iMac Pro Described as Blazingly Fast, Quiet, and Fairly Priced, But Lacks Upgradeability

[VRing]

Of course you don't...there is really nothing else to say then "I was wrong" but this is not the comment an internet warrior would choose. Good Job!

You're following typical troll logic.

You don't read my post and facts, then insult me for not wanting to continue a discussion.

Like I said, if you want to have a discussion, go back and read it. Don't just skip my post because it proved you have little to no understanding of what you're trying to discuss.

 

[PJivan]

You're following typical troll logic.

You don't read my post and facts, then insult me for not wanting to continue a discussion.

Like I said, if you want to have a discussion, go back and read it. Don't just skip my post because it proved you have little to no understanding of what you're trying to discuss.

I don't want to discuss, it's not a debate since the informations are out there, I posted facts, your facts were illogic as you are comparing different old and cheap hardware just to support your claim, end of story, call me when you have facts.

 

[Thunderbird]

OK, there you go. Nobody needs an iMac Pro. Why? Because your project review software and company don't.

Nice that you can speak for everyone else. Somebody, please let Apple know there are no customers needing an iMac Pro. Stat!

Yes, most of those particular professions you listed do not need, nor will they ever use, the full processing power of a new iMac Pro (even at the base configuration). If the people in said professions still WANT one anyway, that's a different matter, and certainly their prerogative. I never said they shouldn't buy one, only that they don't need one.

 

[citysnaps]

Yes, most of those particular professions you listed do not need, nor will they ever use, the full processing power of a new iMac Pro (even at the base configuration). If the people in said professions still WANT one anyway, that's a different matter, and certainly their prerogative. I never said they shouldn't buy one, only that they don't need one.

Got it... You're the arbiter of what kind of processing power professionals need to do their work. Clearly, you are not one who works in those professions and fields where simulations, modeling, signal/image/video processing, and renderings take a lot of processing time.

 

[Thunderbird]

Got it... You're the arbiter of what kind of processing power professionals need to do their work. Clearly, you are not one who works in those professions and fields where simulations, modeling, processing, and renderings take a lot of processing time.

It's not about being an 'arbiter', it's about knowing what professions actually do with a computer and comparing that with what a given computer is capable of.

What do doctors, history professors, and attorneys, for example, need with 8 cores, 32 GB RAM and a Vega GPU? How would they possibly fully utilize those specs as part of their profession?

 

[citysnaps]

It's not about being an 'arbiter', it's about knowing what professions actually do with a computer and comparing that with what a given computer is capable of.

What do doctors, history professors, and attorneys, for example, need with 8 cores, 32 GB RAM and a Vega GPU? How would they possibly fully utilize those specs as part of their profession?

If you go back, to post#199, the list of professions I originally listed was a wide swath in response and in rebuttal to the claim that "professionals" are the ones who like to tinker with their computers (rather than tech enthusiasts); i.e. replacing RAM, SSDs, GPUs, etc.

To address your off-topic response to my post, in that list there are a large number who, like my architect just as an example, need a much faster computer for complex 3D renderings. Others are people who do simulations, modeling, analysis, signal/image processing, produce music, edit video, etc.

 

[Bryan Bowler]

What do doctors, history professors, and attorneys, for example, need with 8 cores, 32 GB RAM and a Vega GPU? How would they possibly fully utilize those specs as part of their profession?

Why are you worrying about what other people need? Spend more time on what matters to you...

 

[Peterk12]

put together a similar speced computer with components and let us know what it comes out too.

There's a great thing called "reading the article first". I suggest you try it.

He said the iMac Pro's biggest weakness is its lack of upgradeability, but he said its expensive $4,999 starting price is actually fair for the hardware included, and he priced out a PC with mostly equivalent tech specs at $5,100.

 

[Daniel Reed]

What happens if, what happens if. Most graphics, image, music, video professionals wouldn't know how to fix an SSD and restore their system anyway, or want to. Also why would they have a spare one laying around...

Most studio's order at least one spare for any bulk order, if not two to four.
Meaning if studio X puts in an iMac Pro order for a dozen employees, they'll order at least 13.

Faults happen for every product made; loosing even one work day can be a big deal.

