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
*coughs.* Why doctor... :O
As for Manga battle cries. Why not.
I do like Shiro Massamune.
And Battle of the Planets (G-Force/Gatcha Man...)
And if you haven't seen Fist of the North Star...it's just elbow in the nose brutal.
Azrael.
Should be able to.
There is also the option of putting Big Sur on an external SSD when it arrives.
Azrael.
bec you are runing nvidia dGpu and not amd...680MX, 780M...and then they started with 295MX and the heat and fan noise started..
Was just curious in case I decide to return the iMac.
[automerge]1596730302[/automerge]
thanks
Aye. Playing around with advanced settings can really take the load off for some features that can be turned off completely or just reduced work the gpu less.
Metal enabled. Good. 8 out of 10 is decent. Very good.
Smooth as butter. Great news.
Azrael.
Mark your calendars. June 2021 is closer than you think.
NV always held the upper hand in Open GL. (I guess they did the drivers for Apple to sign off on before they 'fell out?')
And Apple's Open GL is way out of date deprecated. But in 2012...it was kinda ok. Decent enough to run Vanilla WoW with ease.
So if the Open GL is better, I should imagine the 'Open GL' card will strain less and perform 'better.' That said, in the WoW example mentioned, Jet noted the API used was Metal.
So it is an interesting point you make. But it might have more to do with AMD's GPUs just running hot and being less efficient.
We must also note. AMD's efficiency hasn't been 'brilliant' for quite a while now. Nvidia have been beating them in efficiency for a while...well...in many things.
The 680MX was in the top ten gpus for its year. Not bad for a mobile gpu. And it served my iMac with distinction. (Despite my frequent iMac gpu complaints...the 680MX was one of the better highlights of gpus and iMacs.)
So the 50% of the RDNA2 will be most welcome. IF any Mac gets to see it.
More likely, GPU efficiency (and probably superior performance in this context) will come to all Macs care of Apple AS GPU.
Azrael.
The T2 is soldered. The T2 contains the SSD controller ( the "brains" of the SSD ). The SSD is soldered to the board in the Mac Pro and iMac Pro. What isn't soldered is the NAND storage modules. Those are not SSDs. They are useless without being connected to a T2 to complete the SSD. It is like saying the RAM DIMMs of the iMac are the computer. They are only a part of the computer; not a complete system.
I read the translated German from the site that claims it is all soldered to the board. I'm not sure if the translation is muddled but it talks about not being also to put in a 2nd SSD. That would be true if the T2 is soldered to the board. The iMac Pro doesn't have an operation for second ( and the Mac Pro doesn't have a M.2 SSD slot on the motherboard either . Although there are SATA SSD and PCi-e add-in-card options. )
Apple soldering 8TB of NAND chips to the iMac motherboard makes no sense. Apple could do it but it is just brazenly stupid. ( unless trying to rip folks off down streams on motherboard repairs. ). The laptops Apple has some rational in that painted themselves into a corner on thinness and "have to". But the iMac Pro has approximately the exact same case and doesn't do it. So there is no "we painted ourselves into a corner" excuse. The Mac Pro has 256 GB Modules. So getting to 256 and 512GB configurations would be easy with modules that Apple is already making. Getting to 8TB would be easy with modules Apple is already making.
Soldering to the motherboard would probably drive even higher inventory costs than what they have now.
But internal to the iMac and not being "user replaceable", I could see the internal docs labeling this as "can't be changed later". it is not particularly labeled as can be changed later on the iMac Pro.
It will count down lightning fast now I have an Intel iMac coming...
Took one for the team...
I think that would make sense. They could include the 24 and 32 inch in that. That gives them a year.
And me 10 months of buyer's remorse.
Just kidding. I'll be able to run this iMac as the 'PC' in Bootcamp. And acquire the AS iMac 32(?) incher if the performance is compelling enough.
Janus. Looking back.
Looking forward.
Azrael.
I actually love having it in window mode and just play a week or so when i take breaks.
