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

[Azrael9]

The MacBook Pro's are on Navi 14, which is 85W (5300M and 5500M).

The Radeon Pro 580 in the iMac is 150W TDP, which would match the Navi 10 5600M. The 5700M is a 180W part, but it might work. (Note: Apple might be under clocking all these cards so they might not be pulling rated TDP.)

The 5700XT is a 225W part and not sure what the Vega 56 and 64 were pulling in the iMac Pro, but in desktop form it was 210W and 295W, respectively, so 5700XT should be no problem for an iMac Pro.

It sounds like an Apple type thing to do. The 5700XT might work if they down clock it somewhat. But we have to face current iMac reality. The closest thing without a proper cooling system? Is a Vega 48. (Why Mac customers are paying over £400 for something that is out of date when you can get a Radeon 5700XT for much less than that...)

But RDNA1 is more efficient that Vega? And they can fit a Vega 64 in the iMac Pro. (With cooling. And I've read reviews that the 56 and 64 are down clocked in the iMac Pro compared to desktop versions running in towers running at full tilt.)

If the cooling is improved a 'proper' 5700XT could do in there with a slight down clock. RDNA2 is imminent also. So why put the 5700XT in that when RDNA2 is more efficient.

It's 24th of May. WWDC is a month away. iMac has to be 'soon' TM.

Azrael.
[automerge]1590334013[/automerge]

I thought Macs already support the 5700 XT via eGPU. Is that not true? If not, god damn Apple are slow.

I think the 5700XT is supported.

Try 'Barefeats.com' to find out.

Benches of iMac with and without eGPU support there.

Azrael.

To make things harder RDNA2 is coming in September according to new rumors.

It adds to the mix. My cynical self says it will make no have no weight on Apple's decision to offer RDNA1's year old tech' for 'thankful' iMac buyers.

And that we'll have to wait another year before any mainstream Mac £999-£3560 will get RDNA2.

Azrael.
[automerge]1590334158[/automerge]

I think that is a given based on what we have seen with the rest of the Mac line. I think 256GB SSDs will be deleted and replaced with 512GB for the 1TB and 1TB Fusion Drive models for the same price ($100/$200). I would love to see the $2299 5K iMac drop the 2TB Fusion Drive for the 512GB SSD, but it might stick with the 2TB FD with a 1TB SSD being a $100 upgrade (instead of the current $300).

We'll get more SSD options with the usual Apple BTO tax. But it's just a case of what SSD as standard we'll get. *looks to Mini as possible ideas. 256 or 512 gig SSD options and 1TB SSD on the top end model.

*sweeps the Fusion Garbage Drive into the 'Bin.'

Azrael.
[automerge]1590334565[/automerge]

What about the Vega48 in the iMac?

Vega 56 and 64 ran hot. It was very inefficient compared to Nvidia. The iMac Pro has that 'cooling' the iMac hasn't got as good cooling.

The Vega 48 is a custom unit to fit the cooling envelope of the iMac. (We wouldn't want Apple spending some of its Trillion capita or mountain of cash fishing the cooling system on the iMac's pressure cooker they currently have...) So it's probably just a cut down or downclocked version. It's not a bad card. Better than the 580 (which is decent low end card but shouldn't be in an iMac costing £1700+ or a Mac Pro costing £6k...) but the Vega 48 is out of date and the RDNA1 is more efficient that the Vega stuff.

The next gpus in the iMac should be more efficient and more powerful. Whether they reach the heights of a 5700XT in a tower is doubtful. It will be some 5700XT custom job. ala. 'Pro 5700XTA' or some such. With 1/2 to 3/4s of the full 5700XT.

Azrael.

 

[sublunar]

I thought Macs already support the 5700 XT via eGPU. Is that not true? If not, god damn Apple are slow.

To be fair they have been listed on Apple's external graphics processor support page for a few months - initial support first appearing last year from what I have seen.

There have been a few general driver issues in the wider PC world this year from what I've seen. Seems fairly dire in some cases - could Apple have delayed the iMac until a fix is released?

 

[gusping]

Discussion of power draw is easier to relate to than "desktop" and "mobile". I agree with CWallace, iMP should cool a 10900K and 5700XT combination sufficiently well. Start with the iMP. Then: smaller bezels, abandon HDD in the 27 inch, start SSD at 1 TB, better camera, FaceID, perhaps shrink the case slightly to compensate for smaller bezels, perhaps thicken it slightly and use numerous and decorative XDR screen vents. All of a sudden it looks modern. I want mine in white, not silver or the space gray. There should be a choice between 10900k (125W) and 10900 (65W) for those who like a cooler running machine.

