Will there ever be a new large iMac (Pro)?

[CWallace]

I'm still not sold on 8K for general consumer use. Heck, I am not sold on it for gaming use - all those reviewers were commenting on how they could see tire treads and count the leaves on trees and such, but you don't have time to admire the scenery in a competitive FPS or BR game.

I think the XDR went 6K for two reasons: the size of the display required it to maintain Retina and it being used in 4K video editing allows space for both the 4K video stream (at 4K) and all the editing windows.

Apple drove down the price of 5K displays with the iMac 5K's volume so I think they could do the same with 6K. And with a $5000 benchmark, going 32"/6K on the large AS iMac would allow them to raise iMac prices while still giving the impression of more value due to a larger, higher-resolution display (hopefully with FaceID).

And that should be okay since there will be the ~24" 4K model which will hopefully start at $1499 with a 256GB SSD that will crush the Intel equivalent 21.5" model at the same price.

 

[Azrael9]

I'm still not sold on 8K for general consumer use.

Even if you're a creative pro'. Who is going to buy your 8k content? On what monitor? And on what rig' to push it?

But an impressive gpu. For an inflated price.

Azrael.

 

[Azrael9]

Apple drove down the price of 5K displays with the iMac 5K's volume so I think they could do the same with 6K.

*Muses. You're right. Apple did democratise the 5k. 6 years later. Still waiting for the next display frontier on Apple.

I'm not sure the 6k at £6k is it.

The 6k isn't such a leap that the 5k was. Calling for it rather than a 6k display...meh. Where's the ambition of this 2 trillion dollar company?

Dell have a £3300 8k display. Isn't that less than what Dell where charging for the 5k display back in 2014?

I'd rather have seen Apple push the display boat out again.

Azrael.
[automerge]1599063293[/automerge]

Heck, I am not sold on it for gaming use - all those reviewers were commenting on how they could see tire treads and count the leaves on trees and such, but you don't have time to admire the scenery in a competitive FPS or BR game.

I am.

Gaming.

Art.

8k?

Yes.

Please.

Azrael.

 

[Azrael9]

Apple drove down the price of 5K displays with the iMac 5K's volume so I think they could do the same with 6K. And with a $5000 benchmark, going 32"/6K on the large AS iMac would allow them to raise iMac prices while still giving the impression of more value due to a larger, higher-resolution display (hopefully with FaceID).

Raises prices..?

They democratised the 5k display with the iMac in 2014.

So raising prices is backwards thinking.

Azrael.
[automerge]1599063396[/automerge]

That 3090 - OMFG!

With an OMFG! price to go with it...

Azrael.

 

[Azrael9]

Apart from some marketing terms this is insane. I guess Nvidia stepped it up again and I wonder what will AMD do now as I assume RDNA2 is not that good (or is it?).
Apple has big shoes to fill and even though I believe they can pull it off I feel it will take them a while.
I hope that they did pay attention the to announcement as that should be their base benchmark from now on.

I doubt Mac Pro will jump straight to AS for the GPU. It may stick with dGPU from AMD for a while until Apple catches up to a reasonable level.

That 3090 - OMFG!
So sad to see that 3080 is way more powerful than 5700XT we get in iMac and its pretty much the same price.

if only we could get 3070 for the new iMac

I'm curious to see what RDNA2 brings and I really hope that Apple will give us an option to iMac for the upgrade as I doubt there will be another update before the AS one - which by the looks of it is 1 year away (Oct/Nov 2021).

So, can we please get RDNA2 in march or so? ;-)

I did like the Omni, the Broadcast tech'. The 'marbles' demo was impressive. (Only QHD at 30 fps though.)

Did like the gaming at 8k at 60 fps. (But where did they drag those streamers up from?)

RDNA2. Seems late to me. The 3080/70 have been priced very low to counter the incoming threat to RDNA2. So gpu pricing from AMD is going to be interesting. This will be their 1st flag ship gpu in...how long? We'll have to see how it performs. Probably in excess of the 2080 Ti. But some way short of a 3080? And nowhere near a 3090. But equal or better than a 3070? We'll have to see.

As for how RNDA2 performs. It's debut on the PS5 speaks for itself. £399. That's 'next gen' value to me.

Ampere has set quite the benchmark for Intel, Apple, AMD to swing for. And moAR competition in gpus is exactly what we need. Hopefully it will push us faster to an 8k future and 8k content...and 8k gaming.

