8-core i7 and i9 in 2018 iMac

Discussion in 'iMac' started by Appleaker, Jun 27, 2018.


Do you expect to see Apple offer the i9 in this years iMac refresh?

  1. Yes

    85 vote(s)
  2. No

    59 vote(s)
  1. Appleaker, Jun 27, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2018

    Appleaker macrumors 68020

    Jun 13, 2016
    It looks like the Core i9 will be coming to the mainstream desktop line in the form of the anticipated 8-core part. This is from a naming leak that shows an i9 9900K alongside the Core i3, i5, and i7 chips.

    Still expected in September, along with the rest of the 9th gen desktop lineup. No news on the clock speed which was around 3.2GHz in the last leak but could be a bit higher for the final release.

    Do you think we’ll see this in the 2018 iMac?

    As i’ve said before, I do, but I can understand that the immediate reaction for many might be ‘of course not’ due to the iMac Pro. However it’s important to note that it will be in the same line/using the same chipset as the i3, i5, and i7. Also remember that the Mac Pro also started with a 4-core configuration until last year, since there are other benefits that come with the Xeon line. And cooling won’t be an issue.

    For those who don’t know, the desktop i9 was previously an extreme edition (X-series) only, rather than a mainstream processor and therefore used a different chipset. I doubt Apple won’t offer an i9 model, at least on the 27” (depending on the price), perhaps moving i7s down to the pre-built configurations, but if that is the case then this means it could be swapped out for an 8-core i9 for those willing to take it apart.

    UPDATE 1: A supposed leak shows both the i7 and i9 as 8 core processors, with the i9 having hyper-threading, unlike the i7. Originally the 8-core part was rumored to be an i7, and given the competition from AMD, this wouldn’t be a total surprise if true.
    The final clock speeds for both are listed as 3.6GHz, which is in line with what we have previously seen and isn’t too much lower than the 8th gen i7. Turbo for the i7 is 4.9GHz and the i9 is 5GHz.

    I guess this would invalidate those arguments from people saying that Apple won’t include the i9 due to the core count and positioning, despite it’s inclusion in the MBP.

    UPDATE 2: Later than originally expected, but they’ve now been announced:

    I guess that’ll come as a surprise to those who haven’t followed the leaks and probably spark the iMac Pro debate again, I wonder what the poll will now say. In even more good news, AMD are expected to announce their RX 600-series cards this weekend, paving the way for the use of Radeon Pro 6xx cards in the new iMac.
  2. BlueTide macrumors regular


    Feb 6, 2007
    I would like to see that, but I don't think we will. I still anticipate Apple keeping the good stuff in iMac Pro and keep the profit margins for iMac high - thus not caring about new cooling or latest components that would increase BOM. This argument is not that they could not do this, but that I think they don't want to or care enough.

    I so hope to be wrong.
  3. Jerion macrumors member

    Mar 31, 2016
    Possible as a BTO in the 27" (or whatever replaces it, if they change the screen sizes). Would be thoroughly surprised if it made it to the online store 'stock' configs, though. Those are going to be i5/i7 territory for a while yet, I think.
  4. Appleaker, Jun 27, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2018

    Appleaker thread starter macrumors 68020

    Jun 13, 2016
    I strongly disagree with your view on Apples approach to the iMac and that’ll be proven this year.
    As for the i9, it seems like a lot of people are falling into this trap but the truth is that this situation has not appeared before since this is the first new addition to the mainstream lineup. And as I’ve also said in my post, the trashcan Mac Pro started with a 4 core Xeon despite the i5 and i7 found in the iMac being quad-core.
  5. BlueTide macrumors regular


    Feb 6, 2007
    Yeah, and the trashcan did so well... Snickering aside, I sure hope you're right.
  6. Appleaker thread starter macrumors 68020

    Jun 13, 2016
    Yeah, that’s what I was saying, I would expect it could mean we see the high end stock configurations with an i7 on the 27” (which makes sense considering the price).
    --- Post Merged, Jun 27, 2018 ---
    The success of the trashcan Mac Pro wasn’t because the base config had a quad-core processor, it was because of it’s limiting design and poor value... Similar to the iMac Pro, which leads to the question of whether the line will continue for more than 18 months when it will have no place in the lineup.
  7. kwikdeth macrumors 65816

    Feb 25, 2003
    Tempe, AZ
    no they wont. the i9-9900 will almost certainly be a LGA2066 socket cpu, the x9xx cpus have always been a high-end enthusiast model where its basically a server-grade part with certain features added for the desktop space. this has been the case with the i7-x9xx CPUs for several generations now. notice that there is no i7-8900... yet... but this is also believed to be a LGA2066 cpu and rumors are spreading from the same leaks that gave news of the i9-9900

    the imac will continue to use the desktop-grade LGA1151 processors which are just now moving from quad to hex-core configurations.

    putting an i9-9900 into a regular imac would require the use of a imac pro motherboard and would effectively create overlap from the imac into the imac pro line and apple just wouldnt do that.
  8. Appleaker thread starter macrumors 68020

    Jun 13, 2016
    Are you joking?
    Not only has this been leaked before as a mainstream part, but I say in my post that this uses the same (now Z390) chipset as the i3, i5, and i7. This isn’t a X299 part and doesn’t use the LGA2066 socket.

    If this leaked mainstread 8-core CPU turned out to be an X299 part, the question would be invalid.

    I have a feeling that half of the ‘No’ replied in the poll are people who don’t have a clue about this and have just read the title. At least read my post. By the looks of it, you must have read some of it, and yet the 9900K name, that doesn’t contain the X moniker, still indicates an extreme edition CPU to you?

    Or maybe you just think I have no idea what I am talking about and must be mistaken? I have been talking about the core increase since late 2016, I know the current status of Intel processors, and this is a Z390 part like the 9th gen i3, i5, and i7 chips.
  9. BlueTide macrumors regular


    Feb 6, 2007
    Lol, one of these dudes again. Enjoy your poll.
  10. DeepIn2U macrumors 603


    May 30, 2002
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    The Mac Pro started with Xeon while the iMac's had a Core 2 Duo.

    WWDC 2006
    Intel Xeon Woodcrest

    The iMac didn't get the Core i based cpu until 2009.
  11. Appleaker, Jun 27, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2018

    Appleaker thread starter macrumors 68020

    Jun 13, 2016

    I’m talking about the trashcan, in line with my previous posts. The iMacs didn’t go quad-core until 2009 as you said.

    By started, I was referring to the starting configuration until April 2017.

    Sorry for the confusion, i’ll make it clearer on that post.
    --- Post Merged, Jun 27, 2018 ---
    ... That dismissive line isn’t quite as effective when you’ve posted twice before in this thread.

    Not sure what you mean by ‘one of these guys’, someone who inludes a poll in a thread? This is simply a thread about the mainstream 8-core part. The poll is just there to quickly see what people think, if anything it is starting to show the number of people who haven’t actually read the post.
  12. kwikdeth macrumors 65816

    Feb 25, 2003
    Tempe, AZ
    feel free to post documentation showing otherwise. go ahead, i'll wait.
  13. alien3dx macrumors 6502a


    Feb 12, 2017
    I'm expected "
    Intel® Core™ i7-8809G Processor with Radeon™ RX Vega M GH graphics"
  14. Appleaker, Jun 29, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2018

    Appleaker thread starter macrumors 68020

    Jun 13, 2016
    You want proof that a Coffee Lake S (Z390) 8-core CPU, now revealed to be the i9-9900K is a mainstream part?

    I should be asking you for proof for your theory that it uses the LGA 2066 socket and therefore the X299 chipset. Except I’m not, because I know your wrong.

    If you can’t see that, then just wait until the announcement.
  15. maflynn Moderator


    Staff Member

    May 3, 2009
    The burden of proof is on you to support your position, not the other members to provide evidence to disprove your supposition.

    Anyway here's some links to show that it may very well be using the LGA1151 socket


    I think those news stories are postulating about what it could be though
  16. Appleaker thread starter macrumors 68020

    Jun 13, 2016
    Well at least you did research before commenting.
    Yes, as i've been saying, of course it will be using the LGA 1151 socket. But since there is no actual proof or documentation, I don't believe @kiwkdeth will believe it until the announcement. I believe the indication of socket is from the words I put in bold in my comment (other than Z390, they would determine that from the rest), as it was present in a few leaked benchmarks months ago.

    There is no burden of proof on anyone, but if proof is needed for either view, then in my opinion it falls on kwikdeth to prove that it won't be using the LGA1151 socket.

    EDIT: I realise that in the convoluted line asking for proof, I was asking @kwikdeth for proof that it isn't a mainstream part. Obviously, in line with the rest of that post and my previous posts, I meant to ask for evidence of the contrary. I've now fixed this in the post.
  17. Count Blah macrumors 68040

    Count Blah

    Jan 6, 2004
    US of A
    Uhhhh no!

