2020 is just not a good year, period.
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.
Will there ever be a new large iMac (Pro)?
- Thread starter krazzix
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And if you have a mid-2010 MBP that is almost dead and can't do any of the things you need to do on it?
At this point I'm wondering if Timmy's messing with everyone by delaying it every time a leaker says it's gonna release.
Here we go 
www.anandtech.com
Intel Adds Core i9-10850K To Desktop Chip Lineup: 10 Cores Minus 100MHz
It's quite simple. Wait.
Unless you have a machine that is 'dead.' (see my fried gpu iMac..) Or a machine is slowly dying a death and won't perform like you need it to for your job.
IF you absolutely 'NEED' a Mac now for your production work. (Time is money=wages=making a living.)
There are plenty of options.
Borrow a friend's spare Mac.
Lease a Mac.
Rent a Mac.
Buy a current Mac on %. (Apple have a 2 year 0% deal. Some 3rd parties let you have a Mac over 3 years.)
Buy 2019. iMac. (Decent. But out of date.)
Buy 2017. iMac Pro. The ultimate iMac (but out of date.)
Buy used. Still pricey at almost new prices.
Buy refurb. Still pricey at almost new prices.
Build a Hack. (A far cheaper option. From £660-£1250 (+ screen) to get something that will out perform the £1950 iMac.)
Build a PC (and update it any time you like...)
or
Wait.
Azrael.
[automerge]1595864364[/automerge]
Here we go
Intel Adds Core i9-10850K To Desktop Chip Lineup: 10 Cores Minus 100MHz
*Goes to link to 'ave a read...
Azrael.
Last edited:
the only thing I don't like about this 10850 chip is the assumption that its just bastard chips that didn't pass the quality control. Not sure I like they idea of paying for overpriced iMac and having bastard chip in it.
No TDP rating. Is this the 95W part that appeared in the Geekbench leak?
Azrael.
[automerge]1595864704[/automerge]
Not great so far.
But the 'year end' promises the new dawn.
Sep' onwards it will start to heat up.
Azrael.
Azrael.
[automerge]1595864704[/automerge]
Not great so far.
But the 'year end' promises the new dawn.
Sep' onwards it will start to heat up.
Azrael.
Well, they think its 125W but they are not sure. Its 100MHz less all over the specs so would that cut around 25%? I doubt that
125 W but I just noticed that all these 125 W CPUs can be configured down to 95 W according to Intel so they all can be used in the next iMac.Here we go
Intel Adds Core i9-10850K To Desktop Chip Lineup: 10 Cores Minus 100MHz
Intel® Core™ i9-10850K Processor (20M Cache, up to 5.20 GHz) - Product Specifications | Intel
Intel® Core™ i9-10850K Processor (20M Cache, up to 5.20 GHz) quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.
ark.intel.com
Intel set themselves up for failure when they increased the turbo so drastically on the 10900k. They will have a ton of chips that aren’t good enough... Apple will lap them up, as they are a ‘good’ match for the **** iMac cooling. In reality, they will probably (Tim) cook just as well as the past few Intel CPUs.
Intel are between a rock and a volcano.
Tom's H don't know the TDP of this chip. (Guessing 125w?) That doesn't help the new Intel iMac.
But I remember reading the 2019 iMac gpu just under volts.
So either this 10850 is 95w. Or it's 125 and Apple under clocks/under volts it?
Or maybe there is another part in the works.
What's interesting is that Tom's in indicating
Supply and demand?
Azrael.
but 10900K can be configured to 95W also so what is really the benefit of this bastard child?
125 W but I just noticed that all these 125 W CPUs can be configured down to 95 W according to Intel so they all can be used in the next iMac.
Intel® Core™ i9-10850K Processor (20M Cache, up to 5.20 GHz) - Product Specifications | Intel
Intel® Core™ i9-10850K Processor (20M Cache, up to 5.20 GHz) quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.
125 W but I just noticed that all these 125 W CPUs can be configured down to 95 W according to Intel so they all can be used in the next iMac.
Intel® Core™ i9-10850K Processor (20M Cache, up to 5.20 GHz) - Product Specifications | Intel
Intel® Core™ i9-10850K Processor (20M Cache, up to 5.20 GHz) quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.
*nods. You can run them slower?
Just as Apple is in the current 2019 model?
Azrael.
