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
This is my favorite iMac commercial. I bought the purple one! (Well, my parents bought it for me. That was a while ago. 
)
)16 core GPU is not enough. It better be 32 for the 32" model
Reminds me of Lovetodream's cryptic tweets...This is my favorite iMac commercial. I bought the purple one! (Well, my parents bought it for me. That was a while ago.
16 for the 24" iMac and 32 for the 32" iMac.16 core GPU is not enough. It better be 32 for the 32" model
That is how I’m with the 32” display. At one setting I feel that I have to have it too close and I’m moving my head around too much to see the whole screen or I have to place it further away and then have to decrease the resolution so I can see it placed that far away. The current 27” and 2x retina resolution is the sweet spot for me.
Recommended distance from 27" screen?
Do you have to sit further away from the 27" than a "normal" size screen? What's the recommended distance?
forums.macrumors.com
re: screen sizes. This is my opinion, but anything smaller than 32 inches with 4K resolution is pointless. You either have to scale it up to see it, or increase text size too far to make the resolution and screen real estate usable. IMO 27 inch is best at 2560x1440. 32 inches at 3840x2160. Even 5K has to be scaled some so that you can see the text and stuff on it unless you have the vision of a hawk.
Personally, I think we see a buying experience similar to iOS devices. You start with a base, in this case 24-inch, and then you chose RAM and SSD. I think the 24 will only come with one type of processor for simplicity.
That is true for Windows, but 5K works perfectly at 27" on an iMac because of the default pixel-doubled retina setting that makes the UI the equivalent of 2560x1440, but the higher resolution makes everything clearer.
I have a 27" 4k monitor as a second display for my iMac, and the resolution is better for reading than on the iMac display. I frequently use magnification on the main display (including now), because text is so small, but I rarely need it on the second display, which has UI the equivalent of 1920x1080.
Have you already tried changing these settings?
Will you be able to choose different variations of the same processor, but with more cores? Apple didn't really simplify things with the MBA, MBP, or Mac Mini.
I just hope that the entire 21.5" lineup gets refreshed... ?
The verge cast say there is no way a new imac is coming tomorrow.
WWDC at the earliest
:-(
WWDC at the earliest
:-(
No way in hell will we not see new iMacs tomorrow. There is just an absolute plethora of evidence to sort through, not to mention that the tables have completely turned in the last couple of days.
Perhaps, you can choose between core counts, that is differently binned chips so essentially lower core count chip has some malfunctioning cores that are disabled like the M1 7 and 8 core GPU option. I doubt we see different "base" chip in the iMac 24 (the larger ones is likely different. However, I am just speculating just like the rest of us.
macOS automatically handles scaling so the 5120x2800 is effectively pixel-doubled 2560x1440. As noted, in Windows 10 you need to manually set scaling to 200% for the same effect (though Windows does not handle it quite as elegantly as macOS).
The reason there is a MacBook Air with 7 or 8 GPU cores is likely due to yields: so in a certain percentage of M1 chips, one of the GPU cores is failing validation and is therefore disabled. Rather than just throw it away, Apple uses it in the base MBA and discounts the price to reflect the missing GPU core.
We saw the same with the 2018 iPad Pro where the A12X released with only 7 of the 8 GPU cores enabled, but by 2020 the yields had improved so the A12Z was released with all 8 GPU cores enabled.
It seems unlikely, but what if the reason for including the 24" iMacs at the event tomorrow is because they'll actually incorporate touch screens? I give it a 5% chance, but it also seems weird to redesign and introduce the iMac and release it at an event for iPads. Since no one has mentioned the idea of a screen, it put this as highly unlikely, but I can wish.
If they do have a touch screen, Apple will not make any mention of it since there is now way to interact with it under macOS 11 and we'd have to wait for the announcement of macOS 12 at WWDC. And at that point, might as well wait to release the hardware until WWDC.
They work quite well when you have a single display. Next to a display using its native resolution, the scaled resolutions look annoyingly fuzzy.
Can people stop with the touchscreen nonsense? Touchscreen for Mac is not happening and won't happen for a long time (or unless Apple completely changes the format of the device).
