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

[Freida]

Why would the iMac Pro have a priority? If I had the budget/need for iMac Pro then I would rather get Mac Pro as that is expandable and better for pros. iMac Pro really is not needed anymore as it will be too expensive for prosumers with no expandability and too limited for pros.
So why would anyone think it has priority over iMac?

Yes, as I already wrote, new iMac Pro with new design and then new iMac with the same design but at the moment the iMac Pro has the priority

 

[bsbeamer]

A lot will depend on the TB3 allocation(s) for the 10th Gen Intel desktop processors. If all in the line have ability to handle/drive 4+ TB3 there is little "need" for the iMac Pro in professional environments, unless it's differentiated in some other substantial way.

Personally think the 27"/30" iMac should be "rebranded" as the iMac Pro, the Xeon iMac should be dropped, and 21"/23" iMac branded as the straight iMac.

 

[Freida]

That to me is the most logical thing I've heard.
iMac, iMac Pro & Mac Pro
Everyone is catered and its simple.

A lot will depend on the TB3 allocation(s) for the 10th Gen Intel desktop processors. If all in the line have ability to handle/drive 4+ TB3 there is little "need" for the iMac Pro in professional environments, unless it's differentiated in some other substantial way.

Personally think the 27"/30" iMac should be "rebranded" as the iMac Pro, the Xeon iMac should be dropped, and 21"/23" iMac branded as the straight iMac.

 

[CWallace]

Why would the iMac Pro have a priority? If I had the budget/need for iMac Pro then I would rather get Mac Pro as that is expandable and better for pros. iMac Pro really is not needed anymore as it will be too expensive for prosumers with no expandability and too limited for pros. So why would anyone think it has priority over iMac?

Two main reasons and one secondary one:

1) Low panel yields. If they can only make a smaller number of panels at 27 inches, then offer it on the model that sells less;

2) High panel prices. The iMac Pro likely has a higher margin than the iMac due to it's higher sales price so Apple can better absorb that cost. The W-2200 series Xeons are also supposed to be hundreds of dollars cheaper than the current W-2100 series so Apple could use those savings to mask the higher panel costs and not need to raise the iMac Pro's pricing.

3) Differentiation. "Pro" models get "pro" displays first.

 

[qap]

Two main reasons and one secondary one:

1) Low panel yields. If they can only make a smaller number of panels at 27 inches, then offer it on the model that sells less;

2) High panel prices. The iMac Pro likely has a higher margin than the iMac due to it's higher sales price so Apple can better absorb that cost. The W-2200 series Xeons are also supposed to be hundreds of dollars cheaper than the current W-2100 series so Apple could use those savings to mask the higher panel costs and not need to raise the iMac Pro's pricing.

3) Differentiation. "Pro" models get "pro" displays first.

This. Plus the iMac pro is not updated since 2017. iMac 2019.

I think the ne iMac/Pro will have a new design with smaller bezels and less rounded, and maybe different stand, more like the XDR display.

 

[Freida]

I understand that but who would buy this? Pros goes for Mac Pro for zillian reasons and prosumers will go for beeefed up iMac. The iMac Pro was a bridge which made sense before but now not so much. Apple better know that that those numbers they got when Mac Pro wasn't out are different and I guess the iMac Pro is now not so desired.
So who is this product really for? Because I'm sure those that need the server cpu + ram etc. will go for Mac Pro simply on the fact that you have so much to do with it and the price is not that much higher considering what you get.

 

[CWallace]

I understand that but who would buy this?

I know of a not-insignificant number of software developers and audio/podcast folks who have iMac Pros. The stated reason is they find the iMac Pro has the right mix of price and performance for what they do compared to the 2019 Mac Pro. Many also comment on how they appreciate how much quieter the iMac Pro is compared to the iMac under higher loads.

