iMac Pro Available to Order December 14, Starting at $4,999

[tipoo]

Definitely. It should deliver at a minimum 12.5TFLOPS of single precision compute performance. 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 0.8TFLOP/s per GPU, for a combined total of at most 1.6TFLOP/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 8-10 times faster than the trash can, in most cases it will be almost 20 times faster, and by the way, the trash can is slower than the current gen MBP.

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!

The Vega Pro 64 in there runs at 83% of a desktop ones Gflops (and working backwards from that – clock speed) and 83% of the memory bandwidth, for thermal considerations for sure. 11Tflops, 400GB/s. Not sure where you got the impression the Pro variants would be faster, they're always clocked more conservatively for reliability and heat.

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2871/radeon-rx-vega-64

https://www.apple.com/ca/imac-pro/

And your minimum is the maxed Vega Pro 64, the Vega Pro 56 is something lower.


The Mac Pros D700 was also 3.5Tflops * 2, did you take the worst one to compare to?

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2555/firepro-d700

 

[qawes]

With these kind of specs, I can't see anything needing an upgrade (besides the ram if one chooses the 32 GB option).

Also, the resell value will hold up pretty well, and if one needs a bigger and beefier GPU, you've got Thunderbolt 3.

Can't remember where exactly, but I've seen a PC build comparison with similar workstation-class components whose configuration was similar to the iMac Pro's entry-level one and it was around 4.8k $. Let's hope they managed to engineer awesome thermal management in an already tried and tested form factor.

 

[velocityg4]

I know a lot of people are poo-pooing the price. If you were to DIY this build. I come to around $5,000. Using the closest generation equivalents and brands I can.

Motherboard: LGA 2066 estimated $325 (none on the market with Thunderbolt 3 took cheapest LGA 2066 and added $125)
CPU: Xeon W-2145 $1113 MSRP (I'm guessing it will be LGA 2066 not a more expensive Xeon Purley Silver or Gold Series LGA 3647)
RAM: 32GB Crucial Registered/ECC server grade RAM JEDEC standard $425
SSD: Samsung 960 Pro 1TB $620 (Apple often uses high end Samsung with a proprietary connector it could be the 960 Pro/Evo equivalent
GPU: AMD Vega 56 MSRP $399 (in actuality these hit the $700 mark. This also assume the Radeon Pro isn't a workstation model closer resembling the AMD Vega Frontier in features and cost)
Monitor: LG 5K 27" 27MD5KB-B $1,350
Apple Magic Keyboard Extended $130
Apple Magic Mouse 2 $75
Bluetooth Dongle $20
decent 802.11AC card $50
CPU Cooler mid range $50
Fancy Aluminum Case $100
PSU: Tier 1 80+ Gold 650W $100
Windows 10 Pro $130
Decent 1080p Webcam $50

$4,937

Depending on the actual specific parts. It may cost your more to build the iMac yourself.

Sure you could knock the snot out of the iMac Pro price/performance ratio. If you pick and choose parts which will give you equivalent or better performance for the price. Especially when it comes to the BTO options. As you can get so much workstation performance for the money with AMD Threadripper plus AMD Vega Frontier. Plus use multiple good 4K monitors rather than one 5K. Skip the ECC memory, bluetooth junk and so forth.

 

[e1me5]

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/

Hm.. Yes, QuickSync is gives a major boost. I can see the difference between my 2012 MBP and 2010 MP. But the latest GPUs have QuickSync like acceleration built in, I doubt the iMac Pro won't, since Apple states that the newer Macs have hardware decoding for HEVC. As for RAW, well, if that's the case with FCPX then it's a win for the users as you can do more for less. Thanks for the feedback!

 

[NightFox]

No second video input on monitor? No sale.

 

[Ishayu]

The Vega Pro 64 in there runs at 83% of a desktop ones Gflops (and working backwards from that – clock speed) and 83% of the memory bandwidth, for thermal considerations for sure. 11Tflops, 400GB/s.

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2871/radeon-rx-vega-64

https://www.apple.com/ca/imac-pro/

And your minimum is the maxed Vega Pro 64, the Vega Pro 56 is something lower.

I made a mistake. I also made a mistake with the D700. I compared single precision to double precision and reached some retarded numbers. I've updated my post to reflect this, apologies.

Anyway, that sounds quite strange, but fair enough. Why would "pro" be slower than "RX"? ****it, marketing speech. Even so, 11TFLOPs is not bad at all for an AiO. In fact it's not bad at all, period. We're still looking at a ~2x speedup from a well optimized program on the Mac Pro and a 3x speedup on not well optimized program, including all games.

Also, for anyone calling this too expensive... find me a 5K display and those internals and combine the costs and see if you can get below $5000. I dare you guys.

This is a great product. The only thing I don't like about it is you can't upgrade the RAM, but honestly it's coming with more-than-beefy enough RAM configurations anyway, and it's ECC.

The other thing I don't like about it is I can't upgrade the GPU, which is important for me because I actually want a really high-end gaming rig with lots of compute power for my scientific computing projects as well. Definitely getting that here, but I fear that 3-4 years down the line, this machine just won't deliver the performance I want, especially with that 5K display. If I could slide in a new >20TFLOP/s GPU in after 4-5 years, I'd have bought it instantly.

 

[BJonson]

Because they don’t sell enough to justify the costs. Plain and simple.

That's a bad argument. If apple made a mac pro worth a damn they would sell enough to justify it. Trashcans are not computers.

 

[tipoo]

If you can use AVX-512 you do get quite the boost over consumer iMacs

 

[gugy]

Here is my case for why I rather have a MacPro. I have a 2011 MP 12 core. I upgraded the HD to SSD’s in a raid. Last time I did the Photoshop test on MR, I was just one second shy of the the top of the line 2015 MP trash can.
So, my old MP still rocking at very good speeds.
Sure it’s time to upgrade for me but spending $5k on an iMac is not worth imo.
I rather get the supposedly upcoming MP and new stand alone 5k displays. In the end the cost will be way higher but I can keep this configuration for at least 6 years and still getting quality returns.

 

[tipoo]

I made a mistake. I also made a mistake with the D700. I compared single precision to double precision and reached some retarded numbers. I've updated my post to reflect this, apologies.

Anyway, that sounds quite strange, but fair enough. Why would "pro" be slower than "RX"? ****it, marketing speech. Even so, 11TFLOPs is not bad at all for an AiO. In fact it's not bad at all, period. We're still looking at a ~2x speedup from a well optimized program on the Mac Pro and a 3x speedup on not well optimized program, including all games.

Also, for anyone calling this too expensive... find me a 5K display and those internals and combine the costs and see if you can get below $5000. I dare you guys.

This is a great product. The only thing I don't like about it is you can't upgrade the RAM, but honestly it's coming with more-than-beefy enough RAM configurations anyway, and it's ECC.

Because if I'm training a neural net for 8 days, a crash or finding out it throttled overnight is devastating, vs shaving off a day with the faster consumer speeds.

This has always been the case with pro cards. A more favorable perf/watt and rock solid consistancy, dialed back from the consumer cards that just focus on going fast.

 

[RuffDraft]

Hm.. Yes, QuickSync is gives a major boost. I can see the difference between my 2012 MBP and 2010 MP. But the latest GPUs have QuickSync like acceleration built in, I doubt the iMac Pro won't, since Apple states that the newer Macs have hardware decoding for HEVC. As for RAW, well, if that's the case with FCPX then it's a win for the users as you can do more for less. Thanks for the feedback!

Vincent Laforet's blog post shows off the H264 performance and it's twice as fast as the current iMac for generating Optimised Media (converting to ProRes), which is really, really nice, but he doesn't go into how good the performance is in terms of transcoding to Proxy Media - just that they all performed seemingly similarly well.

Straight from his blog post:

"I imported 10.96 GB of DJI Mavic PRO 4K, H.264, 23.98 fps footage, a total duration of 24 minutes 16 seconds of footage transcoded to Proxy ProRes422.

All 3 machines created low resolution Proxy footage in under 8 minutes which was impressive.

