Odd, this Pro computer has diverse and numerous ports for connecting various devices, legacy hardware, transferring data, and generally getting work done etc. Why would a pro user want those?
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.
iMac Pro Available to Order December 14, Starting at $4,999
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think Tim Cook is counting on Apple Pros having "Stockholm Syndrome". That's the only way you can explain excitement over an all-in-one bone being thrown to them.
Hoping that the modular Mac Pro is far nicer. I'll pay Apple premium prices, but not for an AIO. I have two broken iMacs that are sitting in the corner of my office.
Hoping that the modular Mac Pro is far nicer. I'll pay Apple premium prices, but not for an AIO. I have two broken iMacs that are sitting in the corner of my office.
I'd love to see someone try to plug a USB-C cable into one of those ports, on the back, without getting up and going around the back to do it. It's almost impossible to plug one into the side of a MacBook Pro by feel.
Not true, unfortunately. RAW is usually in the .MOV wrapper using Apple's own codec, ProRes, as far as I understand it, which is optimised for FCPX to begin with.
I've had this explained to me recently on here by Joema2. He said that H264 is heavily compressed, and therefore, QuickSync is a massive help - which XEON processors do not have. Therefore, it's a very valid question that is the big question on the minds of most people. E.g. I use 3 4K multicam streams with 10 audio sources and all of mine is H264 out of GH4s/GH5s... therefore, my transcoding time is heavy. The Mac Pro makes a worse job of this than the current iMac due to QuickSync. People were suspecting that the iMac Pro would have the same problems as the Mac Pro, but that doesn't seem to be the case according to Vincent Laforet - which is fantastic news!
http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2017/12/12/apples-new-imacpro-has-an-impressive-200-300-speed-bump/
LOL...all of the standard 2017 5K iMacs are faster than those old 2010 and earlier Mac Pros.
Don't forget the cool black color! Gotta be worth at least $250... XD
Seriously though, there's more than meets the eye. Double the TB ports, cores, and GPU external display capability. The RAM is ECC. 10X the ethernet speed. It's hard to put a price on those things, and I'd say for people who need/use them, it's very easily worth the extra $1300.
Yeah! Can't wait. I'm still using a late 2014 iMac 5k which still holds up well.
I hope the extra options I need don't bring it close to $10K.
Will be very interested to read your review once you've owned it for a few months.
Yes - I love this irony - for a fixed machine on your desk that could easily leverage a dock, Apple sees the value in legacy ports, but for a mobile pro laptop that can't be cleanly augmented, they axe the ports.
But let's not speak of this too loudly - maybe some noble Apple designers snuck the ports in and Apple doesn't realize it.
And yes - I've contemplated turning the iMac Pro into a 20 pound laptop.
Well, if you top out the "consumer" iMac you can take that 1300 bucks you saved on the pro and buy Apple care for it...
I really see this as being a product like the 20th Anniversary Mac or the Mac Cube. Clever design, powerful machine, but expensive, and not expandable or upgradable and so ultimately impractical for most users. It will be bought by wealthy, fashion conscious individuals, and prominent in media (like Seinfeld's 20th Anniversary Mac), but ultimately sales will be poor and it will be quietly retired in a year or two.
It's not just about the # of cores available - the Intel Xeon CPU is in a completely different class than the Core i5, i7, etc. Xeon CPUs are significantly more powerful than desktop class CPUs (and a lot more expensive). Core count eventually comes into play once you exceed 4 cores (Intel makes Xeons up to 22 cores).
While we don't have all the details for a couple more days, early indication is that this new iMac PRO is really pro (except for the form factor) and well within price competition with PC workstations.
I've always preferred the Mac Pro for that reason (and upgradability), though you'd think Apple would at least throw in a keyboard and mouse for the price.
According to the article just posted, the $4,999 iMac Pro base model has a multi-core score over 37,000 vs. over 19,000 for the high-end 2017 5K iMac standard...so basically double the multi-core capability in theory.
Of course. I know that.
I still want to see the difference between those two models. Just for my own curiosity.
The price doesn’t surprise me. Xeons aren’t cheap, nor is the rest of the components. Whether that is something someone else is willing to pay for remains to be seen. Remember when MS released the Surface Studio, and it was a curious blend of expensive display and non-workstation components? I wonder if iMac Pro is a response to SS?
Can’t wait for ifixit to get a hold of one to see how they are engineered. While not exactly easy to open, they usually have components that can be swapped. I don’t know if Xeons can be soldered. Do these have the AMD + Intel MCM chips inside?
Can’t wait for ifixit to get a hold of one to see how they are engineered. While not exactly easy to open, they usually have components that can be swapped. I don’t know if Xeons can be soldered. Do these have the AMD + Intel MCM chips inside?
Here's the most detailed tests I've seen, numbers of course look good
http://hrtapps.com/blogs/20171212/
http://hrtapps.com/blogs/20171212/
Definitely. It should deliver at a minimum 12.5TFLOPS of single precision compute performance. (EDIT: Apparently 11TFLOP/s? Me has a feels it can be overclocked a bit if you try) The Vega RX 64 delivers that and the Vega Pro 64 will be at least that fast, but probably faster. The GTX 1080 delivers 8.9TFLOPS. The 6.1 Mac Pro delivers 3.5TFLOP/s per GPU, for a combined total of at most 7TFLOP/s, but usually programs could only take advantage of one GPU, and even then probably only at 80% efficiency.
As a result, the iMac GPU solution should be around twice as fast as the trash can, in most cases it will be up to 4 times faster.
I've been wailing like a banshee for proper GPU's in Mac products for years now. Looks like I might finally get my wish! If the new modular Mac Pro has anything even remotely like this, I'm buyin' it!
Last edited:
Nice of them to include both the mouse and trackpad, as you can't use the mouse while it is being charged.