After five years of promising 4k gaming...I'm not 'that' impressed with Ampere 70/80 finally offering solid 4k gaming. Ray Tracing is cool though.

As for the Mac Pro. The gpus in that won't change until RDNA2 comes along. Maybe(!) the iMac Pro too.

Maybe you're right. Next March in a 'Mac.' Though the debut for this year is imminent. November? It's supposed to be av' for PCs 1st and the PS5 is scheduled to debut this(!) year.

I wonder. It would be just my luck if Apple refreshed the iMac with more heat efficient cpus and an RDNA2 option before going to AS. (Call it a feeling...)

Azrael.

 

[Azrael9]

But I guess they want Apple GPUs to look better. Not worse. I'd expect this Intel iMac to be the 'last.'

A year and half between updates says the next refresh has to be AS.

Azrael.

 

[CWallace]

*Muses. You're right. Apple did democratise the 5k. 6 years later. Still waiting for the next display frontier on Apple. Dell have a £3300 8k display. Isn't that less than what Dell where charging for the 5k display back in 2014? I'd rather have seen Apple push the display boat out again.

I just think 8K is "too much" for how close most people sit to an iMac. As long as it is Retina, it should be plenty. Mind you, I'd prefer an 8K display on principle since I can have a 4K display as a secondary display and windows will be the same size, but having to pay, say, another $1000 for an 8K display could be a hard sell for many (myself included).

As I recall, Dell wanted $1800 for their first 5K display which is what the base iMac 5K cost (with an i5, FD and 8GB of RAM). So with the Mac, you effectively got the computer for free. And back then, the iMac design still looked "fresh" to many.

Raises prices..? They democratized the 5k display with the iMac in 2014. So raising prices is backwards thinking.

I don't think the first generation Apple Silicon iMacs are going to be cheaper than their Intel equivalents. However, I am hoping we just "get more for the same price" - larger displays, FaceID, other AS-unique features, etc.

If Apple does offer a larger 6K display, it's going to be more expensive than the 27" 5K display and if it is significantly more, then I don't see Apple not passing that cost on.

It could also be the case that Apple is repositioning the iMac family with the ~24" being the 'iMac" and the ~32" being the "iMac Pro". So just as the 12.9" iPad Pro is twice the price of the iPad Air, I could see the "iMac Pro" being the same (so $2999 vs. $1499) and for that price doubling you get things like a 32" 6K MiniLED display, four TB3 ports, double the storage (512GB vs. 256GB), double the RAM (16GB vs 8GB), a dedicated GPU vs the integrated SoC GPU and more compute cores.

 

[pldelisle]

The DTK has 16 GB RAM. It's a good indicative I think that future RAM standard will all be 16 GB for iMac and Mac mini.

 

[CWallace]

One can hope, but with the Intel Mac Mini and iMac models still rocking 8GB as standard, count me skeptical. I expect the DTK came with 16GB more as a convenience to the app developers.

 

[iPadified]

Half 5700XT performance would be disappointing to me.

It's last year's mid-range card from a company that couldn't even offer a flagship gpu...and isn't rolling in cash.

It doesn't have to be a 3090.

But I'm expecting something better than a 5700XT.

Apple have been leading the gpu race in mobiles. Why should we have Mac computers continuing with mid range last year gpu perf' in the move to AS?

I want something that competes with the PS5, at least.

Azrael.

For a 27+ inch - yes. For an entry level 24 inch - no.

A 3080 draw 320W...the SoC I proposed would draw 16W. 320 W Apple GPU would be 40-80 fold more powerful than a A12Z assuming perfect scaling of core utilization. A12Z having about 10000 in metal score and a 320W would than have 400,000-800,000 assuming 0.5-1W per Apple GPU core...seems like a whole little supercomputer to me.

We will see, the GPU will be more interesting than the CPU on AS.

 

[Freida]

Do we think that RAM might be better optimised in AS than on Intel so maybe there will be less need for crazy amounts?

The DTK has 16 GB RAM. It's a good indicative I think that future RAM standard will all be 16 GB for iMac and Mac mini.

 

[pldelisle]

Do we think that RAM might be better optimised in AS than on Intel so maybe there will be less need for crazy amounts?