I then had the software render ProRes422 Optimized media from the H.264 source media:

iMac Pro – 7minutes 56 seconds

iMac – 15 minutes 47 seconds

MacBookPro 15” – 19 minutes 55 seconds"

Source

Therefore, I'm uncertain as to how well it all performs, but I may switch my workflow to using Optimised Media if the transcoding is that fast.

 

[jasonklee]

This toy isn’t a pro machine. I don’t care what you do but I’m a professional, trust me. I laughed hard when my father-in-law use a little handheld chainsaw to trim branches. I own a MAGNUM MS 880. It’s a BEAST at trimming branches.

I also have an AR15 and Mossberg 500 for home defense. So this iMac Pro is as embarrassing as using a revolver.

 

[Ishayu]

Here is my case for why I rather have a MacPro. I have a 2011 MP 12 core. I upgraded the HD to SSD’s in a raid. Last time I did the Photoshop test on MR, I was just one second shy of the the top of the line 2015 MP trash can.
So, my old MP still rocking at very good speeds.
Sure it’s time to upgrade for me but spending $5k on an iMac is not worth imo.
I rather get the supposedly upcoming MP and new stand alone 5k displays. In the end the cost will be way higher but I can keep this configuration for at least 6 years and still getting quality returns.

Completely valid point. This machine is definitely niche and not for a lot of us in here.

I did see a lot of companies using iMacs for programming and mathematical modelling in Copenhagen about 4 years ago, though. They were ~300 people there. This is the machine they've been dreaming about, so there are definitely customers here.

Also, I think many video editors will be quite happy with this deal. They don't want to fiddle with or upgrade their machines, they just want them fast, clean, and simple, and iMac Pro delivers in spades here.

 

[dogslobber]

It still has a low tech 5K display attached. This is almost 2018. Couldn't Apple have made a headless IMac pro where you can attach your own 8K display? Perhaps call it the Mac Pro and shape it like a trash can...

 

[iReality85]

Why would you want a 4K display when it already has a 5K one?

I can see the argument that for such a professional machine, it would be better marketed with a cinema 4K display panel, which is 4096 X 2160 (e.g. true 4K resolution, which is what production studios are mastering at). There isn't much value proposition for creating native 5K content; there are no 5K TVs and most people don't own 5K monitors, so making 5K videos or images is mostly useless at this time. As it is, professionals during the mastering process usually like to see their content "as is" on their display while working on it, not through scaling.

 

[H2SO4]

Didn't take long for the Apple haters to show up in the thread.

Dunno where people get crap like this from. A lot of us are Mac devotees and want to spend our money, (but not all of it), at Cupertino.
We'd like to think at some stage we'll get thrown a bone for years of supporting an increasingly dumbed down and locked in platform.

 

[Ishayu]

I know a lot of people are poo-pooing the price. If you were to DIY this build. I come to around $5,000. Using the closest generation equivalents and brands I can.

Motherboard: LGA 2066 estimated $325 (none on the market with Thunderbolt 3 took cheapest LGA 2066 and added $125)
CPU: Xeon W-2145 $1113 MSRP (I'm guessing it will be LGA 2066 not a more expensive Xeon Purley Silver or Gold Series LGA 3647)
RAM: 32GB Crucial Registered/ECC server grade RAM JEDEC standard $425
SSD: Samsung 960 Pro 1TB $620 (Apple often uses high end Samsung with a proprietary connector it could be the 960 Pro/Evo equivalent
GPU: AMD Vega 56 MSRP $399 (in actuality these hit the $700 mark. This also assume the Radeon Pro isn't a workstation model closer resembling the AMD Vega Frontier in features and cost)
Monitor: LG 5K 27" 27MD5KB-B $1,350
Apple Magic Keyboard Extended $130
Apple Magic Mouse 2 $75
Bluetooth Dongle $20
decent 802.11AC card $50
CPU Cooler mid range $50
Fancy Aluminum Case $100
PSU: Tier 1 80+ Gold 650W $100
Windows 10 Pro $130
Decent 1080p Webcam $50

$4,937

Depending on the actual specific parts. It may cost your more to build the iMac yourself.

