Apple's Next iMac Pro: Everything We Know

[HobeSoundDarryl]

This is for HDMI output, not input.

That's not a known. Everyone is assuming HDMI output only. What if it IS an HDMI input?

Consider this: if M-series chips are going to be "long in tooth" in even 2 generations or so like their A-series siblings, iMac screens on even more expensive iMacs are still going to be pretty fresh only 2-4 years from now. I've been an iMac fan/user for well over a decade but I don't think I pay way up for one again if there isn't some way to keep using the screen when MacOS updates are not working in full with the early/"old" M-series chips (what we'll be spinning to each other in only a few years). Thus, I'm wanting to see a target display mode-type revival. One way to do that would be HDMI IN.

Consider this too: even bigger screen iMac (as rumored) might double as someone's TV. What does any other thing a person may have to push picture to a screen use? HDMI. For example, how do I hook the cable box to my iMac 32"? How do I hook my game console to my iMac 32"? Etc. The easiest option would be to include an HDMI IN jack.

Protected content REQUIRES a direct HDMI connection, so an idea of sending it through a hub and then sending it on to a computer on USB-C/Thunderbolt would break the HDMI secure connection... opening the door wider than ever for video piracy. How to get around that? Put an HDMI input jack on the new iMac.

I'm not actually expecting it myself- just pointing out the possibility and a little logic in it. I know that I will not pay way up for a new iMac if I can see I'll have to "throw baby out with the bathwater" in only a few years when "long in tooth" starts being slung around. A great monitor can still be a great monitor 8-10 years from now. Knowing how things go with A-Series chips, how long until even M1 MAX is being viewed as "old", "getting very slow", "showing it's age", etc? How long until new macOS update features "are not able to work well on early M-series chips" (even if hacks prove otherwise). Almost certainly not close to 8-10 years.

 

[CWallace]

I can’t see a 27/30/32” whatever size it is iMac with starting at 16Gb and 512Gb SSD, $2000. The 24” with 16Gb 512Gb SSD is $1900.

At this point, based on all the past and present rumors and claims and reports, I think Apple is going to stick with a 27" 5K panel for the new iMac. Apple has been using it for over five years now and it should be pretty straight-forward for LG to add ProMotion and MiniLED to it. And in keeping that panel, it will keep costs down which will allow Apple to better price the machine.

My belief is we will see a starting price of $1999 with an 8/14 M1 Pro, 16GB of RAM and 512GB of SSD. This is $500 more than the 24" iMac with the 8/8 M1, 8GB of RAM and 256GB of SSD which offers enough differentiation between the two models.

 

[MrMister111]

iMac 24" starts at $1299. A "starting at..." $1799-$1999 27"-32" probably looks more technically like that one (under RAMmed and under SSD'd). Apple likes that sub $2K number for "big reveal" press coverage. I fully expect one at $1999 MAX. Then when you build it as you really want it, it's probably >$3K.

I agree, they always give a lower one, but if this rumour says starts at $2000 it’s still only $100 away from same spec 24”. They wouldn’t do that surely.

Without looking your right, 14” starts at $1299, 27/30/32” starts at $1999, but with same specs that disappears.

Not sure what it was like on last Intel 21 vs 27 iMac, maybe that will reveal?

 

[Allyance]

I just got my 55" QN90 Samsung 4K TV with Mini LED backlighting, picture is awesome, new iMac will be stunning too.
"the next-generation iMac will adopt a mini-LED display for brighter colors, deeper blacks, and improved HDR"
For sure.

 

[deconstruct60]

Do you think the former iMac Pro was discontinued super early because of how bad the M1 kicked the pants off the Xeon?

Probably not. First, not "super early" since this was essentially a 2017 product ( it got some bumps to the BTO config later, but the baseline system dates from 2016-17 work. )

Apple skipped the W-2200 solutions. The reason why the W-2100 is "dead" now at Intel is that exremely few vendors would prefer the W-2100 to the W-2200. It is basically the same die but the end user price is cheaper and the clocks are run higher.