I hope!!!!! RAM usage on Intel is damn pretty high but Big Sur X86 seems to bring this down a bit. I find my general RAM usage a bit less on Big Sur than Catalina. The OS might have been “cleaned” a bit ?. I don’t have any bug on Beta 5, really. It’s been even more stable than releases of Catalina .0-.3. Seems to have been baked in the labs for a while. And it’s the same code for both x86 and ARM but with different optimizations, so they might have passed over both Intel and ARM code for months.

But this damn 7 years old MBP heats the hell out with this OS. I don’t know if it’s because I really demand more out of it since recently, but fans are in 80-100% range 12h a day.

 

[jazzer15]

I hope!!!!! RAM usage on Intel is damn pretty high but Big Sur X86 seems to bring this down a bit. I find my general RAM usage a bit less on Big Sur than Catalina. The OS might have been “cleaned” a bit ?. I don’t have any bug on Beta 5, really. It’s been even more stable than releases of Catalina .0-.3. Seems to have been baked in the labs for a while. And it’s the same code for both x86 and ARM but with different optimizations, so they might have passed over both Intel and ARM code for months.

But this damn 7 years old MBP heats the hell out with this OS. I don’t know if it’s because I really demand more out of it since recently, but fans are in 80-100% range 12h a day.

Sorry - a bit off topic question - but since you are talking about RAM usage, under what circumstances (other than perhaps CAD and 3D rendering) do people use/need more than 32GB of RAM? I assume 4K video editing and audio production are more than fine with 32GB?

 

[CWallace]

Sorry - a bit off topic question - but since you are talking about RAM usage, under what circumstances (other than perhaps CAD and 3D rendering) do people use/need more than 32GB of RAM? I assume 4K video editing and audio production are more than fine with 32GB?

Running multiple virtual machines can benefit from more RAM so each VM has more RAM to work with.

 

[jazzer15]

Running multiple virtual machines can benefit from more RAM so each VM has more RAM to work with.

Thanks. What about reasonably heavy video editing with Adobe Premiere? A friend does this kind of work part time and I'm trying to give him some advice.

 

[pldelisle]

Sorry - a bit off topic question - but since you are talking about RAM usage, under what circumstances (other than perhaps CAD and 3D rendering) do people use/need more than 32GB of RAM? I assume 4K video editing and audio production are more than fine with 32GB?

I need to have a lot because I do machine learning, statistical analysis, big data... this data must be stored in RAM to perform computation.

Generally 32 GB is more than fine. I’d personally take 2x32 for future upgrade considering my usage but 2x16 GB is usually plenty enough for video and audio things. Leave room for two more sticks for the future. Chose Crucial RAM for best luck in the future if you ever want to upgrade.

 

[CWallace]

Thanks. What about reasonably heavy video editing with Adobe Premiere? A friend does this kind of work part time and I'm trying to give him some advice.

I do not have personal experience, but seems like 32GB is recommended from a quick Google search.

 

[krazzix]

I'm perfectly happy with my new iMac, but watching Nvidia's presentation still hurt

 

[Azrael9]

Do we think that RAM might be better optimised in AS than on Intel so maybe there will be less need for crazy amounts?

Yes. I think the way (some one else feel free to chime in...) the iPad operates is with unified memory/cpu/gpu.

It's basically operates as 'one' thing. A SoC. Tighter integration of performance.

Azrael.

 

[Azrael9]

I'm perfectly happy with my new iMac, but watching Nvidia's presentation still hurt

View attachment 949810

Well. Yes. A little bit and not so much.

EVEN if Apple offered you the 3070. The only way you could get it would be? £500 BTO in a Mac Pro. Which costs £6k to start? Not a rational argument to me.

Wanting a £1500-£3k tower is rational. So. The 3070 is tied with the 2080Ti. £500. The 5700XT is last year's card. Mid range. No getting around that. But it offered half the performance for a 1/3rd of the 2080Ti's price. It does offer 16 of VRAM and getting mid-range gpu power in an iMac is progress. After a fashion. All in a razor 'thin' tear drop enclosure.

The Ampere launch makes it look like what it is. A year old mid range gpu. Apple are late to the 'party.' But the iMac boost was dragging on and on. Really. This currently model should have been RDNA2 based.

But AMD aren't there with their RDNA2 yet. It is what it is. That's what happens when you don't have competition in the gpu space. An ugly reality of politics and business.

The 3080 is 'UP TO" x2 as fast. From 60%-100% based upon what I saw from the event stream. *shrugs. So you can play 4k smoothly after 5 years of both Nv and AMD promising such things.

*Shrugs.

HD and QHD are the mainstream performance right now. 4k won't get their until Ampere, RDNA2 and PS5 sell in great numbers over the next two years.

By which time...any Apple GPU in a 27 inch iMac will bury the 5700XT.

The 3090. Now, that's some card. Maybe 'creator's' will buy it. But 8k content? Inside two years?! When 4k gaming isn't even mainstream? And won't be for two years?

The 5700XT is a here and now machine for iMac owners. We won't be getting 3080 performance for a while. It took long enough to get the 5700XT.

Azrael.

 

[Azrael9]

Thanks. What about reasonably heavy video editing with Adobe Premiere? A friend does this kind of work part time and I'm trying to give him some advice.

32 gigs should be enough.

You can bring any workstation to its knees with plug ins etc. If he needs more than 32 he'll know.

Buy two 16 gig sticks to begin with for 32. He can always buy another set of 2x16 if he needs to later.

Azrael.

 

[Azrael9]

I just think 8K is "too much" for how close most people sit to an iMac. As long as it is Retina, it should be plenty. Mind you, I'd prefer an 8K display on principle since I can have a 4K display as a secondary display and windows will be the same size, but having to pay, say, another $1000 for an 8K display could be a hard sell for many (myself included).

As I recall, Dell wanted $1800 for their first 5K display which is what the base iMac 5K cost (with an i5, FD and 8GB of RAM). So with the Mac, you effectively got the computer for free. And back then, the iMac design still looked "fresh" to many.




I don't think the first generation Apple Silicon iMacs are going to be cheaper than their Intel equivalents. However, I am hoping we just "get more for the same price" - larger displays, FaceID, other AS-unique features, etc.

If Apple does offer a larger 6K display, it's going to be more expensive than the 27" 5K display and if it is significantly more, then I don't see Apple not passing that cost on.

It could also be the case that Apple is repositioning the iMac family with the ~24" being the 'iMac" and the ~32" being the "iMac Pro". So just as the 12.9" iPad Pro is twice the price of the iPad Air, I could see the "iMac Pro" being the same (so $2999 vs. $1499) and for that price doubling you get things like a 32" 6K MiniLED display, four TB3 ports, double the storage (512GB vs. 256GB), double the RAM (16GB vs 8GB), a dedicated GPU vs the integrated SoC GPU and more compute cores.

8k. It's not going to be mainstream for a very many good years.

4k isn't mainstream. And the gpus to push it at a rock solid smooth as butter 60FPF+ just arrived two days ago after 5 years of promising 4k performance. We finally have gpus that can. And the PS5 imminent. The RDNA2 imminent.

But they'll need to sell 'lots' for a couple of years yet.

By which time, gpus that can push 8k will be available in two years time. The 3090 is already here.

Pushing 4k or 8k available performance and that format/content being mainstream are two different things.

We'll have to see how Apple positions the iMac 24 and (32?). They're not out yet.

Azrael.

 

[Azrael9]

I'm still not sold on 8K for general consumer use.

Yeah, yeah, CWallace...like you wouldn't be 1st in the line to buy that if Apple offered it right now in a teh sexy 32 inch iPad iMac enclosure...

Azrael.

 

[DrRadon]

I'm perfectly happy with my new iMac, but watching Nvidia's presentation still hurt

View attachment 949810

The way they priced that card is like a stone cold stunner including the middle fingers right after don to the coming console generation.
You can probably hope that Sony and MS are doing some rearranging of their prices right now after stearing each other down waiting for the other console to drop the price pants first.

 

[PaulpBenitti]

I theory yes, but in practice... there's lag, stuttering, glitches, search it a bit please...
i.e.

Officially giving up on the Mac Mini 2018 + 4K monitor dream

Myself and others have found not insignificant lag/glitches for basic desktop operations (i.e. dragging a window around) when using 2 scaled displays with the mini. I find it hard to believe you don't have the same issues - do you just live with the lag?

forums.macrumors.com

and many others in Google.
And yes TB bandwidth is a problem.
eGPU in general is just a patch.

Anyway, whatever it works for you is fine, but having a not so great experience with the mini's iGPU and its limitations is a negative point.
If you have no demanding uses or any problem with this weak iGPU then it's fine and wish you all the best...

Well considering I’ve actually used everything we’re actually talking about, unlike you, I think I might know a little better than your googled articles do.

eGPU performance is several times better than using the integrated graphics, which is the entire point.