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.
14 and 18-Core iMac Pros May Arrive Sooner Than Expected [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
For what price? For 2700 GBP or 4999 USD? I assume the latter.
The 18 core Xeon-W CPU costs around 2,500 USD.
Now you have 2,499 USD left.
Good. One 2TB M.2 drive from Samsungs costs around 1,250 USD.
Wow, now we have 1,249 USD left for two GTX 1080 Ti GPUs.
Luckily they only cost around 700 USD each, thus we get two and still have -151 USD left for a 5K display, a logic board, 128 GB of RAM, a case and a PSU and some other stuff most people ignore.
Or do you have specific parts in mind you are not able to share?
PS: Sorry if does sounds condescending, it just is.
Lie. I’ve built multiple PC workstations that have similar specs but a lower class monitor and they start around 5500 for what Apple is charging 4999
Whatever else it is, it's a fricking iMac! We toss 5 or 6 of the things into the recycling bin every year, because something broke, rendering the remaining components useless and impractical to repair.
It is a Machine that's signature design feature is that it's thin at the edges (which you will never see, nor notice during normal usage), has a bump on the back like a pregnant beluga whale (which you will never see, nor notice during normal usage) and has no design consideration for something as basic as height adjustment, which leads to virtually all the installed ones I've ever seen having stacks of something under them.
It is an irrational machine, why you you want a $13K "Workstation" hamstrung by a 500W power supply (and they apparently were doing good to shoehorn that in)? There was no need to slavishly adopt the outer look of the 27" iMac, but an irrational choice to do so was made.
That's why tacking "Pro" on the end is so silly, its design constraints are capricious and arbitrary, as are so many of Apple's recent computers. A "Pro" design should make no performance concessions, yet be aesthetically pleasing, it's not too much to ask, especially at the healthy price tag this thing sports.
Yes, a sizable percentage of these will end up on the desks of the privileged, non-productive few as a trophy. I've seen it with every overpriced boutique design Apple has concocted (except the cheese graters, too much "function over form" for most dilettantes).
Yeah, I like the color, that's about it.
I'll wait for the "Modular Mac Pro" to see how they screw that up.
Last edited by a moderator:
A $1,000 phone - a $5000 computer. As a video editor I can say, I understand the need for such a machine. However, Liberal Timmy has gone off his rocker with these prices! Do I need to remind everyone about the $10,000 WATCH!!!!!
Well those people are just creating eye strain for themselves. Just like foolishly hanging a flat screen TV over the fireplace. A slightly downward gaze is what you want to minimize eye strain. The iMac is very well designed from that standpoint.
14 and 18 CPU cores. Wow, does this thing have a built-in air conditioner? 
Yes, because everybody is exactly the same height.
I need the power - I have complicated songs with many plugins - I can’t play it in real time - I can only hear it after an offline bounce...
I need this machine and it’s cores - this is a lot easier than getting a waves soundgrid server...
This machine solves my problems... my 2015 iMac benches out at 16,000
- the new one 35,000 - I should have plenty of headroom for years - unless they start making monster plugins that use massive cpu power...
I am ‘in the box’ with all virtual instruments - got rid of my kurzweils and hardware long ago...
For me this is a great tool that will work great - I’m just deciding if rev a is good enough or should I wait 6 months...
Best
Mike
I need this machine and it’s cores - this is a lot easier than getting a waves soundgrid server...
This machine solves my problems... my 2015 iMac benches out at 16,000
- the new one 35,000 - I should have plenty of headroom for years - unless they start making monster plugins that use massive cpu power...
I am ‘in the box’ with all virtual instruments - got rid of my kurzweils and hardware long ago...
For me this is a great tool that will work great - I’m just deciding if rev a is good enough or should I wait 6 months...
Best
Mike
Last edited:
All 5 of the available iMac Pro processors are around 140 Watts. The 8 and 10 core might be a little lower but there’s no data available on them from Intel, they seem to be custom SKUs made for Apple and are not generally available.14 and 18 CPU cores. Wow, does this thing have a built-in air conditioner?
To keep the higher core parts operating at the same thermals, Intel reduces the clock speeds depending on factors like the number of cores in use, load (utilization), temperature, etc. That’s why the 18-core only runs at 2.3GHz but the 8-core is 3.2GHz (using all cores). Single core speeds are almost the same, 4.3/4.2.
Are you aware the storage is spread across two modules and if one goes bad both have to be replaced? They're also tied to the logic board so if either of those 3 components is tampered with ALL data is lost. If data recovery is required the ENTIRE machine must be sent off to a special facility. If the machine needs an OS restore it has a DFU mode like an iOS device and needs to be restored using another Mac with Apple Configurator. Can't just reinstall with a USB drive. It also doesn't support Target Disk Mode or NetBoot. HOW IS THAT PRO???
If the logic board fails, it needs to be replaced. I don’t think you would be able to repair it. The drive is removable. Data recovery requires the FileVault password.