What Apple bought was binned , underclocked 2100's for a decent part of the line up to fit into the relatively (to the competition) tight thermal enclosure of the iMac. ( hidden ventilation that had to be hidden behind arm pedestal holding it up.) Apple probably was not interested in lower cost at all since that pass along everything that Intel charges and slaps another 15+% tax on top of that. Lower cost CPUs would actually make them less money ( from taxes). And higher TDP ... that is a disconnect for iMac Pro also.

There might have been some planes for a W-2300 "Ice lake" ( or W-3300 ) iMac Pro way back in 2017-18 but Intel's 10nm (not enhance or superfin ) has run the TDP of any potential W-2300 or W-3300 even higher than the W-2200 increased . Intel's just cranked clocks higher to try to offset their AMD competitive deficits . That pragmatically diverages from the iMac Pro.

Not just Intel though. From the 2017 era roadmaps, AMD's RNDA and RDNA2 GPUs got delayed. Even if Apple revised the W-2100 to a W-2200 and took a TDP hit there wasn't anything "better than Vega Pro" to go to on the GPU side. Again Apple is running an underclocked GPU model to fit the iMac Pro case so can't just throw more TDP at it . ( the Pro Vega II used in the Mac Pro in 2019 were incrementally better Vega dies that were still GCN5 but with "better" Infinity Fabric links on them and better bandwidth to the HBM. There was a shrik from 14nm to 7nm. But at the underclocked rate the iMac Pro would required would there be a decent difference. Plus quantities if Mac Pro consuming most of them. )

The third problem was that the 10 core , "regular" iMac ate into the bottom end of the iMac Pro line up. It also go a underclocked 5700XT with 16GB of VRAM. ( capacity wise same 16GB that the Vega 64 had ).

The XDR and Mac Pro probably ate into the top end. (and provided Apple with much larger margins which they would want to protect. )

Even if the M-series didn't show up for another 1-3 years, the iMac Pro was in trouble. Intel and AMD trying to compete with AMD and Nvidia pushed the major component path the iMac Pro was using into higher TDPs. Apple is/was rigidly holding onto 4 year old iMac physical dimensions.


Finally, the Apple can't walk and chew gum at the same time for Mac product development. Even the M1 iMac 24" had to cause the imac 27" development to stop to work out the issues. Apple hasn't doesn't an across the board , substantive product line update in more than several years. If Mini is being remodels then something else is on pause. If MBP on update then some other laptops on pause. etc. etc.

The iMac Pro and Mac Pro are assigned the same product manager. If doing doing gobs of work on the Mac Pro then largely the same resources are assigned to the iMac Pro . Over engineering one is likely going to lead to no ( to little) engineering of the other.

24" Intel iMacs continue to be sold

Those recently got cut off. ( the non-retina 21.5" Edu iMacs. Apple should have been embarrassed to still be selling those. Somewhat likely some multiple year contract they signed with some school systems kept that ancient MBA CPU powered product on the books. )

 

[deconstruct60]

But 27", or only 27", seems off.

Why would=n't an iMac Pro match the Apple XDR display? At least in dimensions.

Primarily price. a $6K system cost would loose the vast majority of customers who have been paying $1,699-2,400 . They just gone.

A 27" mini-LED panel will cost substantially less than a 32" one. Alot less. This isn't mature technology (even without the chip supply/demand shortages and skews ).


Additionally, Apple would like to keep the competition down for the XDR . Even more expensive and more highly proprietary screen costs there they probalby want to milk for more profits over a longer time. ( micro-LED product isn't moving as quickly as they hoped. )


The XDR panel is dead end tech. There is little good reason to attach that panel to an All-in-one.

I'd be pretty excited about M1 Pro/Max and 27" w/ 120 Hz ... but seems logical that they'd offer 17" & 32", they do already produce the larger size.

