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 Compared to 5K iMac and MacBook Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A Honda Accord fully loaded can go past $40,000...
"SO honey, we have a chance to put a down payment on a house, or we can buy an "overpriced garbage" that has a Honda logo in it that will be worth half the price in a year?"
If someone is buying a $13k car, they can’t afford a Mac Pro.
Also, cute how you’re embarrassing yourself by having no clue what you are talking about
Also, cute how you’re embarrassing yourself by having no clue what you are talking about
It's amazing how often these figures get used incorrectly. I've seen the incorrect terminology used by reviewers, ISPs, and occasionally even by hardware manufacturers themselves.
"So honey, we have a chance to buy a new small car that will rapidly depreciate, or we can buy an iMac Pro that I can use as a work tool to complete $250,000 in contracts in my design business?"
Last edited:
Very good question. And kinda worrying. Not what you want to hear when you're considering spending £5000+
It's not just a question of hardware. Hardware is only as good as the software it runs. And if the OS has been neglected for years in favour of the favoured iOS. Then it's pretty academic what you waste your cash on. A performance sheet is just that. A piece of paper. In the real-world user experience is the decider as to whether people think overpriced and feature reduced Apple kit is worth the extra premium over the massively cheaper competition..Or not.
If it were me, I would probably look putting my money towards a solution that is easier to upgrade and/or modular in design. I can see the iMac Pro being a good fit for some customers, but by the same token I believe the Mac Pro should be an overall better experience for those who need full workstation power and upgradeability.
Given the price tag of the iMac Pro, I'm thinking that Apple will price the new modular Mac Pro even higher, we'll have to wait and see if that's the case.
Don't forget you're gonna have to buy the new one to be guaranteed Meltdown and Spectre free...
[doublepost=1516362241][/doublepost]
I love that the posters, not solely the one above, like to point out that $13,199 is a cheap car. If anyone's first car cost more than that Mommy or Daddy bought it for them.
In general: Clock speed > Cores when it comes to PS and Lr.
The i7 iMac will therefor continue to be the reasonable option for most photographers.
If it made your workers more productive, than yes you would buy it. It's called ROI. Plus if your business and working with Apple you most likely can get some discounts.
Insensitive, offensive and unnecessary your comment is. Useless.
With the actual deal of 3999€ for the iMac Pro it is only about 500$ more expensive than a maxed out 2017 iMac with 1 TB SSD and self added 32GB RAM (not from Apple!). For this 500$ you a super quiet 8 core workstation with Vega graphics, 10 Gig Ethernet, double the amount TB3 ports, a better camera and microphones, a better card reader, better resale value and a nice colour.
This is really something to think about....(at least if you live nearby that stores...)
This is really something to think about....(at least if you live nearby that stores...)
I could see a pretty big price range depending on how how many options you have and how you configure it. If that's the case, the entry level modular Mac Pro will probably start with a price similar to the entry level iMac Pro and it will go up from there.
People who don’t buy workstations don’t understand the cost of workstations and never will. These aren’t like buying your average dell PC or building your own. These are specifically designed to work near constantly on specific tasks and the cost shows that.
I have a feeling it will be quite a bit more to differentiate the lines. I would consider the iMac Pro to have captured the 'bottom end' of the workstation market so I reckon it will start about the same as the most popular iMP config, which at the moment I would guess would be 10 core, 64GB RAM, 64 Vega so about $/£7k.
I was originally hoping to get the new Mac Pro but I realised that the truth is I'm not going to constantly pay for upgrades to graphic cards etc. My iMac Pro is a beast and by the time it starts to slow down or my work suffers, I'll get a new one. If I get four years out of it, happy days.
Truth is, with all the time they are taking it will likely be something quite different but we know the price will go up. By that time I hope the people who can actually afford/justify the expense will be the people doing the most commenting. It's so irritating to constantly battle through the comments from users who will never buy one anyway.
How does that project compare on an old Mac Pro 5,1 (i.e. 2012) either stock or beefed up. THAT would be a good test.
That's exactly what he did, nothing wrong with that. It's just another point of interest. I do this all the time when I buy a new system, I benchmark it against my existing systems just for curiosities sake. However I don't publish them to YouTube (but, where applicable, I have provided them in forum discussions).
"So honey, we can buy this iMac pro and in a couple of projects it can pay for it self and for the nice luxury car we always wanted"
I'm interested in the thermal performance comparison.
How do they compare in an ambient room temperature of 90F (32C)over a period of time with respect to CPU/GPU performance, CPU/GPU temp, fan RPM, fan noise, how warm to touch is the enclosure, etc.
How do they compare in an ambient room temperature of 90F (32C)over a period of time with respect to CPU/GPU performance, CPU/GPU temp, fan RPM, fan noise, how warm to touch is the enclosure, etc.