I hope we do not need to wait until autumn for a new iMac...

That sounds like a fantastic list. May I add one thing? 32in option please.

I agree, I will be extremely disappointed if we have to wait another few months/a year for a new iMac (or redesigned iMac)..
[automerge]1590340119[/automerge]

To be fair they have been listed on Apple's external graphics processor support page for a few months - initial support first appearing last year from what I have seen.

There have been a few general driver issues in the wider PC world this year from what I've seen. Seems fairly dire in some cases - could Apple have delayed the iMac until a fix is released?

Thanks. Oh yes, I follow PC hardware pretty closely (idk why tbh, given I am a Mac user. It's just quite interesting I guess). The stories of AMD driver issues have been horrific in some cases. I hate Nvidia after the current RTX line-up, but at least they are stable.

 

[Azrael9]

That sounds like a fantastic list. May I add one thing? 32in option please.

I agree, I will be extremely disappointed if we have to wait another few months/a year for a new iMac (or redesigned iMac)..
[automerge]1590340119[/automerge]

Thanks. Oh yes, I follow PC hardware pretty closely (idk why tbh, given I am a Mac user. It's just quite interesting I guess). The stories of AMD driver issues have been horrific in some cases. I hate Nvidia after the current RTX line-up, but at least they are stable.

Well, yes. It's up to Apple to excite it's Mac userbase with design. That's up to them. After tremendous pressure from the Pro community Apple capitulated and brought about the Mac Pro. Shame the pricing had to be so back handed and price out the former buyer base of Tower Macs. Similarly, it's up to the iMac userbase to put pressure on Apple to improve the design and the spec. There is plenty to improve in the iMac. How can the Mac Book pro have slimmer bezels but not the iMac? What about the cooling? What about rotate to portrait? What about great flexibility to slant the monitor at an angle? To put a digitiser (for those that can paint and draw and wish to do so on the 'creative' platform) on the iMac or iMac 'Pro'. The iMac is supposed to be the flagship of Apple's original 'Steve Jobs' recovery that saved them from oblivion. Its been the standard bearer of design. It's time for a shake up, Apple. Just making it thinner isn't enough. There's plenty to do to make it a more ergonomic draughtmanship tool and more potent in terms of power.

Nvidia. AMD. Let's be honest. Neither have draped themselves in glory over the last 5 years or so. GPU improvements had been glacial over that time stuck on the .25 nm process. That has begun to turn around in the last year with Nividia having Radeon in a headlock of performance and efficiency. AMD are playing catch up and they and we know it. And we're stuck with less efficient and performing parts on the Mac desktop because 'Apple'.

But let's face it. The current gpus from both 'RTX' and 'RDNA' are transitional technology. The RTX was 'beta' testing ray tracing that couldn't run at full tilt. RDNA 1 is a lower to lower mid gpu stepping stone to RDNA2 where you get support for ray tracing and (finally) a full product stack from AMD worthy of the name in terms of performance and efficiency.

It's 'competition.' And most welcome it is. My former idea of 'Mac' being one giant family is just that now. And I take a different view of corporations who continutally ride up prices for less spec and use upsell to make you take the top spec to get the deal. Competition. In CPUs and GPUs (well, Nvidia have been competing with themselves... ) that have forced things to get moving again. We're not there yet. But the console, PC and Mac (eventually...) will get those seismic (and they are) improvements promised from September onwards.

We're talking about 8, 12 and 16 cores on a mainstream cpu from AMD. And 4k gaming Raytracing from the 3080 RTX Nvidia and Big Navi. The next big wave.

It would be nice to have Apple let Mac users have desktop options to share in that 'wave' that don't start at £6k for a base line gpu.

Azrael.

 

[_Skyfire_]

The MacBook Pro's are on Navi 14, which is 85W (5300M and 5500M).

The Radeon Pro 580 in the iMac is 150W TDP, which would match the Navi 10 5600M. The 5700M is a 180W part, but it might work. (Note: Apple might be under clocking all these cards so they might not be pulling rated TDP.)

The 5700XT is a 225W part and not sure what the Vega 56 and 64 were pulling in the iMac Pro, but in desktop form it was 210W and 295W, respectively, so 5700XT should be no problem for an iMac Pro.

It's ridiculous if we still have to abide by these TDP ratings in 2020 and iMac doesn't get at least the 3-year old iMP thermals to improve the heat envelope...