Logical for Apple ? No.

Apple isn't looking to sell everything to everybody. The number of products than can be in the Mac product line is limited. They don't sell printers, They don't sell generial monitors ( more so docking station monitors. ) . they dones't sell mid-range Xmac box with slots.

If Apple was trying to monkey-see-monkey-do copy Dell or HP then that would be "logical". But those folks don't make the money (and margin) that Apple does ... so how logical is it to copy them to make less margin? Not much.

 

[Lilibu]

M1-Max is not enough here! The M1-Max GPU performs around at the speed of the 5700xt 16Gb. It's simply not enough. A D1 (desktop1) maybe...

 

[CWallace]

I agree, they always give a lower one, but if this rumour says starts at $2000 it’s still only $100 away from same spec 24”. They wouldn’t do that surely.

I think they could when we consider a 14" MacBook Pro with the 10/16 M1 Pro is within $200 of the 16" with the same configuration. But everyone does not just pick the 16" because the size and weight increases might not be desirable.

There is a segment of the market for whom 27" is too large. So even if they could get the 27" for only $100 more, that might not be a viable option for them.

Not sure what it was like on last Intel 21 vs 27 iMac, maybe that will reveal?

It was roughly about $300 between the 21.5" and the 27" when both had an i5, 8GB of RAM and a 256GB SSD ($1499 vs $1799).

 

[IllinoisCorn]

Can, but it would be mostly hackery and less effective. It would be in the "can do it" camp of putting purple disco lights around the display. Technically possible, but why would they do it.

The iFixit teardown highlights that MBP M1 Pro/Max models are using a PCI-e SD Card controller

The "All the Apple Chips you can eat" section here :

2021 MacBook Pro Teardown: A Glimpse at a Better Timeline

We’re done with the new-but-also-classic 2021 MacBook Pro teardown, both 14 and 16-inch versions, and they’re full of happy surprises. Dig in with us.

www.ifixit.com

Specifically :
http://www.genesyslogic.com/en/product_view.php?show=80


This chip hooks to the M1 Pro/Max via one of the PCI-e v4 x1 lanes ( overkill ) And that chip is hooked to the physical SD slot ( and to the card when inserted). That's is what gets the relatively decently high ( but not super , utlra fast ) speeds on/off the card.


To stuff the SD card down into the long end of the power cord they'd pragmatically have to put a USB connection down there. PCI-e isn't going to go that far. Would need to put a SD-to-USB controller down there. Power that chip. ( so both more space internally and chip power ).

The Ethernet controller on the iMac 24" is on the logic board inside the mac. Essentially all Apple in the custom power cable is an ethernet patch cable to just a plain receptacle ( no electronics ) in the brick. No chip power.

On a non implementation front, it would be kind of goofy to put a SD slot on (or near the floor). When empty just down closer to the dust. ( Similar kind of goofy when don't have anything plugged into the iMac 24" Ethernet jack also. )


For the MacBook Pro price point , argubably Apple should be using a faster SD-Card controller than they are now; not slower. iMac ( or iMac Pro) similar for the system price point.

Thank you for the super in depth answer. I looked at what they did with the brick and thought "why not shove a bunch of other things in there?"

 

[IllinoisCorn]

Mandatory requirements

• Infinity display
• No chin
• No notch
• USB-A ports

I can't imagine an iMac without a chin. I bet the iMac Pro is just a gun metal gray, 27 inch version of what the 24 inch is with more powerful processors, additional I/O choices and the XDR tech. $2K for 16 GB/ 512 is what I bet.

 

[IllinoisCorn]

You do realize that’s where all their current pro machines start right? If you’re using a desktop it isn’t a huge deal, because you could use a 10 Gigabit NAS, so if they include the 10 Gig Ethernet, it might just be a perfect entry level machine for the pro class.

Why does it need more than 512 GB? I imagine people who work with video and photos have all their work on a network or external drive.