I think most of the load on that game is on the CPU, i am looking forward to just ramping up as many leagues and players in the active database as possible.
The game runs on 256MB VRAM and uses metal. 4k should be doable on our machines.
Metal? Coolio.
Nice one. In sexy 4k? Oh yeahh....brummmm...guuuuguuguu...BRUMMMMMM....g-g-g-g-g-.guh....
Azrael.
I have a similar issue, but with respect to my wife's machine. Mine is a 2015. Not sure what I am going to do yet.
See thread here: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/buy-new-2020-imac-or-wait-for-redesign-and-as.2248636/
Yes.
Well.
You can get a much cheaper PC. £1300. Then you'll need a display. Eg. Dell 4k. Another £400. Which will bring you to about the entry iMac.
The Legacy deprecation/ammortisation of price.
For £1750 you get a Mac with a £1300 5k monitor. (Still the iMac's best feature. One that is difficult to replicate in a 'cost conscious' way on PC.)
But you also get a £1750 'PC' free!!! With Bootcamp.
So?
Well. You're not going to get £1750 worth of 'free' PC with your AS iMac. No Bootcamp. :/
So take that £1750 of free PC to sooth your perception and your Intel iMac's ammortisation.
That '£1750' Free PC absorbs and surpasses any losses with any future AS launch and any 'loss' of value.
Remember. You can keep this Intel iMac and run it as a 5k, 10 core (in my case) 5700XT (with the 16 gigs of vram difficult to replicate on Windows...) and even boost it later with an RDNA2 via eGPU....forever offsetting any such 'loss' of performance.
Just use this Intel iMac until it drops.
I quite like the idea of having a 32 inch AS iMac...with a 27 inch 5k 'PC' alongside it.
I did say I was going for a dual PC/Mac work set up.
I think the penny has finally dropped as to how I'm going to do it. Perhaps I don't need that PC 'tower' after all...
Azrael.
Those reasons don't fly at all.
Packaging doesn't fly because it is already "Packaged" for the Mac Pro and iMac Pro. Talking about components that already exist and are being manufactured. The GPUs are soldered onto the board so there is a bit of "Just in Time" build to configuration going on. ( but also way the first two standard configurations do not have any GPU options. ). The SSD NAND modules all Apple to build a motherboard and then "plug in and mate" the SSD to the motherboard. That is actually simpler packaging than having to "guess" about how many fixed configuration SSD builds to build. ( or waiting until orders come in to just build everything custom. ).
Performance. The Mac Pro isn't hurting on SSD performance. There is lots of space where the 3.5" HDD was. Can get the T2 and two module connectors into that space relatively easy. (all three elements would be in very close proximity so the traces will be very short. Not going to win much on trace length savings). With some minor clearance can get some simple circuit elements underneath the modules to more efficiently use that 3D space. Soldering to the board is only going to "spill" and spread what is on the modules out onto the motherboard. On the laptops that is OK because the keyboard means the logic board has to be wider anyway, but Apple ends up doing both sides. Both sides on an iMac Pro may not be a good thing.
It is less than 2 inches thick so yeah they do it on the MacBook line up. It doesn't make sense in an iMac where have no where near those kinds of z-height constraints. Apple solders the RAM due to z-height constraints and yet there are so-DIMMs still on the iMac 27". If enough z-height for RAM why would there be enough for the SSD?
60 hz display, I think. Which is more than fine for creative work or mainstream gaming. And about as fast in FPS as the 5700XT can push that 5k monitor anyhow.
Promotion will probably (120 hz) come with the AS iMacs. Another reason to upgrade to them.
Azrael.
So which tier are you going to get?
Nobody likes an iMac more than me...apart from my wife...and a few of her friends...
Azrael.
That Nanotexture display looks great on iMac, but man... I can afford it, but spending almost 600 EUR to get a matte display. Some things still feel stupidly expensive even if you can afford them 😂
I wasn't that fond of 'matte' displays. Not that I'm addicted to reflective ones either. So I understand why some need Matte displays.