 

[iPadified]

That sounds like a fantastic list. May I add one thing? 32in option please.

I agree, I will be extremely disappointed if we have to wait another few months/a year for a new iMac (or redesigned iMac)..
[automerge]1590340119[/automerge]

Thanks. Oh yes, I follow PC hardware pretty closely (idk why tbh, given I am a Mac user. It's just quite interesting I guess). The stories of AMD driver issues have been horrific in some cases. I hate Nvidia after the current RTX line-up, but at least they are stable.

32 inch means 6 or 8k. Are you willing to pay?

 

[Voyageur]

32 inch means 6 or 8k. Are you willing to pay?

Not only cost, but also greatly increased resolution, which leads to a significantly increased load when using graphics. In some scenarios, any increase in the new GPU can be safely considered zero, if not negative.

 

[CWallace]

32 inch means 6 or 8k. Are you willing to pay?

For 8K? Yes, because I can use 4K secondary displays with no compromises.

For 6K? No. Too many compromises to use a secondary display that wasn't also 6K.

 

[KTK1990]

Well it looks like im out unless a new iMac comes within the next 12 days or so. Just picked up a 27" iMac, the last and only one of this type in the store.

 

[ArmouredBear]

Well it looks like im out unless a new iMac comes within the next 12 days or so. Just picked up a 27" iMac, the last and only one of this type in the store.

You couldn't wait a few weeks?

 

[cltd]

Well it looks like im out unless a new iMac comes within the next 12 days or so. Just picked up a 27" iMac, the last and only one of this type in the store.

What specs, if You don't mind?

 

[KTK1990]

What specs, if You don't mind?

I tried to wait as long as I could however last night the screen started flickering more frequently and became difficult to actually see anything, touch screen was randomly touching itself, and another key wouldn't work. I got a little bigger version than I originally wanted but I really wanted the 2TB fusion drive and all other models were BTO which would mean a delay. My apple store had this one (and only one) in stock.

3.7Ghz 6-core 9th gen i5 with turbo boost to 4.6Ghz
8GB of ram
2GB fusion drive
Raedon Pro 580X 8GB version.
$2069.00, including tax and apple care was about $2384.

 

[askunk]

The last three generations of iMacs were introduced about 5 months on average after the official presentation date by Intel of their respective CPUs.

If Apple follows the pattern, there is no iMac in sight until around September/October.

 

[AlexGraphicD]

The last three generations of iMacs were introduced about 5 months on average after the official presentation date by Intel of their respective CPUs.

If Apple follows the pattern, there is no iMac in sight until around September/October.

This sucks so bad...

 

[askunk]

I know. I have no reason to say they will or won't. Just stating a fact. After all, you need time to finalise the product and fill the stocks.

 

[cltd]

I tried to wait as long as I could however last night the screen started flickering more frequently and became difficult to actually see anything, touch screen was randomly touching itself, and another key wouldn't work. I got a little bigger version than I originally wanted but I really wanted the 2TB fusion drive and all other models were BTO which would mean a delay. My apple store had this one (and only one) in stock.

3.7Ghz 6-core 9th gen i5 with turbo boost to 4.6Ghz
8GB of ram
2GB fusion drive
Raedon Pro 580X 8GB version.
$2069.00, including tax and apple care was about $2384.

Looks great, have a fun with new machine

 

[Tekguy0]

I think they really need to give up this super thin design if they want to put powerful components in (especially those space heater intel CPUs). Maybe something like a less fancy Pro Display XDR (to give more volume), but with a computer inside of it, and with a lower res panel. But Apple has little to gain (at least in the CPU department) by updating now, 10th gen for desktop is basically still 6th gen with some minor changes. I expect a "Late 2020" model with 10th gen, new GPUs, the same stale design, and Ice Lake 28W in the Non-Retina Full HD model. I also expect (and hope for) the end of the HDD, though Fusion Drives will be the base storage.

 

[Abazigal]

Well, yes. It's up to Apple to excite it's Mac userbase with design. That's up to them. After tremendous pressure from the Pro community Apple capitulated and brought about the Mac Pro. Shame the pricing had to be so back handed and price out the former buyer base of Tower Macs. Similarly, it's up to the iMac userbase to put pressure on Apple to improve the design and the spec. There is plenty to improve in the iMac. How can the Mac Book pro have slimmer bezels but not the iMac? What about the cooling? What about rotate to portrait? What about great flexibility to slant the monitor at an angle? To put a digitiser (for those that can paint and draw and wish to do so on the 'creative' platform) on the iMac or iMac 'Pro'. The iMac is supposed to be the flagship of Apple's original 'Steve Jobs' recovery that saved them from oblivion. Its been the standard bearer of design. It's time for a shake up, Apple. Just making it thinner isn't enough. There's plenty to do to make it a more ergonomic draughtmanship tool and more potent in terms of power.