But you should make backups, since recovery services can be very expensive, and there are no guarantees the data will be recoverable. Hardware failure of the SSD can result in catastrophic data loss. Definitely you should make backups of important data. If only a boot drive with applications, though, then it wouldn’t be necessary since you can just re-install.
OS restore doesn’t require second Mac unless EFI firmware is corrupted. This would be a rare occurrence, but is possible, for instance a power failure during a firmware update. External drives can be disabled or enabled, it is configurable:
Apple has a lot of smart engineers, they can help you. If you have more questions or concerns, call and talk to them before you buy.
But maybe a Dell, Lenovo or HP workstation would be better for your needs if you are scared of iMac Pro. They make some nice Xeon workstations but they are probably more expensive than iMac Pro. And you won’t be able to run MacOS. But if you only need Windows or Linux you’ll be ok.
And that is precisely the point. However there will undoubtedly be those with more money than sense that purchase the iMac Pro for the sake of bragging rights and not used for what it was intended, akin to driving a Ferrari around town.
For most the standard 27" 5k iMac is more than sufficient.
I really want to see the benchmarks on these machines
And - the biggest iMac (with i7) would be nice if it got an update. I'm getting ready to update my 2012 iMac i7 next year
And - the biggest iMac (with i7) would be nice if it got an update. I'm getting ready to update my 2012 iMac i7 next year
I’m sure there will be an iMac update next year. I think a 6-core 8700K should be available, but I don’t think many others changes are on deck. It can be configured with an i7-7700K, 64GB RAM, 2 TB SSD... already a beastI really want to see the benchmarks on these machines
And - the biggest iMac (with i7) would be nice if it got an update. I'm getting ready to update my 2012 iMac i7 next year
Last edited:
I’m going for a top of the line so I don’t ha e to think about a new computer for 7 years or so.
This. We’ve never upgraded our video machines at work, not once. We just replace entire thing because the entire thing needs an update. Memory, grfx, hdd, cpu. Only time I ever MIGHT upgrade a machine would be a gaming rig, but usually the whole thing needs an update then too.
For those saying the price is out of line, We needed a few High Core machine to run simulations in the automotive industry. We bought a MAC and a PC. The Mac will be my personal machine and the PC will run 10-14 days (non stop) for the final simulation.
I currently have a Mac Pro (pre-trash can) and have not had to add a single upgrade to it in 7 years. My old one is a 2 x 2.4 GHz Quad Core Xeon, 24GB 1066MH with ATI Radeon HD 5870 1GB. It honestly runs well, however I am starting more simulations in both Fusion 360 (Mac Side) and Inventor (running on Parallels).
We have purchased new software running about $45k so we opted to get a solo PC machine for that. Keep in mind the DELL has NO 5K monitor included and we got 2 extra cores.
[doublepost=1513952485][/doublepost]
LOL no.
Dude, Jeff. You're boss gonna love that you share work IP on MR. lol.
We all know the iMac is priced fine for specs, but you also have a lot of high priced storage there on the PC, and they chose the PC for real simulations for a reason.
I'm a long time Apple user and, for the most part, I love their products but Apple isn't that responsive in fixing mistakes. In fact, I say they deny their mistakes and even go to lengths to avoid fixing them. It's not a new problem. The earliest example I can remember is that they had huge issue with fan noise in the G5 iMacs which they denied. There was obviously antenna-gate and there have been others.
Apple is not the friendliest company to deal with.
Thanks for clarifying. I had no idea!
Only a very tall person would need to raise an iMac, or any large display for that matter. Setting one’s desk and chair at the proper height would probably elimate almost any need to raise a monitor. I’ve bought a lot of monitors and I don’t remember any with height adjustment.
I see no IP; it’s a standard high performance, dual-processor Xeon workstation (which I wish Apple would bring back with the new Mac Pro).
But I do see a suboptimal RAM configuration. @gobluejd
It’s only going to run at about 2/3 of the maximum memory bandwidth, best case (a single, 4-channel interleave set), since you can only use 4 of the 6 memory channels available.
Populated incorrectly as two, 2-channel interleave sets, that would drop to about 1/3 maximum(!).
If memory bandwidth is important to your application (it may not be but it’s very possible) then you need 12 DIMMs to achieve best results. That would allow you to populate all 6 memory channels on both processors. Ideally the DIMMs would also be dual ranked and not just single ranked so you can take advantage of memory rank interleaving as well, although that benefit is relatively small.
In addition to giving you 50% more memory bandwidth (by using all 6 memory channels instead of just 4), you’ll also have 96GB RAM (6 x 16GB) per CPU instead of just 64GB (4 x 16GB).
PS If memory bandwidth is more important than total RAM, you might get significantly better performance using a 6 x 8GB DIMM configuration rather than your current 4 x 16GB, even though your RAM would drop from 64GB to 48 (per processor). Just depends on your application. This could be an option if there’s just no budget for another four 16GB DIMMs.
Last edited: