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.
No chance of that. They have to improve the iMac at some point. Any improvement means that the iMac will probably match the iMac at around £2500 instead of the £3560. ie. IMprovements to cpu core count eg. 8 core, 16 gigs of ram, gpu and SSD and then the only thing you go for the iMac Pro for are?
Grey paint. Cooling. Erm. Better sound. 'Nice' to haves. Not worth an extra £2500.
When the iMac 'steps up...' the iMac Pro is going to have to become far more compelling.
For me, just rebrand the iMac from £1700-£3560 the iMac Pro. Bring the refinements into the iMac of cooling, sound and paint. Which means the iMac 21 inch becomes the more 'consumer' orientated machine...in a far more friendly price range of £799-£1399 (as much as you should be paying for a stingy21 inch monitor.) As a 24 inch version that makes the 'consumer' iMac far more compelling.
I hear what you're saying about the cpus. We all lived through Intel's delays and problems. But Apple designed themselves into that cul de sac. So they have to share responsibility for not just having a tower in the £1k-£3 arena that can just 'take anything' cpu wise. Intel didn't force them to design the 'Can' or make the iMac the 'tower range' computer from £1700-£3560. Apple should just have a consumer tower and let the Apple Mac consumer decide if they want the iMac or the Tower. It's artificial upsell.
But really, it's just a matter of 'low balling' Comet cpus. They'll just 'peg' them lower. And then they won't run 'as hot.' And 'iMac Pro' cooling?
And iMac Pro cooling?
And iMac Pro cooling?
Did I say that?
Azrael.
[automerge]1590426704[/automerge]
I've been following Apple leaks for many many years, and have never heard of this guy/gal. Nothing they have reported catches the headlines... (thinking macrumours and 9to5mac). What they tweet seems very shady (Mac mini with a dGPU, 16in MBP to receive a larger Touch Bar, etc). I am not buying this for one minute. I hope I am wrong.
The proof will be in the pudding...the other leaks seem to suggest some variant of the 5700s. Plus the RDNA1 will be due die shrinks. Which makes their inclusion quite likely in the iMac...I would have thought. Apple's GPU history in the iMac rarely included the 'top end' cards for obvious reasons. But with the iMac Pro they have really stretched the thermal envelope of what is possible in the AiO.
And credit to HP and their AiO. They've managed to put a 2080 gpu in theirs....
Don't get me started on the dGPU in the Mac Mini. *HOWLS AT THE MOON!*
Azrael.
[automerge]1590426865[/automerge]
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.
Hmm. That would tie in with the rumours of the 23 inch iMac for 2nd half this year.
Which, as you point out, would put it bang smack in the RDNA2 path. At which point.
Will Apple give us RDNA1 or 2?
🙂
Which means the wait for a Mac will be agonisingly long for some. *points to self.
Azrael.
[automerge]1590427030[/automerge]
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.
You've sold it to me.
I wish they'd just make a black NeXt Cube box. With mainstream cpu and gpu cooling solutions. £999-£3560.
Something smart you can just plug into the 'iMac Monitor' or XDR cheaper variant for consumers.
Job done. I'd happily put the Mini and iMac in the dumpster for that.
I'd buy it. Maybe Freida would...and Alex...and Gusp'....and...
Azrael.
[automerge]1590427130[/automerge]
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...
I hear what you're saying. But does Apple?
Azrael.
[automerge]1590427344[/automerge]
32 inch means 6 or 8k. Are you willing to pay?
Er, yes?
Apple launched the 5k iMac when Dell were charging a fortune for it minus a computer.
Where IS that Apple today making the iMac a compelling value? An innovation machine?
For the record, I think Dell do an 8k which has been on sale in the past on Amazon for around £3k-ish.
With Apple's supply chain expertise....
But I guess with the Pro XDR on 6k we won't expect 8k any time soon.
But a 6k iMac. It's going to be doable at some point. Now? Or in the future?
Revolution or evolution?
We have yet to see the iMac Pro refinements come to the iMac and it's been 3 years later. I don't recall things taking that long under Steve Jobs...
Azrael.