 

[Freida]

Fair enough ;-)

I know of a not-insignificant number of software developers and audio/podcast folks who have iMac Pros. The stated reason is they find the iMac Pro has the right mix of price and performance for what they do compared to the 2019 Mac Pro. Many also comment on how they appreciate how much quieter the iMac Pro is compared to the iMac under higher loads.

 

[sublunar]

I understand that but who would buy this? Pros goes for Mac Pro for zillian reasons and prosumers will go for beeefed up iMac. The iMac Pro was a bridge which made sense before but now not so much. Apple better know that that those numbers they got when Mac Pro wasn't out are different and I guess the iMac Pro is now not so desired.
So who is this product really for? Because I'm sure those that need the server cpu + ram etc. will go for Mac Pro simply on the fact that you have so much to do with it and the price is not that much higher considering what you get.

It'll be for the people who can't fork out for the Pro Display XDR but yet still want greater contrast ratio and a reduced halo effect (possibly with HDR, faster response times, and maybe even high refresh rate in some SKUs). It's the latter 2 points which may have sparked talk of a gaming Mac...

See the Linus Tech Tips video on Mini LED and there's a page on AU Optronics (sometime supplier of Apple display panels)

The ones of interest are:

Dell UP3221Q 31.5" 4k miniLED 2000 dimming zones (allegedly BT.2020 coverage and maybe full DCI-P3), Thunderbolt 3 connectivity, and probably ridiculous cost.

Or the more common or garden:
32" 4k 120Hz IPS FALD in Q2 2020 as used in ASUS PA32UCG
27" 4k 144Hz IPS FALD in Q4 2019 as used in ASUS ROG Swift PG27UQX.

and also:

32" 4K 144Hz IPS 1152-zone Mini LED FALD, DisplayHDR 1400 G-SYNC Ultimate as used in ASUS ROG Swift PG32UQX and Acer Predator X32 (expect price of $3600).

The 27" 4k panel could be driven at 120Hz for Apple's uses, and yes it might not reach the definition of retina (a 32" 4k definitely doesn't), but would that be important?

So no wonder the iMac Pro would get it. Cost savings from NAND, RAM and CPU discounts would be driven into the screen.

 

[_Skyfire_]

Personally think the 27"/30" iMac should be "rebranded" as the iMac Pro, the Xeon iMac should be dropped, and 21"/23" iMac branded as the straight iMac.

Hell nah!
I can't fathom what type of an elitist ass**** decides the average person should be content with just a "21-23" screen.

 

[Freida]

Thats not what he said. He was proposing to have iMac 21/23", then 27/30 iMac Pro and then thats it. The next step would be Mac Pro.
Its just a naming scheme to the existing line except he was proposing to drop the current iMac Pro (which makes sense).

It would be overall better line/naming.

Hell nah!
I can't fathom what type of an elitist ass**** decides the average person should be content with just a "21-23" screen.

 

[Voyageur]

Thats not what he said. He was proposing to have iMac 21/23", then 27/30 iMac Pro and then thats it. The next step would be Mac Pro.
Its just a naming scheme to the existing line except he was proposing to drop the current iMac Pro (which makes sense).

It would be overall better line/naming.

Essentially there is no sense what they are called. Building theories about names is a waste of time.

 

[sublunar]

Thats not what he said. He was proposing to have iMac 21/23", then 27/30 iMac Pro and then thats it. The next step would be Mac Pro.
Its just a naming scheme to the existing line except he was proposing to drop the current iMac Pro (which makes sense).

It would be overall better line/naming.

Apple could just as easily do micro led backlighting on panels of existing sizes but if they intend to push the iMac 27 upmarket to include higher base spec and Xeon cpu then it makes sense the entire 27” line is renamed iMac Pro. I’ve said before that reducing base spec to 512gb ssd and 16gb ram would make it popular.

below that an 8gb/256 base spec on a smaller screen makes sense for ‘iMac’

 

[askunk]

It may be sadly true that Apple doesn't update the iMac in 2020. I still can't believe it, though.

