This complicates my decision matrix. I never even considered buying an iMac until the 2014 Retina 5K came along. I expected to replace it with the rumored 27” iMac Pro, because of the screen. But if Apple has a 5K display available separately, that will open more options.
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.
Apple Rumored to Launch Lower-Priced 24-Inch and 27-Inch External Displays: What to Expect
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
assuming that the mac mini pro has the same exact specs as the upcoming imac pro, what do you think will cost more. mac mini pro with this 27 inch monitor, or the imac pro?
I expect the iMac Pro to start at $2199 or so. As such, I could expect a 27" ThunderBolt display and Mac mini Pro to be the near-side of $2999.
Last edited:
All-in-ones appeal to consumers more than to enterprise customers. So, it wouldn’t make sense to price the all-in-one higher than the separate components. But I doubt the comparison will be that direct.
Good news. I hope they make a 30" like they used to. With prosumer specs it really wouldn't compete with the 32" XDR, which of course I would love to have, but that price tag is simply out of reach for me and many others. (And quite honestly, that extra $1000 for a damn stand kinda sours me on the idea.)
I would actually guess the opposite, based on pricing of past iMacs which have come in much cheaper than a comparable Mini and comparable display.
back in post #46 expected the 27" mini-LED monitor to be.
" ... $1499 seems reasonable ..."
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ct.2327867/page-2?post=30705776#post-30705776
So a Mac Mini Pro is going to cost $1000? No way. A Mac Mini with a full M1 chip and 16GB of RAM and 512GB SSD costs $1099. Even a M1 Pro stripped down is likely another $200 or so on top of that.
The iMac Pro at $2,199 vs a. $2699 Mini+external combo is going to sell more iMacs. That is exactly what Apple will want to happen. And Apple will take the extra margin for those with the fanatically modular requirements. (ditto for Mini + 24" being substantively over the iMac 24" )
The upside for the mini is don't have to buy a $1,499 monitor to do a vast majority of workloads.
Yes but it had an expensive Intel Xeon CPU, and expensive AMD GPU, expensive ECC RAM, an expensive Intel motherboard, an expensive cooling system and an expensive power supply.
I didn't have a chance to look at M1 mini pricing before I posted.
So I could see upwards of $2999 for a Mac mini Pro and 27" Thunderbolt Display and I have updated my original post to this new figure.
Apple getting out of the external display business has been one of my greatest disappointments.
Seriously. It CAN’T be all about profits and shareholders ALL THE TIME.
Customers and fans of Apple need some things THEY want sometimes even if the numbers don’t make sense at the bean counter desks.
(Hi-DPI screens from third parties in an atrocious 1990’s monitor chassis just pour lemon juice on the profit-at-all-costs paper cuts.)
Seriously. It CAN’T be all about profits and shareholders ALL THE TIME.
Customers and fans of Apple need some things THEY want sometimes even if the numbers don’t make sense at the bean counter desks.
(Hi-DPI screens from third parties in an atrocious 1990’s monitor chassis just pour lemon juice on the profit-at-all-costs paper cuts.)
Apple gave up a lot of great products including Apple Cinema Display, Time Capsule and Apple branded routers. Information about upcoming display from Cupertino is a good news especially for those who use Mac mini like I do. This display should have a FaceTime Camera!
apple can very easily hold off a few years before putting facetime camera on it just to make more money. the latest intel imac design was used for 8 years. if they put all the bells and whistles the imac pro or the 27in monitor now, people may very well buy all that they need now and not upgrade for 8 years. i think we've hit the margin of diminishing returns already for non workstation computers. today's entry level m1 pro will probably be all the average computer user will ever need for at least a decade. my prediction is that at the half way point of the new imac design lifetime, they're gonna upgrade the imac to have a facetime camera and microLED display.
I have a friend who is a designer at Ikea. He tells me when they create a new product they start with the price then figure out what they can do whilst still maintaining their margin. I'm willing to bet that Apple do exactly the same. They will decide to build a $5000 desktop computer and look at how much they can stuff into it and still make their typical profit.
There have been claims that Apple wants to try and keep the starting price of the Apple Silicon iMac Pro similar in price to the Intel iMac 5K.