So unless iMac can go flat on a table then its not touchscreen.
These silly requests always irritate me (even though it shouldn't)
Touch screen on a mac = awful idea
So unless iMac can go flat on a table then its not touchscreen.
These silly requests always irritate me (even though it shouldn't)
Touch screen on a mac = awful idea
I think that would be a tad too confusing for consumers.
Could you elaborate?
I highly doubt that.
Yeah, just buy a Surface Studio 2 or its predecessor.Can people stop with the touchscreen nonsense? Touchscreen for Mac is not happening and won't happen for a long time (or unless Apple completely changes the format of the device).
So unless iMac can go flat on a table then its not touchscreen.
These silly requests always irritate me (even though it shouldn't)
Touch screen on a mac = awful idea
Ah, okay. I see what you're talking about now.
Yes, exactly. I don't think it's going to happen at all.
If Apple only refreshes the lowest base model of the 21.5" iMac, when will the other two configurations be updated? ?
I just notice that some applications don't seem to scale as well in Windows at 200% then in macOS at HiDPI (which is effectively 200%). Overall, Windows 10 seems to do it pretty well, however. Certainly for daily use (I do run BootCamp during the day for my work).
Ok guys, here is what I see today. Digging around Apple stores it seems that only the 7th gen 21" iMac is in weird spot with stock etc.
So, tomorrow we will see only that one being updated so again -> we are getting low end computer. Clearly shows, that Apple is not ready yet to show us the beefy machines.
So, I guess it might make sense why Mark said iPad chip might be in iMac.
Overall, that seems to be the only scenario I can see where iMac is shown tomorrow.
Actually I wouldn't be surprised not to see it at all tomorrow but taking everything into account the lowest iMac (the crap model) is refreshed. The Intel will probably stays
So, tomorrow we will see only that one being updated so again -> we are getting low end computer. Clearly shows, that Apple is not ready yet to show us the beefy machines.
So, I guess it might make sense why Mark said iPad chip might be in iMac.
Overall, that seems to be the only scenario I can see where iMac is shown tomorrow.
Actually I wouldn't be surprised not to see it at all tomorrow but taking everything into account the lowest iMac (the crap model) is refreshed. The Intel will probably stays
How would a M1 iMac 21.5" be low end when it beats all the other iMacs except 27" with 8-10 cores in Geekbench 5? It would be weird to have such an iMac at the bottom side by side all the other more expensive iMacs unless it only has 4-6 cores instead of eight.
Yes, it would be low end. iMac is not just CPU - its overall package and a lot of people need the GPU power and not just CPU. The 21" was always crap device when it came to GPU. I guess it was simply due to the limiting form that maybe didn't allow for more TDP.
So, maybe what Apple can do is ditch all model in the 21" category and just keep this one as as you mention it will be faster.
However, it will still be low end model. 27" currently nukes everything when it comes to GPU processing so until Apple can at least match 5700 XT then its pointless to talk about "powerful" chip.
Anyway, I think we are reading too much into the iMac thing and I'm starting to reverse my excitement about iMacs tomorrow to just "Hey they might show us a decent low end model but thats it"
I don't mind waiting though as I feel the M2 or so needs a bit more time so the more time passes the better likelyhood that we will get some serious 27-32 machine that most of us will be happy with for years to come.
This alleged 24" will most likely not be powerful enough.
So, maybe what Apple can do is ditch all model in the 21" category and just keep this one as as you mention it will be faster.
However, it will still be low end model. 27" currently nukes everything when it comes to GPU processing so until Apple can at least match 5700 XT then its pointless to talk about "powerful" chip.
Anyway, I think we are reading too much into the iMac thing and I'm starting to reverse my excitement about iMacs tomorrow to just "Hey they might show us a decent low end model but thats it"
I don't mind waiting though as I feel the M2 or so needs a bit more time so the more time passes the better likelyhood that we will get some serious 27-32 machine that most of us will be happy with for years to come.
This alleged 24" will most likely not be powerful enough.