I bought the first one in 1986 and till now I have always seen Apple being the first to make the tough choices. Among them: ditching the FD drive, then the CD drive. Now it's time for the HD.

Every time they did it, they kept the legacy models for about a year (or more, in case of the MB Air) to allow for lower budget configurations.

The iMac is Apple's most sold desktop. It's actually, as far as I know, the best selling computer in history.
Keeping it without a Tx chip and with an HD is mostly ridiculous in Apple terms.

On the other side, unless they decide surprisingly to hop on the AMD train, Intel is offering really crap alternatives for an upgrade. The 300W or so of TDP under heavy load of the new 10th gen chips is the worst nemesis for Apple's engineers. They have done miracles in the past, given the chassis they are constrained to work on. However, Apple is not famous for designing unleashed machines.

If we didn't see a MP for years is ALSO because there was no easy way to replace the CPUs and GPUs without having to waste all the R&D spent on the tMP. Remember the "thermal core" with the bottom fan? Where is it today?

Cascade Lake Xeons are more or less close to their predecessors. Therefore, in the very likely case where Apple will just tweak the design a bit while keeping the shape (like they did with the MBP 16"), the IMP is the only machine they can produce.

GPU wise, we will have all the AMD range at their disposal. From the 5500 to the upcoming 5950(?). Delays aside, all the range should be available by H2.

The two depressing scenarios I see most likely to happen are:

1) Apple is waiting for Intel to deliver a 10nm+ (or 7nm?) that doesn't fry eggs and will come out only with an IMP by the end of the year.

2) They are radically changing the design and as said before by others, they will percolate the innovation top to bottom for financial reasons and we will need to wait until 2021 for a mini-led iMac with a similar design to the IMP.

We (almost) all know that if they used Ryzen/Threadripper chips in the iMac/IMP line, they wouldn't have to struggle this much.

However, getting back to my first point, it is ludicrous that Apple will ditch the HD in 2021. They should have done it in 2016, imho.

 

[sublunar]

It may be sadly true that Apple doesn't update the iMac in 2020. I still can't believe it, though.

I bought the first one in 1986 and till now I have always seen Apple being the first to make the tough choices. Among them: ditching the FD drive, then the CD drive. Now it's time for the HD.

Every time they did it, they kept the legacy models for about a year (or more, in case of the MB Air) to allow for lower budget configurations.

The iMac is Apple's most sold desktop. It's actually, as far as I know, the best selling computer in history.
Keeping it without a Tx chip and with an HD is mostly ridiculous in Apple terms.

On the other side, unless they decide surprisingly to hop on the AMD train, Intel is offering really crap alternatives for an upgrade. The 300W or so of TDP under heavy load of the new 10th gen chips is the worst nemesis for Apple's engineers. They have done miracles in the past, given the chassis they are constrained to work on. However, Apple is not famous for designing unleashed machines.

If we didn't see a MP for years is ALSO because there was no easy way to replace the CPUs and GPUs without having to waste all the R&D spent on the tMP. Remember the "thermal core" with the bottom fan? Where is it today?

Cascade Lake Xeons are more or less close to their predecessors. Therefore, in the very likely case where Apple will just tweak the design a bit while keeping the shape (like they did with the MBP 16"), the IMP is the only machine they can produce.

GPU wise, we will have all the AMD range at their disposal. From the 5500 to the upcoming 5950(?). Delays aside, all the range should be available by H2.

The two depressing scenarios I see most likely to happen are:

1) Apple is waiting for Intel to deliver a 10nm+ (or 7nm?) that doesn't fry eggs and will come out only with an IMP by the end of the year.

2) They are radically changing the design and as said before by others, they will percolate the innovation top to bottom for financial reasons and we will need to wait until 2021 for a mini-led iMac with a similar design to the IMP.

We (almost) all know that if they used Ryzen/Threadripper chips in the iMac/IMP line, they wouldn't have to struggle this much.