    Look to the Mac Mini as an example of Apple's grand plan. You want more power, you have to pay!!!! The 2012 Mac Mini was too good. So good, that Apple purposefully glued/over-engineered everything into the same case in 2014, but with an inferior CPU. If you want more power, you have to pay!!! (where have I heard that before?)

    There is very little chance that Apple would offer an i9 in the regular iMac, unless it required other upgrades, to make it cost as much as the iMac Pro. Maybe they'll ship the i9-8950HK, but why do that, when the i5/i7 also have 6 cores to offer? Building a brick money wall between different products is the Apple way, so there will be precious little threat from a regular iMac, to the iMac Pro
  18. Appleaker thread starter macrumors 68020

    Jun 13, 2016
    You will be paying.... an additional $200 from the i7.

    The i9-8950HK is a mobile processor; there's no way we'll see it in the iMac unless the 21.5" goes mobile only (which is possible) and offers an i9 at the high end. But then the 27" would have to have an i9 option, therefore it would use the 9900K.

    While I disagree that this idea of a 'grand plan' from 4 years ago, I do agree that they had an approach to the Mac mini that came from the idea that it was 'too good', as you put it. Perhaps the introduction of a cheaper 15W model and positioning against the Mac Pro played a role in it too. Remember that the same year, we saw the introduction of a 15W iMac, followed the next year by the removal of any dedicated GPU in the 21.5" iMac. Their approach has changed.

    But in terms of Mac mini processor tiers, they didn't get rid of the i7 as an option, they simply used the 28W part. I am not suggesting that they will be using a 140W X299 i9, I'm talking about the 95W Z370 chip. A processor with the same TDP, chipset, and socket as the other processors used in the iMac.

    As i've said before, the quad-core Mac Pro didn't stop the iMac using quad-core processors, nor did quad-core iMacs pressure Apple into starting the 2013 Mac Pro with the 6-core processor. There is more to the iMac Pro that just core count, and whose to say a new model won't begin with the 10-core chip, since there is little difference in cost for them. On the other hand they may not care about the iMac Pro, with it serving purely as the interim pro machine. Personally I believe the iMac Pro can either go in 2 opposite directions, and the other would differentiate it further, beyond the CPU.

    I think it comes down to the idea that this can be hard to comprehend. Most people were ignorant to the idea of any core count increase on desktop until after the announcement, some people still aren't aware of it today. The idea that just a year later we'll be getting an 8-core chip as part of a new tier in the consumer lineup, a tier that was previously a $1000+ enthusiast 10-18 core chip, is unprecedented.

    Sorry for the rambling in this, but hopefully I've explained why I disagree with your comments.
  19. Appleaker, Jul 12, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2018

    Appleaker thread starter macrumors 68020

    Jun 13, 2016
    Updated the title following the i9 on the MBP, as it strongly implies that Apple will have an i9 option for the 2018 iMac.

    For those that haven’t read previous posts, this is referring to the unreleased 8-core coffee lake Z390 processor that uses the LGA1151 socket, not extreme edition i9s.

    But some may argue that the core count of the mainstream desktop i9 stops it from being an option for the iMac, so I wonder if this will change the poll results.
  20. AlexMaximus macrumors 6502a


    Aug 15, 2006
    A400M Base
    Exactly This !

    But the good news is, there will be a small room for a regular iMac with a hex CPU. This way it stays two cores under the iMac Pro and therefor will not cut into their iMP market with a price point around 4200 - leaving enough space apart to the base modle iMac Pro...
  21. Appleaker thread starter macrumors 68020

    Jun 13, 2016
    What?! Clearly you have not read my original post or my subsequent posts. This is about the consumer i9, not the extreme edition. The 8-core processor coming to the Z390 platform, using the LGA1151 socket. Part of the same family as the 9th gen i3, i5, and i7. Does that make it clearer for you?

    I mean I thought it was obvious that I am not suggesting Apple put in a completely different family of processor because it is called the i9, but clearly not. My original post didn’t even suggest anything like that, so it shows that you haven’t read them.

    What do you mean ‘there will be small room for an iMac with hex CPU’, the iMac, other than some 21.5” models, will be moving to hex CPUs.

    I am sorry for appearing so annoyed, I am just shocked at the ignorance and disregard for context here.

    This is not specifically target at you, but rather everyone that comes on here without bothering to read the post And with the immediate assumption that I don’t know what I’m talking about but I’m afraid its the other way round.
  22. sublunar, Jul 13, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2018

    sublunar macrumors 6502a

    Jun 23, 2007
    @Appleaker - There's a litany of unsubstantiated rumours from a variety of sites which you can take your guesses from. Perhaps what people are not liking is the lack of attribution from your guesswork.

