How do these M1 Pro/Max chips compare to Intel’s server grade chips we saw in the last iMac Pro? Has anyone been able to compare yet? Even at a theoretical level?
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' Coming in 2022 With M1 Pro/Max Chips, 27-Inch Mini-LED Display, MacBook Pro Ports and More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Hard to say. Extrapolate from those tangible examples?
Or is base model M2- rumored to not be quite as powerful as PRO & MAX- in a version of this rumored iMac?
With iMac, Apple seems to like a high-but-not-crazy-high "starting at $XXXX" price. That has directly fed into gripes about them hanging on to mechanical drives and tiny starter RAM for seemingly way too long. But that price also feeds all the initial chatter and PR until configurable options are made available and true reality for all but the most basic users sets in.
So my guess is that there will be a relatively low-priced "starting at" (bigger) iMac price.
But then when you configure it as you can imagine needing it for life of device (because you can't do as you could with traditional iMacs in adding RAM and even new internal boot drive capacity later), you probably find yourself at 1.5X-3X that price if not more.
The goal for me is to not have to have an additional monitors to get more screen real estate. I am sure the new iMac will support them.
When my 2012 27" died back in May I got a new 24" and I don't think I've lost anything because of the smaller screen. Looking back I probably should have got a M1 Mini and ultra wide UHD screen but got the iMac for the whole all in one package.
Personally I think new iMac Pro will have a bigger screen than the 27", even if its only 28 or 29. But could Apple surprise us all with an ultra wide 21:9 iMac Pro?
Personally I think new iMac Pro will have a bigger screen than the 27", even if its only 28 or 29. But could Apple surprise us all with an ultra wide 21:9 iMac Pro?
I always wondered why including HDMI port on the iMac. Most monitors have DisplayPort and TB3/4 coming on now, isn't HDMI inferior to those?
Very nice... I would love an ultrawide display though. My last wish.
The iMac Pro was only strong at multi-threaded tasks; its single-threaded performance was rather mediocre compared to recent Intel Macs.
| Single-Core | Multi-Core | |
| 14-inch M1 Max (8+2 cores) | 1644 | 11715 |
| 8-core iMac Pro | 1065 | 7979 |
| 10-core iMac Pro | 1113 | 9378 |
| 14-core iMac Pro | 1091 | 11028 |
| 18-core iMac Pro | 1090 | 13408 |
| 8-core 2020 Intel iMac | 1252 | 8131 |
So, if you take the absolute highest end of the iMac Pro and have a heavily multithreaded task, you might still be ~14% faster than the highest-end MacBook Pro. But also much slower at single-threaded tasks.
I rarely see DisplayPort or Thunderbolt displays. I almost always see HDMI ports. Especially useful for a laptop like the MacBook Pro, where you might be traveling to a client's, or presenting at a conference, and odds that they offer anything but HDMI are next to zero.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I'm IN for a 21:9 Apple iMac... but I want it to resurrect target display mode or similar so that when Apple makes the guts seem too old or when macOS won't update on those guts anymore but I still have a spectacular screen with plenty of years left, I have a way to keep using that screen with perhaps Mac Mini or Mac Pro Jr 2025 or so.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
It's called "crazy like a fox" when everyone agrees with you, buys anyway and pays the Apple premium to get the storage they really think they will need for life of the device.
Best I can recall, Apple has always rolled out a minimalist base configuration to spin a low starter price. Many buyers need upgrades. Some have paid the Apple premium for those upgrades. Apple gets to spin low starter price AND make great profit on those parts.
What's different now is that select buyers would be able to buy RAM and STORAGE upgrades from other sources for much less. It would "just work" just as well. This could even be done later when they need more RAM or more storage. Now the walled garden has insurmountable walls. Buy your upgrades from Apple immediately (there will be no later upgrades)... and pay Apple prices for those upgrades... or bust.
Last edited:
A trackpad with Apple Pencil support would be nice. Especially for those of us that already use Wacom tablets and the like.
The internal storage is just for applications. All the video footage and images are stored on the NAS.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Maybe you are a video editor and you want to do your editing on your desktop but easily throw edited video to a much bigger screen TV. Best I know, few TVs have Displayport or TB3/4.