However, getting back to my first point, it is ludicrous that Apple will ditch the HD in 2021. They should have done it in 2016, imho.

you can’t compare Intel TDP to AMD tdp because of the differences in ways they measure TDP.

what you can say is that this years Xeon runs around 20w hotter than the ones in the 2017 iMac Pro.

There may well be exclusivity reasons for Apple not to switch to AMD, and Intel could give Apple huge discounts to stay with them

 

[krazzix]

If it turns out there won't be a new iMac this year, and only an iMac Pro, I think I might go pro then. I don't think I can wait until somewhere 2021.

I spend most of my waking life behind the screen of an iMac, so it kind of makes sense to spend a lot on it. Congratulations Apple, your marketing strategies got the best of me.

 

[sublunar]

If it turns out there won't be a new iMac this year, and only an iMac Pro, I think I might go pro then. I don't think I can wait until somewhere 2021.

I spend most of my waking life behind the screen of an iMac, so it kind of makes sense to spend a lot on it. Congratulations Apple, your marketing strategies got the best of me.

I can’t see why Apple would not introduce the T2 to iMacs though.

It’s the final line in the sand before Apple can kill off hackintosh by demanding T1 cpu with macOS 20 or some such

 

[satchmo]

you can’t compare Intel TDP to AMD tdp because of the differences in ways they measure TDP.

what you can say is that this years Xeon runs around 20w hotter than the ones in the 2017 iMac Pro.

There may well be exclusivity reasons for Apple not to switch to AMD, and Intel could give Apple huge discounts to stay with them

Would it be safe to assume Apple wouldn't dare go with their own chips right out of the gate with a high volume product as the iMac? Assuming they have something comparable.

 

[bsbeamer]

Would it be safe to assume Apple wouldn't dare go with their own chips right out of the gate with a high volume product as the iMac? Assuming they have something comparable.

It is widely ASSUMED the first product that would feature only Apple's own processors would be the MacBook Air. There has been no concrete information to indicate either way. Who knows if the rumors of smart keyboard with trackpad for iPad have any impact on this rumor.

Remember that the T2 is Apple's own processor and has been in several machines in the past several years. There is also speculation the ARM rumor misinterprets the T2/TX as this, depending who you ask.

 

[ondert]

Really, what is the point of updating imac pro when mac pro is available? Mac pro should have 2999$ starting price like before but you know greedy tim is greedy. i9 imac has already caught iMP although having crappy cooling solution.
If they’re going to update the imac pro, I really wonder how the price will be after intel sliced the cpu prices half.

 

[xgman]

Really, what is the point of updating imac pro when mac pro is available? Mac pro should have 2999$ starting price l

You answered your own question. PRICE!
[automerge]1583339663[/automerge]

I can’t see why Apple would not introduce the T2 to iMacs though.

As one with a T2 imac pro, be careful what you ask for. Nothing but trouble from my experience..

 

[bsbeamer]

Previously Reliable Leaker CoinX Suggests New iMac and Mac Mini Models Are Coming Soon

New models of the iMac and Mac mini could be on the horizon, according to previously-reliable leaker CoinX. The cryptic tweet simply mentions the iMac and Mac mini next to a "soon" arrow emoji, with no further details shared. Apple last refreshed its regular iMac lineup in March 2019 with up to...

forums.macrumors.com

 

[FrankySavvy]

The iMac definitely needs a design refresh. I don't mind the chin, but the bezels around the display are ginormous lol, when the iMac screen is off it actually looks quite nice.

 

[Moonjumper]

I can’t see why Apple would not introduce the T2 to iMacs though.

It’s the final line in the sand before Apple can kill off hackintosh by demanding T1 cpu with macOS 20 or some such

I believe the T2 only works with SSD. I'm not interested in having the T2, but if it means the iMac goes all SSD, then there is some positive from adding T2.

 

[bsbeamer]

T2/TX is inevitable for the entire Mac line at some point. Nearly all of the security portions can be 100% disabled, should the end user desire that.