 

[Warped9]

People can horde on their computers just as they do in real life. I sometimes think some people don’t really understand what “delete” is.

 

[macjaffa]

An hdmi port on an iMac would be nuts. Still not convinced it was a good choice on the new MacBook Pro’s but utterly pointless on an iMac.

how would it be pointless ? It's exactly the connecter needed to connect a TV to your computer.

 

[LonestarOne]

When Steve Jobs returned to Apple, after being kicked out, Apple was the underdog. Windows nearly had a monopoly.

Steve rebuilt Apple into the world’s most valuable company.

20+ years later, now Apple nearly has a monopoly…

What does that have to do with the 27-inch iMac?

If you want to troll, go start your own thread.

 

[BuffaloTF]

This is for HDMI output, not input.

Perhaps. But it’s a rumor about what it is. Not direct confirmation. And with 4K already on them, and certainly HDR coming, input is a much more provocative discussion.

 

[Realityck]

I can't imagine an iMac without a chin. I bet the iMac Pro is just a gun metal gray, 27 inch version of what the 24 inch is with more powerful processors, additional I/O choices and the XDR tech. $2K for 16 GB/ 512 is what I bet.

Likely cost a lot more. A M1 24" 16 GB/ 512 is currently $1899. Probably that larger config with a M1 Pro (10/16) will be $2499 or more because of the screen. A 16" M1 Pro 16 GB/ 512 MBP is already $2499.

 

[IlluminatedSage]

Who is the sd slot for? Not video pros (they use cf-pro) and honestly I use a usb-c card reader, because how many times a day do you put sd-cards in, (and on the back is ever so convenient /s) where the dongle is hardly a big deal. Plus the dongle moves the card slot in front of the machine. I would much rather have a usb-a to be honest over a sad-card reader as it is way more often I need a dongle to mount someone’s usb thumb drive than say so. HDMI 2.1 please.

it ought to have both SD Card input AND usb-a. dont add limitations based on your workflow, many of us do things with them and time has proven that apple cut out way too many ports and it became dongle city.

 

[Yebubbleman]

A few thoughts:

1. I would think that it would make sense for Apple to forego the M1 Pro altogether and just give this thing the M1 Max. The only folks that would need a larger screen, but not significantly more power than the 24" iMac currently offers really only need the larger screen and don't need the goldilocks-and-the-three-bears sweetspot that the M1 Pro seems to be catering towards. The 27" iMac, unlike the 16" (and now 14") MacBook Pros, never seemed to be particularly geared for those that would've otherwise been fine with the smaller sized iMac but just want the bigger display.

2. If they keep the thinness the same on this one as they have the 24" iMac, then there won't be an HDMI port on the back of the unit. Will it be on some kind of other module (in the same way that the Ethernet port now lives on the power brick)? Possibly. But the 24" iMac is too thin to accomodate anything physically larger than USB-C, and both HDMI and the SD card slot are bigger than USB-C.

 

[EdT]

If I get a new Apple computer it will be something in this class, but from the prices being bandied about I'm not sure. For the price of an entry level 27 inch (or whatever screen size the larger iMac ends up being) I could get a pretty powerful Win machine. Not as energy efficient, but I'm buying a desktop not a laptop, I don't have battery life to be concerned about. I don't think that Microsoft is more ethical, but they aren't talking about privacy while also allowing outsiders to inspect what's on my computer or storage. Apple hasn't done that YET (AFAIK), but they have openly talked about it and Cook supports doing it. Windows may only be providing lip service about not allowing outsiders access but its beginning to look like Apple isn't any different, and they are more expensive and they aren't going to be as upgradable with system memory and their hard drive choices have been a couple of generations behind for a while. I've sort of lost my Cloud service is too slow/intermittent (thanks StarLink) but I really don't want to depend on ANYONE'S cloud backup for any of my files/general storage. I want to be able to afford computer memory and hard drive expansions without needing to buy an entirely new computer. Multiple screens would be nice as well......