    The facts at hand here are that Apple have indeed used the i9 mobile CPU as a custom build option (i9-8950HK) in the 15" MacBook Pro. What you may or may not have noticed is that this i9 still has 6 cores, 12 threads. Even with the clock speed bump over regular i7s it can't be anything more than the best binned version of the i7 that they sample.

    Apple don't allow overclocking in any of their products when they select Intel's K series unlocked parts - preferring to go purely on the base line clock speed.

    The mobile i9 crucially retains the same TDP (45w) as similar lower spec parts so it can slot in as a BTO/CTO option for the MacBook Pro because of the fact that it hasn't gone and added extra cores for the sake of it.

    What is unknown at the moment is what will happen with any proposed 8 core i9 desktop part (that @Appleaker suggests with no attributions at all) which is currently unknown and has existed as a series of rumours (not even stolen screenshots of Intel marketing road map slides) for a few months now.

    This is before any hard information comes out about the likely socket/chipset that any i9 uses. If it goes above 95w TDP because of the 8 cores then we're using the iMac Pro cooling solution - bye bye replaceable RAM and hello increased prices.

    AMD Ryzen clearly has Intel rattled but the desktop part is in my opinion unlikely to be weighing in at 95w TDP while adding 2 more cores over the i7 and clocking higher than the i7-8700K. And we haven't even discussed the price of it yet never mind if it'll even fit in any domestic motherboard that could be used for other i7 Coffee Lake CPUs.

    If the desktop i9 follows the mobile i9 example it becomes a higher clocked part not unlike the already available ludicrously priced limited edition i7-8086K. And yes that has base clock of 4Ghz and a turbo of 5GHz but crucially has the same 6 cores, 12 threads as other i7 CPUs of the same generation.

    If the 8086K beast wasn't a limited edition would Apple have used it in an iMac?

    So, do Apple want to release an 8 core CPU with LOWER base clock to fit into the 95w TDP that would be required in a current design iMac? That would suit the videographers on here but photographers wouldn't be so interested. Notice how the per core clock speed on the iMac Pro lowers as the number of cores go up. The 8 Core Intel Xeon W (slightly under clocked from the off the shelf version sold by Intel) is 3.2GHz with a TDP between 95w and 140w. By the time we get to the 18 core monster the per core base clock speed is 2.3GHz.

    Are Intel going to charge galactic prices for this 8 core beast? Would Apple want to allow iMac purchasers to legitimately build an 8 core machine on the cheap (eg bring your own RAM) and stop buying the iMac Pro?
  23. Icy1007, Jul 13, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2018

    Icy1007 macrumors 65816


    Feb 26, 2011
    Cleveland, OH
    The desktop i9 hasn't even been released yet and doesn't have a release date yet from Intel. I doubt we will see an i9 in the iMac this year.

    If the iMac sees an update in 2018, the highest processor available will be an i7-8700K as a BTO option.
  24. gusping macrumors 6502a

    Mar 12, 2012
    London, UK

    8700k (which will throttle like a bitch), a rebranded 580X (exactly the same as the current GPU) and no design change will make it the worst iMac upgrade i can remember. On Apple, what happened to you....
  25. Appleaker thread starter macrumors 68020

    Jun 13, 2016
    What guesswork are you talking about?!

    Your lack of research into this is the cause for your assumption that this information is simply guesses based on rumors. You’re wrong. And people aren’t disliking any information, they aren’t looking at the informations and making assumptions.

    Who said anything about it being clocked higher? Again, I’m not the one doing guesswork here. Recent leaks have showed Intel is slowly increasing the clock speed but it doesn’t need to be higher than the i7.

    As you say the 8086K is a limited edition processor and is not part of the same lineup, but if it was some kind of i7-8800K, yes they most definitely would consider it, why wouldn’t they?

    It has not existed as a series of rumours, it was rumours last year when it was proposed that Intel were looking at an 8 core consumer CPU the following year. Since then, the past few months has brought leaks including details on the actual processor and leaks from Intel themselves. It’s a lack of research that’s led you to believe that, the most recent articles have talked about leaked naming, but that could admittedly be guesswork itself.

    As for the TDP, cooling wont be an issue but it is more than likely it will achieve around a 95W TDP. And again, you are guessing that Apple are retaining the same iMac design.

    It appears that we disagree in most areas, so it’s best to agree to disagree at this point.

Share This Page

77 June 27, 2018