Using the 8/8/16/512 iMac as a guide ($1899), even assuming another $500 for the display and M1 PRO 8/14, that brings us to $2399. For comparison, the 2020 iMac 5K with Intel i7, AMD 5500XT and 16/512 is $2499.
The above being said, choosing a 10/32 M1 MAX, 64GB of RAM and 8TB of SSD will add some $3000 to the price so you can spend $5000+ if you want to.
if apple were to remain consistent with their pricing, the best cheapest price scenario would be 1099 and the max price scenario would be 1399.
here me out with some stupidopinion math
if you were to configure the 13in macbook pro m1 to match the ssd and ram to the entry level m1 pro macbook pro 14", the 13in would cost 1699 while the 14" would cost 1999. that means there is a $300 difference between going from 4slowCPU/4fastCPU/8GPU to 2slowCPU/6fastCPU/14GPU AND led to mini led display AND 60hz to 120hz.
i'm no engineer, but what if the cost of creating an entry level m1 pro chip is approximate the same as creating an m1 chip? if apple were to keep the same profit margins for entry level products, then perhaps the $300 difference is only going from the old LED display to the new mini LED display with every other upgrade between the two macbooks being negligible. in this case, because the mac mini doesn't have a monitor to upgrade to begin with, it would only cost 1099 for the entry level m1 pro variant. unfortunately, if they do this then they will either have to discontinue the m1 mac mini or hopefully create an "SE" version of the mac mini that only has the option to have 256gb/8gb and maybe make it cost $499. this is my ideal scenario.
here me out with some stupidopinion math
if you were to configure the 13in macbook pro m1 to match the ssd and ram to the entry level m1 pro macbook pro 14", the 13in would cost 1699 while the 14" would cost 1999. that means there is a $300 difference between going from 4slowCPU/4fastCPU/8GPU to 2slowCPU/6fastCPU/14GPU AND led to mini led display AND 60hz to 120hz.
i'm no engineer, but what if the cost of creating an entry level m1 pro chip is approximate the same as creating an m1 chip? if apple were to keep the same profit margins for entry level products, then perhaps the $300 difference is only going from the old LED display to the new mini LED display with every other upgrade between the two macbooks being negligible. in this case, because the mac mini doesn't have a monitor to upgrade to begin with, it would only cost 1099 for the entry level m1 pro variant. unfortunately, if they do this then they will either have to discontinue the m1 mac mini or hopefully create an "SE" version of the mac mini that only has the option to have 256gb/8gb and maybe make it cost $499. this is my ideal scenario.
LOL who still buys 24" displays without any extra stuff? You can buy them for like $250. But Apple is going to charge $500 upwards.
i honestly dislike the 24" display because of the awkward resolution. i rather have a 27in 4k display which would have less DPI but at least i know that i can watch 4k movies natively without any scaling
Eh. The old displays were VESA compatible. The XDR is VESA compatible. The current iMac is VESA compatible.
If this ever finally exists, I'd be really shocked if it's not.
The thing to worry about is a notch.
now that you guys brought up how costly the new 27" thunderbolt display will probably cost, you reminded me that i hate apple's awkward resolutions. if there was a non apple display that had 27", mini led, 120hz, same brightness, 4k (not 5k) and even if it cost the same exact price, i might end up getting the 4k display over the 5k display just due to the standard resolution. i can watch 4k movies natively without any scaling.
That's about where I'm at. My old 27 inch Cinema Display still works, but I'm constantly shocked there's really nothing on the market I'd like to replace it with. I wouldn't replace it day one if these things launched, but I'm sure this thing will die out eventually, and when it does, I hope Apple is selling this.
I'll shell out $1000 for a high end 27 inch display that looks good in my home and will last me another 10+ years, no problem.
I just can't see that. Apple aren't going to throw away the opportunity to sell expensive and high margin products. This all feels like wishful thinking to me.There have been claims that Apple wants to try and keep the starting price of the Apple Silicon iMac Pro similar in price to the Intel iMac 5K.
Using the 8/8/16/512 iMac as a guide ($1899), even assuming another $500 for the display and M1 PRO 8/14, that brings us to $2399. For comparison, the 2020 iMac 5K with Intel i7, AMD 5500XT and 16/512 is $2499.
The above being said, choosing a 10/32 M1 MAX, 64GB of RAM and 8TB of SSD will add some $3000 to the price so you can spend $5000+ if you want to.