I wouldn't pay £500 to 'upgrade' to one. But someone might.
The only reflection I can see on my current iMac is in the bezels. *Preens and poses.*
Azrael.
I wouldn't pay £500 to 'upgrade' to one. But someone might.
The only reflection I can see on my current iMac is in the bezels. *Preens and poses.*
Azrael.
The problem with using Window GPU cards are proxies is that they are not macOS or the configurations that Apple uses.
/article-new/2020/08/large-5f2bda4336ab4.jpg?lossy)
2020 iMac Benchmarks Surface Online [Updated]
Benchmarks from the new 2020 iMac have today been shared online by Mac Otakara. The Geekbench benchmarks are from the newly-released 27-inch iMac...
www.macrumors.com
So after three years, while GPUs have improved by leaps and bounds, we're supposed to pay a lot of extra money if we want to enjoy those improvements?
Wow, bravo Apple! Way to be greedy
At least on this benchmark The Pro 5300 is beating the 580X. That is lower on the totem pole than the 5500 XT. So the 5500 XT should do reasonably well versus the 580 on at least this benchmark. Not the same set of optimizations as what using the Windows GPU benchmarks would predict at all.
The Pro 5700 would be a huge leap. The "$2,399" price being used as an anchor is muddled with Apple's $400/TB SSD pricing. That 2017 model is saddled with a 2TB Fusion drive. The 2020 model isn't. That is primarily why the Pro 5700 doesn't come with the standard configuration. If push the 2017 iMac into zone where had a 512GB SSD then pretty close to the +$300 that Apple wants for the Pro 5700 .
[automerge]1596732893[/automerge]
The Pro 5300 seems to be holding its own versus the 580X here. These windows GPU card databases aren't the most accurate proxies for compares into the iMac space.
The problem with using Window GPU cards are proxies is that they are not macOS or the configurations that Apple uses.
2020 iMac Benchmarks Surface Online [Updated]
Benchmarks from the new 2020 iMac have today been shared online by Mac Otakara. The Geekbench benchmarks are from the newly-released 27-inch iMac...
At least on this benchmark The Pro 5300 is beating the 580X. That is lower on the totem pole than the 5500 XT. So the 5500 XT should do reasonably well versus the 580 on at least this benchmark. Not the same set of optimizations as what using the Windows GPU benchmarks would predict at all.
The Pro 5700 would be a huge leap. The "$2,399" price being used as an anchor is muddled with Apple's $400/TB SSD pricing. That 2017 model is saddled with a 2TB Fusion drive. The 2020 model isn't. That is primarily why the Pro 5700 doesn't come with the standard configuration. If push the 2017 iMac into zone where had a 512GB SSD then pretty close to the +$300 that Apple wants for the Pro 5700 .
[automerge]1596732893[/automerge]
The Pro 5300 seems to be holding its own versus the 580X here. These windows GPU card databases aren't the most accurate proxies for compares into the iMac space.
Decent post. GPU benchmark charts are always a big 'turn on' for me. Phwoar!!!!
Did you see the Max video where he talks about the new gpus having better codec support for video rendering? Some of the benches he noted were x2/3 times better...?
The 5300. (It is a step forward!) No shame in that or a hyperthreaded 6 core.
Compared to the 4 core i5s of yesteryear and previous gpus, its not an insignificant step in the right direction.
There's value in it.
And it doubles as a PC too.
The entry model will handle HD gaming or 3d rendering.
If you want more of either the BTO options will provide even more grunt.
We're getting more than the 2019 offered all around. And those 'all around' boosts are significant. Whether that is 'enough' for 2017-2019 iMac owners is quite another thing.
But if you're coming from a limping Mac, a dead Mac or a 2012 iMac (*puts hand up in air. ME! M E!!! MEEEE!)
You're golden. It's significant compared to 8 years ago.
Azrael.