cores

 

[fhopper]

I have the maxed out late 2013 27" which as a quad core i7 has served me really well. I understand my machine will not support the next OS release, I have not read why. I am looking at a good 27".

• Standard glass
• 3.8GHz 8-core 10th-generation Intel Core i7 processor, Turbo Boost up to 5.0GHz
• 8GB 2666MHz DDR4 memory
• Radeon Pro 5700 with 8GB of GDDR6 memory
• 1TB SSD storage

The new OS making me an orphan and a real fear that a redesign will not support user upgradable RAM are my motivations and am very close to buying the bag. (I have been waiting for horror stories but there don't seem to be many.)

 

[scotttnz]

I have a 2017 15" MacBook Pro that I use with a 40" 4K screen. Since we downsized to an apartment earlier this year it has felt a bit big for the space, and now with the pandemic I find myself moving my setup to different rooms depending on who is working from home at different lockdown levels. The thought of just being able to plug in 1 cable at my desk, or dinning table, rather than screen, thunderbolt dock, webcam, etc etc is pretty appealing. I have also found that in the 3 years that I have had the MacBook, I have hardly ever used it as a laptop. It is almost always at my desk, with the external monitor, keyboard and mouse. For my mobile needs I have an iPad Pro, and if I get desperate can use my work supplied Windows Laptop.
I work in IT, and also want to run some VMs in a testing\lab environment, and the 16GB RAM in the MacBook is too restrictive. I used to run a seperate machine for this, but I don't really have the space anymore, and the RAM limit is also a problem with that machine too.
I'm using all of the above to justify a new iMac to myself and my long suffering wife. Do I really need it? No, but I want something to make spending all this extra time at home more enjoyable, and I can afford it (If I don't go overboard on the specs!) While I do like the sound of Apple Silicon, I want the ability to run VMs, and I'll let the early adopters iron out the bugs for me.
My use case is WFH\office apps, hobby photography (mostly Lightroom currently, but I'm always looking for a non-subscription alternative) I'm starting to dabble in video, and the VMs I mentioned. I'm still debating the config, but I'm looking at:

• Standard glass
• 3.8GHz 8-core 10th-generation Intel Core i7 processor, Turbo Boost up to 5.0GHz
• 8GB 2666MHz DDR4 memory (Will upgrade myself, probably to 64GB, or 72GB if the apple RAM will play nice with 3rd Party)
• Radeon Pro 5500XT or 5700 with 8GB of GDDR6 memory
• 1TB or 2TB SSD storage

Mostly I'm deciding between the 5700 and 2TB SSD because getting both would put me over budget. I probably don't really need either of them, so that is an option too. (I have plenty of external storage, and I shifted my gaming to a PS4)

 

[balticgreen]

Currently rocking a maxed out 2013 iMac. I'm really looking forward to AS and hopefully a 30-32" iMac. But I decided on getting the 2020 due to it supporting Bootcamp for gaming and the fact that I don't want to get a first generation AS and be involved in all the issues that will surely come with it. So getting the 2020 iMac to tie me over for the next 2-4 years until the AS is fully implemented...

Same for me, except I don't use Bootcamp or do any gaming, but I do need Docker, which currently doesn't work on the DTK Mini. I have a 2013 iMac and it still works but is showing its age and now will not be supported by Big Sur. I'd love a 32" iMac with Apple Silicon but I don't want the first one. Given that it's likely to be a year or so from now that we see an AS version of the bigger screen iMac and another year or so for the second iteration of it, I don't think I want to wait 2+ years while praying that my 2013 doesn't completely bite the dust in the meantime and force my hand. I also worry that the redesigned iMac will not have user-upgradeable RAM and given Apple's current opinions on how much base RAM is enough and the cost of upgrades, an AS iMac could be quite a bit more expensive than a 2020 when configured with more RAM. Hopefully in a few years when I'm ready for an AS iMac, the base RAM will at least be higher even if the upgrades are still expensive.

This year is also very weird due to the pandemic. I typically have a lot of business tax deductions but the pandemic and social distancing have eliminated nearly all of them, so I'm looking at investing in equipment this year to get back some deductions. I figure I probably won't keep the 2020 for 7 years like the 2013 but it will get me through the AS transition and allow me to buy an AS model when I feel comfortable doing so rather than having the potential of growing pains.

I haven't actually bought a 2020 model yet but I will before the end of the year. I haven't upgraded the 2013 to Catalina because so many people are griping about problems with it. I think I'm going to wait until Big Sur is released in October-ish and then buy a 2020 so that it either comes with Big Sur installed or I can upgrade it day one and skip Catalina.

 

[wilberforce]

Everyone is expecting Apple Silicon, and the future design of the iMac, to be wonderfully better in every respect. I am not so sure. Not every generation of products is better in every way than the last. I expect that some aspects will be much better, some much the same, and some worse or compromised. This will lead to much angst and gnashing of teeth. Thus I decided to get the best of the last, and wait and see what happens.