Sure you could knock the snot out of the iMac Pro price/performance ratio. If you pick and choose parts which will give you equivalent or better performance for the price. Especially when it comes to the BTO options. As you can get so much workstation performance for the money with AMD Threadripper plus AMD Vega Frontier. Plus use multiple good 4K monitors rather than one 5K. Skip the ECC memory, bluetooth junk and so forth.

In addition to the GPU price being unrealistic, you forgot a ton of software to bring Windows some of the workstation features of MacOS. A favourite one of mine dynamic display brightness.I'm not sure that LG 5K display can even do that at all - in fact I'm sure there is a PC monitor that can do that at all.

 

[Abazigal]

That's a bad argument. If apple made a mac pro worth a damn they would sell enough to justify it. Trashcans are not computers.

The market for pro users who genuinely need a Mac Pro over an iMac is extremely small. Roughly 4% of all Mac sales. Throw in the cost of maintaining an entire assembly line open for it and I won’t be surprised if Apple is barely breaking even, or even making a loss just to keep the Mac Pro alive, all in the name of keeping their pro users happy.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

The iMac Pro seems like a great computer to have.
• My main concern is upgradability; you are limited to get the CPU and GPU you get at purchase (no option for a gradual upgrade).
• Second, the fact that once AppleCare runs out, you depend on Apple's mercy to get it repaired.

Still, if I had money to spare I would most likely buy it, fully loaded.

 

[mdelvecchio]

More like Apple Disappointees, constantly being disappointed by the pro offering as a pro and not a makeshift home pro - moonlighting as such. I don't know any pro who want's to spend that much money on system which isn't updatable.

You're confusing pros with DIY tinkerers. I'm a software dev pro (per Craig it appears devs are their largest segment of pros). Like corporate pro users, I don't tinker with my workstation -- I don't update drives, video cards, etc. Nope. We get the biggest, fastest machines we can afford, use them to do work and generate income, and then after a number of years retire them for a new machine. EOS. I have no interest in monkeying around upgrading components. Nor does any fortune 500 company I've worked for -- we simply replace machines.

That's why it's called a "workstation". You seem to want a tinkerer machine.

 

[Abazigal]

Then what are Pros buying instead? My brother is a pro and has a Dell. He hates it and has been waiting for something decent from Apple for years it seems.

Mostly laptops apparently.

https://birchtree.me/blog/its-hard-out-there-for-a-mac-lover/

For every 1,000 Apple customers:

• 714 will buy an iPad
• 286 will buy a Mac
• 229 of those Macs are laptops
• 57 of those Macs are desktops
• 9 of those Macs are Mac Pros (rough guess based on Gruber’s “single percentage” quote. I gave it 4% of all Mac sales)

 

[Kurri]

Definitely going to wait for the new Mac Pro. I'm sure this machine will be a beast, but I already have a great display. So my value for money will be in the Mac Pro with better specs and no display.

I agree 100%. Good monitors go on sale all the time too if you dont have a great display.

 

[JeffPerrin]

Seems to me Apple is trying to take advantage of pent-up demand for a pro machine.

I really hope the forthcoming Mac Pro is a little more down-to-earth in price for independent devs and small studios (like myself).

#cheese-grater-rules

 

[macguru212]

Most expensive pro-sumer computer eva.

 

[LogicalVue]

Can we confirm which is likely true on the final units? User configurable memory is my only real barrier to buying any new Apple equipment.

The mkbhd review says "It's a completely sealed, non-upgradeable machine." and that includes the memory -- no access door.

Apparently Apple has run out of courage. I see a headphone jack, a SDXC card slot, 4 USB ports, an Ethernet port, and the 4 Thunderbolt ports. Why?

So many people have said this, but it's just silly. An iMac is 100x bigger than an iPhone so it has tons of space for ports. Apple didn't remove the headphone jack from the iPhone because it felt like it -- it removed it because it needed the space and presumably for waterproofing. The jack remains on all their other devices and computers.