No price hike? Maybe in the US. They made em 200$ more expensive here
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 Updates iMac Lineup With Up to 8-Core 9th-Gen Intel Processors and Radeon Pro Vega Graphics Options
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The question is: what is their priority? A new iPod? Def not the Home Pod, Siri, any services, iPads or the Mac. And iPhones are trailing the competition too.
I have Touch ID on my MacBook Pro and it is extremely convenient and more secure. I don't think I would own another computer without it (or Face ID).
Kuo said they were planning on a "much improved" screen.
I think they wanted to do an update, but it just wasn't ready, so they spec updated.
Next year, for sure.
8BG RAM for $2300 computer? Nuts! The MBP comes with 16GB. Apple have their heads up their
Totally agree with this. It's insulting to even offer it at this point -- and you have to wonder how many people have inadvertantly tried an iMac with a crusty old HDD on it and said "man, Macs are slow!"
the lamp is from menu, called jwda table lampKinda strange the 27" starts with only the i5 and not a i7 considering it's price. And when you want to upgrade the cpu, you'll notice there isn't even a i7 option but you gotta go straight to the i9.
Not sure how well this cpu will do under heavy load. Will it throttle? They probably haven't done anything to the cooling but have given the faster cpu option which obviously produces more heat. The 'old' 27" with the i7 already gets really hot under heavy load.
+ off topic question: anyone knows what kind of lamp that is?
View attachment 827196
Yeah I'm torn between a $4200 iMac vs a refurbished $4250 base iMac Pro. The Pro probably has much better cooling, and 4 TB3 ports. I can always buy an external camera and speakers. We just have to wait for the benchmarks, I guess. I would be disappointed if the 8-Core was throttling after 2 seconds like the MacBook Pros did when they were initially released.
Do you have any info if performance difference between i5-8600 and i5-9600K is dramatic or just minor improvement?
I'm pretty excited about this update! The Intel i9-9900K is a beast of a processor, and looking at Geekbench results for what are likely Hackintoshes seems to compare favorably to the 10-core chip in the iMac Pro on multicore, and is even faster with single core. I ordered the i9 with the Vega 48, 2TB SSD, and 8GB RAM which I am upgrading to 40GB total using matched pairs of 16x2 and 4x2 (included) for an extra $200 or so. It's going to be a great machine which will hopefully last me a long time (5-7 years). I've created a discussion thread over in the iMac forum for users to talk about which configuration they ordered and I go into an explanation of why I ordered what I did: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/what-2019-imac-did-you-order.2173991/.
Compared to an iMac Pro 10-core (again, comparing multicore scores mentioned above) with 32GB RAM (I'll have 40GB), 2TB SSD and Vega 56 I'll be saving nearly $2000 for a machine that has a similar (multicore) or maybe even slightly better (single core) CPU, more RAM, same SSD, and slightly slower GPU. Sure there are higher end options like 10Gbit ethernet, UHS-II SD card slot, and the darker colorway—but I don't think those along with a GPU that is maybe around 15% faster justifies the extra $2000 expense. And actually since it's a desktop why not get a 10Gbit dongle (which I won't need until my current 1Gbps speeds increase in my area) and I already have the Apple USB-C to UHS-II SD card adapter which I've used with my iPad Pro. Overall this is a great upgrade and I can't wait for it to get here!
Compared to an iMac Pro 10-core (again, comparing multicore scores mentioned above) with 32GB RAM (I'll have 40GB), 2TB SSD and Vega 56 I'll be saving nearly $2000 for a machine that has a similar (multicore) or maybe even slightly better (single core) CPU, more RAM, same SSD, and slightly slower GPU. Sure there are higher end options like 10Gbit ethernet, UHS-II SD card slot, and the darker colorway—but I don't think those along with a GPU that is maybe around 15% faster justifies the extra $2000 expense. And actually since it's a desktop why not get a 10Gbit dongle (which I won't need until my current 1Gbps speeds increase in my area) and I already have the Apple USB-C to UHS-II SD card adapter which I've used with my iPad Pro. Overall this is a great upgrade and I can't wait for it to get here!
5400RPM HDDs please.
Save the planet and stop making these horrid drives!
Save the planet and stop making these horrid drives!
That is what is really frustrating. There is no reason this update did not come 6 months ago!
At the current rate, it's not what I'm hoping for, but I would bet money on late 2020 at the earliest. And on iMac Pro first.
Terminal, Safari, Slack, Messages, Calendar, Mail is my standard working set. Eventually that will grind to a halt. If I add one of the Affinity apps to the mix or a modest Parallels VM, eventually takes a lot less time. Since upgrading past 10.12, I have to reboot every couple days. I would never have upgraded but Apple abandoned keeping security patches in sync for older releases, which presented an unacceptable risk.
Honestly this is a really solid update. I have my 2015, and I don't plan on buying an upgrade, but if I was to go out and get a new desktop today, this would be it. I have a fusion drive though, and I'd switch to an SSD for sure. Either way though, people clamoring for a new design, sure that would be great, but this thing is amazing as it is. The screen is the best damn screen you can buy (for a reasonable price) and for someone who runs a small business, it's the computer I always recommend. No t2 chip is a bit of a bummer, but I bet it's because they offer the fusion drive that keeps them back.
after these updates the mac mini looks better and better, sitting on an 09 imac 24in, not going down a screen size
a mac mini with 6core i7, ssd standard and 8gb of ram upgradable later for 1099, tough to beat that. i bet that configuration will outperform most of these updated imacs. To get this config with same processor but 256ssd you're at 1799, hardly worth it for extra hard drive space, yes i know no monitor but you can find a real good 4k for less than 800
a mac mini with 6core i7, ssd standard and 8gb of ram upgradable later for 1099, tough to beat that. i bet that configuration will outperform most of these updated imacs. To get this config with same processor but 256ssd you're at 1799, hardly worth it for extra hard drive space, yes i know no monitor but you can find a real good 4k for less than 800
I am really puzzled why the latest Mac Mini would have the T2 chip, but not the latest iMacs. Seems like a really strange decision to me.
It's the spinning/fusion disk. The mini (and iMac Pro) are SSD-only and the T2 chip only works with SSD.
Single-core of the 9600K is about 10% higher and the multi-core score is around 15% higher.