 

[filmak]

Sorry, I didn't mean to.
Anyway, standard Parallels version is limited to 4 cores

It's not your fault, thanks anyway for trying to help, I tried to post a new link for you to this Parallels article yesterday but when clicked for testing it, it went to the same "buy Parallels" so I deleted it.
Unfortunately I have a "Pro" subscription as I need more than 8 Gb of Ram.
Thanks again.

 

[filmgirl]

Can you please hep me a bit please?

As I see we have similar use cases and thoughts regarding VMs and Adobe CC plus all the other stuff, I also have a 2017 iMac and I'm thinking of upgrading to a new 2020, i7 or i9 one, can you please inform me what are your impressions regarding the performance gains of the VMs on your new iMac (i7 or i9?) and Lr, Ps, Ai, ID in general?

Sure! I’ve already mailed my 2017 iMac to a friend so I can’t do 1:1 comparisons but my impressions are that this is a significant upgrade. The additional cores makes a big difference for VMs (going from 4 to 10 is really significant) and with containers. I’m able to run more VMs (or beefier VMs) than I was before with far less performance impact on my main OS — and it takes a lot more for the fans to turn on (they had started to turn on quite frequently towards the end of my time with the 2017 and I had the maxed out BTO model and 48GB of RAM). I’m even doing some nested virtualization (running a Hyper-V VM inside of Hyper-V in Windows 10 within Parallels for Mac Pro) stuff with very little impact on the host OS.

Most of my Adobe stuff is in Premiere (I also use FCPX but my colleagues use Premiere so I have to use that too) and my Photoshop workloads are very minor so I can’t offer up much comparison that way. In Premiere, exports are MUCH faster and 4K playback is notably improved too.

I also notice it takes a lot more for the fans to turn on. The noise is the same when they do, but it definitely takes more for them to kick in. I’m not super precious about this because the audio recording I do (podcasting) is almost always under light enough load to avoid any issues and I’m always wearing headphones when using my Mac anyway, but I figured I’d point that out. I do know some people are really sensitive to any noise from their Mac (though I do wonder how they deal with a MacBook Pro, since those can be even louder) and I don’t want to mislead anyone that the 2020 is silent. It’s the same noise level as the 2017, but in my experience it takes more for the fans to kick in. The better cooling system and extra TB3 lane is the only advantage the iMac Pro has, but for my money, I’m not buying three-year old hardware when I can get newer/better stuff for less money.

 

[filmgirl]

Oh — I’ll be doing a livestream on Twitch some time next week (I’m waiting for a new standing desk to arrive and it’s a whole thing and has totally ruined my productivity to the point that I’m using my laptop instead of my beautiful new iMac because of the drama involving my office at the moment) and the goal will be to break the 10-cores/128GB of RAM with containers and VMs and such. If anyone is interested in this sort of nonsense, I’ll post a link before I do it.

 

[filmak]

Sure! I’ve already mailed my 2017 iMac to a friend so I can’t do 1:1 comparisons but my impressions are that this is a significant upgrade. The additional cores makes a big difference for VMs (going from 4 to 10 is really significant) and with containers. I’m able to run more VMs (or beefier VMs) than I was before with far less performance impact on my main OS — and it takes a lot more for the fans to turn on (they had started to turn on quite frequently towards the end of my time with the 2017 and I had the maxed out BTO model and 48GB of RAM). I’m even doing some nested virtualization (running a Hyper-V VM inside of Hyper-V in Windows 10 within Parallels for Mac Pro) stuff with very little impact on the host OS.

Most of my Adobe stuff is in Premiere (I also use FCPX but my colleagues use Premiere so I have to use that too) and my Photoshop workloads are very minor so I can’t offer up much comparison that way. In Premiere, exports are MUCH faster and 4K playback is notably improved too.

I also notice it takes a lot more for the fans to turn on. The noise is the same when they do, but it definitely takes more for them to kick in. I’m not super precious about this because the audio recording I do (podcasting) is almost always under light enough load to avoid any issues and I’m always wearing headphones when using my Mac anyway, but I figured I’d point that out. I do know some people are really sensitive to any noise from their Mac (though I do wonder how they deal with a MacBook Pro, since those can be even louder) and I don’t want to mislead anyone that the 2020 is silent. It’s the same noise level as the 2017, but in my experience it takes more for the fans to kick in. The better cooling system and extra TB3 lane is the only advantage the iMac Pro has, but for my money, I’m not buying three-year old hardware when I can get newer/better stuff for less money.

Oh — I’ll be doing a livestream on Twitch some time next week (I’m waiting for a new standing desk to arrive and it’s a whole thing and has totally ruined my productivity to the point that I’m using my laptop instead of my beautiful new iMac because of the drama involving my office at the moment) and the goal will be to break the 10-cores/128GB of RAM with containers and VMs and such. If anyone is interested in this sort of nonsense, I’ll post a link before I do it.

Thanks a lot dear, you are very kind and helpful.
Please share a link when you're ready.
You have my best wishes.