 

[LonestarOne]

Likely cost a lot more. A M1 24" 16 GB/ 512 is currently $1899. Probably that larger config with a M1 Pro (10/16) will be $2499 or more because of the screen. A 16" M1 Pro 16 GB/ 512 MBP is already $2499.

You cannot make direct comparison between laptop prices and desktop prices. Users expect to pay a premium for portability.

 

[EdT]

You cannot make direct comparison between laptop prices and desktop prices. Users expect to pay a premium for portability.

He also compared a new 24 inch iMac with 16 Gb, and its $1900. I don't think expecting a $400 to 500 adder to bump up the processor and increase screen size while everything else stays the same would be surprising or unreasonable assumptions.

 

[LonestarOne]

For the price of an entry level 27 inch (or whatever screen size the larger iMac ends up being) I could get a pretty powerful Win machine. Not as energy efficient, but I'm buying a desktop not a laptop, I don't have battery life to be concerned about. I don't think that Microsoft is more ethical, but they aren't talking about privacy while also allowing outsiders to inspect what's on my computer or storage.

So, go ahead and do it. Seriously. No one's going to mind you buying a Windows machine, if that suits your needs. I've used a few in my time. I worked for Microsoft for more than 15 years.

The Mac vs PC debate is so 20th Century. If you think you're going to hurt our feelings by threatening to buy a PC, you're wrong. You aren't scoring points with your Apple is evil rant. You aren't hurting your enemies. All you're doing is annoying people who are trying to discuss a future product while you go off topic. It's just lame.

 

[Warped9]

My gripe with the iMac 24 was the same when the MacBook Air and Pro was redesigned some years ago and went strictly with a couple of USB-C ports. It was stupid then and it’s still stupid now.

The previous iMac had no HDMI port so no issue if the current redesign doesn’t get one. But losing the SD Card slot was ridiculous when they could have easily mounted it on the side. And not having at least one USB-A port is also stupid given how many USB devices many people still use. Important rule: don’t piss on your customers and don’t nickle-and-dime them either. I really like the new iMac 24 design, but this was a cheap miss in my view.

Forcing your customers to buy stupid dongles for a $1500+ machine is a cheap move.

 

[LonestarOne]

The 27" iMac, unlike the 16" (and now 14") MacBook Pros, never seemed to be particularly geared for those that would've otherwise been fine with the smaller sized iMac but just want the bigger display.

Huh? There are scads of people right now using 27-inch iMacs that are significantly less powerful than the M1. If someone is getting along fine with a 2014 5K iMac right now, why would an M1 or M1 Pro suddenly be insufficient?

The M1 MacBook Pro is now my primary computer. The only time I use the iMac now is when I need the larger 5K Retina display. It would be nice if I could run Photoshop faster, but it's not essential. Screen size is the only compelling reason for me to upgrade right now.

 

[EdT]

So, go ahead and do it. Seriously. No one's going to mind you buying a Windows machine, if that suits your needs. I've used a few in my time. I worked for Microsoft for more than 15 years.

The Mac vs PC debate is so 20th Century. If you think you're going to hurt our feelings by threatening to buy a PC, you're wrong. You aren't scoring points with your Apple is evil rant. You aren't hurting your enemies. All you're doing is annoying people who are trying to discuss a future product while you go off topic. It's just lame.

I'm not trying to hurt anyones feelings. I am disappointed by decisions that Apple has made but the hardware with M1 and I am assuming M2 whenever it comes out is impressive. But its pricing itself beyond what I want to spend, if not beyond what I CAN afford, without there being some 'you can't do this with any other desktop in this price range'. With laptops they may have already done that- great battery life AND top of the line performance in a laptop, compared to other manufacturers laptops. Desktops don't need to be as size limited, and if you give up fashion for watts other manufacturers can match Apples chips performance wise which they can't really do in a laptop without making that laptop huge.