[automerge]1595865023[/automerge]
Good question.
Azrael.
[automerge]1595865069[/automerge]
Cook...I see what you did there...
Azrael.
To keep it cool enough, you’ll probably have to downclock it to 2.8Ghz.
WOO! I love Intel.
The only difference I find besides 100 MHz and $35 is that 10900K is more secure? It has Intel® Trusted Execution Technology (for safer computing is a versatile set of hardware extensions to Intel® processors and chipsets that enhance the digital office platform with security capabilities such as measured launch and protected execution. It enables an environment where applications can run within their own space, protected from all other software on the system.)
i9-10850K does not have Intel® Trusted Execution Technology so no benefit besides beeing $35 cheaper?
Looking at the prices I can't help but think that AS will (or should) introduce some significant savings. Its almost $500 per chip (sure Apple gets them cheaper but for illustration) + GPU that will probably cost around the same (or more).
So for illustration lets just take it that $1000 is for these 2.
Now, iPhone SE is $400 and has the A13. There has to be some saving on the AS computers. iPhone will drive the development etc. so the cost of R&D will be funded fine and that should provide us with cheaper chips that will give us tons of benefits. 1 chip inhouse vs 2 chips from other vendors.
Sure, Apple can be fusion fusers and pocket the difference but do they really need to? Cutting the prices and making the computers more affordable will in return bring in more customers so Apple wins and customers win. Is that really unreasonable to expect?
If new playstation etc. can bring a console that is massively fast for basically peanuts then Apple should be able to do better with their own solution.
iMac Pro should be much cheaper
Mac Pro should be better specs or much cheaper
iMac should be at least $200 and BTO upgrades better priced (that will probably be thing of a past with AS - for GPUs)
notebooks? Who cares - they all suck
XDR - bring back consumer style display like the 30" ACD used to be. That thing was just stunning piece of hardware
Dream - Mac Mini with Mini XDR = less than $3.5k
here is the thing - until now Apple used Intel as an excuse and they said that they have crippled their innovation. Now, no more excuses and now Apple - shows us what you've got. Its your turn to prove it.
So for illustration lets just take it that $1000 is for these 2.
Now, iPhone SE is $400 and has the A13. There has to be some saving on the AS computers. iPhone will drive the development etc. so the cost of R&D will be funded fine and that should provide us with cheaper chips that will give us tons of benefits. 1 chip inhouse vs 2 chips from other vendors.
Sure, Apple can be fusion fusers and pocket the difference but do they really need to? Cutting the prices and making the computers more affordable will in return bring in more customers so Apple wins and customers win. Is that really unreasonable to expect?
If new playstation etc. can bring a console that is massively fast for basically peanuts then Apple should be able to do better with their own solution.
iMac Pro should be much cheaper
Mac Pro should be better specs or much cheaper
iMac should be at least $200 and BTO upgrades better priced (that will probably be thing of a past with AS - for GPUs)
notebooks? Who cares - they all suck
XDR - bring back consumer style display like the 30" ACD used to be. That thing was just stunning piece of hardware
Dream - Mac Mini with Mini XDR = less than $3.5k
here is the thing - until now Apple used Intel as an excuse and they said that they have crippled their innovation. Now, no more excuses and now Apple - shows us what you've got. Its your turn to prove it.
So, why would Apple want to use 10850K if they are all about security? I'm sure Apple has the leverage to ask Intel to give them either custom 10850K with ITE or they get 10900K for the price of 10850K
Damn, I really don't want to have a bastard child at home
Damn, I really don't want to have a bastard child at home
But Apple doesn’t use the Intel trusted execution. In most apple models this feature is not present.
This is clearly an iMac chip. No doubts.
Or, significant profits. Apple isn't know for big price cuts regardless of internals cost savings. So their $1,599 base model will now retail for $1,549 and they'll be like wow what a savings for higher specs.. BFD...
I think consumer computer (iMac 24, MBP13, Air) will see a price cut to increase sales. Volume sales will benefit services so profit will go up totally because of that. High-end lower volume AS will probably cost an ARM and a LEG though but not more than Intel/AMD.
I have 2017 MBP 15" and that crap is noisy as hell too. I hate mobile computers - so many compromises. If Mac Pro wasn't so expensive for the base model I would get that but no way I'm giving them so much money for so little fanfare.
XDR the same
XDR the same