Microsoft tried that with the surface studio.

It didn’t sell.

It’s easy to rattle off a laundry list of features you would like to see come to the iMac, such as the ability to lower the screen into drawing mode or have the screen sport stylus support.

However, it’s unclear who the target market for such a “Frankenstein” computer would be. There’s probably someone out there who would really benefit from such a product, but that user base would represent a niche of a niche, and at the end of the day, I don’t see it worth Apple’s while to service this market, compared to them simply using an external Wacom tablet or the 12.9” iPad Pro.

Second, the reason why we haven’t seen the Mac equivalent of the surface studio is because Apple’s broader hardware strategy is very different from Microsoft’s. Apple positions their Mac as a way to push their mobile products forward, as outlined in the Grand Theory of Apple.

At the T=2.45 min mark.

The job of each product category is to take on tasks and functionality from the category right before it.

The Apple Watch takes on certain tasks from the iPhone, just as the iphone takes on tasks from the ipad, and so on. The reason why Apple has been so slow to update the Mac desktop line is because that is the furthest from what their vision of personal computing should be. There is nothing preceding the desktop that Apple can use as inspiration to further push this product category forward. As far as development goes, it’s a dead end.

As such, it doesn’t make sense to me for the imac to take on tablet-like functionality because then, Apple would be moving in the opposite direction. Apple is trying to migrate as many of their users off their desktop line to laptops and even tablets, not get more people to flock to it. This is also why it was painfully clear right from the very start why touchscreens would never come to MacBooks either.

I don’t see it as Apple dropping the ball though. I get how uncomfortable some Mac power users have become in today's increasingly mobile world, but I believe that the expectation of future Macs reflecting their wishes and desires will likely go unmet as we move forward.

 

[JLOAKS]

Does a redesigned iMac need to have bezels?
Why don't Macs support Face ID?
Why does the iMac Pro have a panel worse than the iMac?

 

[ondert]

What if 2-year update cycle goes on and new iMac arrives in 2021 similar to 2016 where MacBook Pro got a redesign and cpu/gpu update while iMac stayed the same with older tech?

 

[Migranya]

What if 2-year update cycle goes on and new iMac arrives in 2021 similar to 2016 where MacBook Pro got a redesign and cpu/gpu update while iMac stayed the same with older tech?

I hope you are wrong haha. That doesn't match the leakers information.

 

[gusping]

What if 2-year update cycle goes on and new iMac arrives in 2021 similar to 2016 where MacBook Pro got a redesign and cpu/gpu update while iMac stayed the same with older tech?

I will cry, because the current iMac is a relic from 1950. It NEEDS a radical update ASAP. A simple spec bump to the 10th gen processors will not cut the mustard.

 

[AlexGraphicD]

Microsoft tried that with the surface studio.

It didn’t sell.

It’s easy to rattle off a laundry list of features you would like to see come to the iMac, such as the ability to lower the screen into drawing mode or have the screen sport stylus support.

However, it’s unclear who the target market for such a “Frankenstein” computer would be. There’s probably someone out there who would really benefit from such a product, but that user base would represent a niche of a niche, and at the end of the day, I don’t see it worth Apple’s while to service this market, compared to them simply using an external Wacom tablet or the 12.9” iPad Pro.

Second, the reason why we haven’t seen the Mac equivalent of the surface studio is because Apple’s broader hardware strategy is very different from Microsoft’s. Apple positions their Mac as a way to push their mobile products forward, as outlined in the Grand Theory of Apple.

At the T=2.45 min mark.

The job of each product category is to take on tasks and functionality from the category right before it. 8 years now with the same old design, I think the iMac has served its purpose and it has worked well enough to push

The Apple Watch takes on certain tasks from the iPhone, just as the iphone takes on tasks from the ipad, and so on. The reason why Apple has been so slow to update the Mac desktop line is because that is the furthest from what their vision of personal computing should be. There is nothing preceding the desktop that Apple can use as inspiration to further push this product category forward. As far as development goes, it’s a dead end.