Maybe you have some kind of other video equipment that will universally have HDMI but probably not have TB3/4 and be less likely to have Displayport.
I've seen iMacs set up for exhibits and presentations- very much like using a laptop for presentations- where the presenter could glance at iMac to see what was on the big screen behind them. What jack is likely to connect to ANYTHING set up like that? HDMI.
What if this is HDMI IN too? If iMac screens are growing, they could double as someone's TV. If so, HDMI IN functionality would be needed to hook to all kinds of stuff that won't have Displayport & TB3/4. If HDMI IN, certain protected content requires a clean link from source to display... not running into some kind of hub to then use Displayport or TB3/4... else there is easy opportunity for piracy.
I could go on but there's a few.
Great, the 27 inch iMac will only be an iMac Pro, just as I predicted. So if you want a 27 inch iMac it will cost a bomb.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Unlikely. That's not how Apple marketing works. It is likely there will be a relatively lower-cost iMac 27"-32". Specs will probably not be impressive and pretty much beg for upgrades. But Apple likes to work to a "starting at $XXXX" price that seems a little high but not crazy.
Now whether the config you think you will need for the life of the device can be had for less than "a bomb" is probably less likely.
All these years of iMac, this has always been the approach. Look at the 24". Base config $1299. Apple likes that $1299 price. It seems there's been an iMac there forever. Then you configure. I have to have more than 8GB RAM. I probably need 1TB SSD for life of device. BOOM: $1899.
Wait, I probably will need that one additional graphics core sooner or later. Reconfigure. Boom $2099.
Is 1TB enough in 2021? I probably will need that extra TB during the life of the device. $2499.
Apple Marketing: "Starting at only $1299" Buyer reality: probably somewhere between $1899-$2499. It's always been this way.
Now whether the config you think you will need for the life of the device can be had for less than "a bomb" is probably less likely.
All these years of iMac, this has always been the approach. Look at the 24". Base config $1299. Apple likes that $1299 price. It seems there's been an iMac there forever. Then you configure. I have to have more than 8GB RAM. I probably need 1TB SSD for life of device. BOOM: $1899.
Wait, I probably will need that one additional graphics core sooner or later. Reconfigure. Boom $2099.
Is 1TB enough in 2021? I probably will need that extra TB during the life of the device. $2499.
Apple Marketing: "Starting at only $1299" Buyer reality: probably somewhere between $1899-$2499. It's always been this way.
Last edited:
So, thinking that a desktop should be more powerful than a laptop is an "Intel mindset" now? I guess Apple can have this effect on weak minded.
Travelling to a client's place yes makes sense - in the office.
Mac's to Mac's there is SharePlay or projecting over WiFi which you'd most likely connect to anyway. No cables and even with HDMI you're doing to use battery power without charging. At least TB you can - and LG makes at least 10 screens, 4 in production over the last 6yrs, Dell has 3 in production 1 in high demand keeps selling out on Amazon and on their site. Samsung makes a few as well so not sure where you've been or just not been looking.
HDMI is good for projecting to a board room display but that hasn't been happening much at corporations for almost 2yrs now and likely not needed as much going forward, we'll see.
But in your home connecting to another display this is the cheapest solution agreed, but most purchasing an iMac or iMac Pro is going to go for the top spec display that does provide both HDMI and TB (recall daisy chaining as a huge benefit here).
we disagree and I'm on the lowest agreeable part but I concede HDMI is probably more useful.
Unless it’s a 30” screen in the 27” iMac footprint, which would make sense considering there will be a 3” display size difference. Now the question is will a notch be on it. I suspect maybe a 5.5K or 6K screen resolution considering the 24” had a 4.5K display.
Not in the market but looking forward to something refreshing and please make the display rotation friendly and possibly height adjustable.
HDMI input I haven't thought of that.
Actually I think only 2 models of iMac allowed the iMac to be a second screen, not sure why Apple hasn't allowed this as a standard for years now ?? Good points.
The return of TargetDisplayMode would be a welcoming surprise.