As such, it doesn’t make sense to me for the imac to take on tablet-like functionality because then, Apple would be moving in the opposite direction. Apple is trying to migrate as many of their users off their desktop line to laptops and even tablets, not get more people to flock to it. This is also why it was painfully clear right from the very start why touchscreens would never come to MacBooks either.

I don’t see it as Apple dropping the ball though. I get how uncomfortable some Mac power users have become in today's increasingly mobile world, but I believe that the expectation of future Macs reflecting their wishes and desires will likely go unmet as we move forward.

Fair enough. But then, why not drop production on iMac altogether if Apple wants to push the users to laptops, tablets, iPhones and wearables? 8 years now with the same old design I think iMac has served its purpose well to push the market to tablets and iPhones.

What is the reason to keep an outdated desktop machine for so many years instead of having the decency and just pull the plug out. But then again, at this point they could just take the paint job from iMac Pro, the superior cooling system and just apply it to the iMac and I would be as happy I wouldn’t ask for much more. It is shocking to me how after three years Apple hasn’t brought the iMP design to the iMac.

It would be the perfect opportunity to give a some type of “makeover” if Apple does not intend to update the iMacs regularly like its other products.

 

[sublunar]

What if 2-year update cycle goes on and new iMac arrives in 2021 similar to 2016 where MacBook Pro got a redesign and cpu/gpu update while iMac stayed the same with older tech?

What you are referring to coincided with a cataclysmic crash in UK exchange rates and resulted in a roughly 20% increase in retail prices for all Mac products.

Since that dark time, Apple's economy of scale has allowed them to leverage their buying power in NAND storage to the point where they can double storage on all-SSD products as well as refresh the CPU since late 2019.

I think the delay was put down to Intel's late delivery of Kaby Lake desktop CPUs. Some of the commonly used Mac CPU SKUs were not launched until Q1 2017 and a quick look at Intel's ARK suggests that some of those SKUs are being discontinued just 3 years later.

By way of comparison the later Coffee Lake refresh iMacs were done in March 2019 - months after the Mac mini got a variant of it in October 2018. These iMacs were so late that technically 9th gen Coffee Lake refresh CPUs were used for some of the higher SKUs - i9-9900K for example.

That CPU Wasn't launched until Q4 2018 so might be the reason why there wasn't an iMac refresh at the same time as the Mini. There simply was no 8th generation i9 desktop variant and Apple must have decided that the i7-8700K (launched in Q4 2017) - wasn't a suitable flagship BTO part.

In hindsight it's now reasonable to see why Apple decided to wait on a motherboard compatible drop in 9th generation CPU for the BTO top SKU - 8 cores/16 threads sounds a much more BTO substantial upgrade over an i5 with 6 cores than simply adding hyperthreading back in with an i7.

Having said that, I wonder how Apple would view the Coffee Lake Refresh 9th generation i7-9700 CPU. Apple didn't really use i7 CPUs and this one has 3Ghz 8 Cores, 8 threads. The equivalent i7-10700 has 2.9GHz, 8 cores, 16 threads.

The standard Comet Lake S i5-10500 has 3.1GHz and 6 cores, 12 threads. The equivalent 9th generation Coffee Lake Refresh part is i5-9500 3GHz, 6 cores, 6 threads. - same as the i5-8500 but with a higher turbo.

If Apple were doing more than a storage bump but wanted to 'upgrade' the CPU too I would guess the Coffee Lake refresh ought to be a slot in replacement without needing to amend the motherboard. They would only want to do this if Intel were wanting to retire certain 8th generation Coffee Lake parts in 2021.

In that respect could Apple bump all the CPUs in the 2019 iMac to Coffee Lake Refresh 9th generation where they had not and call it day? It would have made sense to do so before Comet Lake S was announced - and especially before Comet Lake S PCs started to arrive on the scene.

This leaves the issue of any storage bump unanswered but Apple could actually increase the size of the Fusion drive on these models back to 128Gb at 1Tb HDD if they were genuinely making a 2020 iMac with 9th Generation Intel CPUs. Or double the standard RAM to 16Gb.

And, handily, if Apple stayed with Coffee Lake Refresh on iMacs at best they don't undercut the iMac Pro which starts with 8 cores, 16 threads.

 

[Homy]

There is a new leak source called Apple RUMORs (LEAKS) that says:

iMac 21.5" or 23" - Pro 5300, Pro 5500XT
iMac 27" - Pro 5700, Pro 5700XT

I wonder what happened to 5600XT.