Also, if studio X hires extra people in the next 3 years,
they'll give the new hires the same hardware as the rest of the team.

Whatever isn't used is still a depreciated tax write-off anyways.

 

[Thunderbird]

If you go back, to post#199, the list of professions I originally listed was a wide swath in response and in rebuttal to the claim that "professionals" are the ones who like to tinker with their computers (rather than tech enthusiasts); i.e. replacing RAM, SSDs, GPUs, etc.

To address your off-topic response to my post, in that list there are a large number who, like my architect just as an example, need a much faster computer for complex 3D renderings. Others are people who do simulations, modeling, analysis, signal/image processing, produce music, edit video, etc.

So you couldn't answer my simple question. Thought so.
[doublepost=1513225784][/doublepost]

Why are you worrying about what other people need? Spend more time on what matters to you...

Because I'm talking to someone else about a claim they made. Buzz off.

 

[FriendlyMackle]

And here exactly is why this Mac is actually quite expensive. You can't upgrade RAM, SSD or graphic card later on without having to pay Apple for that.

AND.... what happens when Apple takes 5 years to release the new model for this Mac? OR when they suddenly decide that they'll stop making Final Cut Pro because it's no longer worth it and there is always iMovie?

Sorry for the rant. I'm just not liking how Apple is doing things lately.

I also have to ask whether they have REALLY solved the heat problem! Every iMac I have purchased since they went to the all-Aluminum design develops dust heat-track stains from the air flow intake at the edges of my screen. Supposedly this isn't a widespread problem -- if you live in a hermetically sealed cleaned-air environment. Everyone else whom I know has seen this same problem, some sooner, some later.

For me it happened with my latest iMac (2015 purchased) after about one year. The only way to clean the dust is - yes - to disassemble the computer, screen, etc remove the glass, clean, then reattach everything without destroying or losing some tiny part or cable. So, at least for me, only to be done by a technical professional - someone other than myself!

And at least with this model, I was able to install 16 GB RAM aftermarket via the provided access! They're really going all the way and making the RAM in this "Pro" computer inaccessible to users?! That is the last straw (for me) -- even if I felt that I could spend $5K on an iMac (and I have no need for that level of power) -- I wouldn't be buying this. Better to purchase something like a Mac Pro if spending that amount.

Is Jony Ive the person responsible for making these awful anti-consumer hardware design decisions? Sure, if money and time were no object, then we could all just buy to our heart's content and scrap the 'old' computer with a shiny new replacement. I have other things on which I would rather spend my time and money. End Rant.

**--TLDR: No Access to RAM in a 'Pro' Machine; and what about the dust trails on the screen -- WTF, Apple?--**
[doublepost=1513239165][/doublepost]

And here exactly is why this Mac is actually quite expensive. You can't upgrade RAM, SSD or graphic card later on without having to pay Apple for that.

AND.... what happens when Apple takes 5 years to release the new model for this Mac? OR when they suddenly decide that they'll stop making Final Cut Pro because it's no longer worth it and there is always iMovie?

Sorry for the rant. I'm just not liking how Apple is doing things lately.

Yes, and does that off-the-shelf model include the full 128GB of RAM for the $4,999 asking price? Or is that an additional $2K?
[doublepost=1513241346][/doublepost]

Parts from 27 slim iMac. Choke full of dust, ( thermal blanket ) and overheated PSU..
That fan was blocked up like a coronary artery! Virtual no air flow.

Janky ? Look at those CPU temps, PSU and fan.

View attachment 741716 View attachment 741715 View attachment 741714
View attachment 741713

From past experience, repairing iMac’s including new Retina 5k’s. I expect to see some hot hot iMac Pro’s !! I simply don’t believe the marking claims about the cooling system in these new iMacs, it’s bs. Buyers will soon complain about throttling. From a thermal point the design is wrong! I would prefer a Hackintosh any day. Ever wonder why Apple make it so hard for you to look inside your iMac.

Best described as Blazingly Hot !

Thank you! I would be terrified to see the amount of dust which must be clogging the interior of my 2015 iMac after just 2 years -- since my screen developed heat trails of dust after just about one year of use. Dust which can only be removed by having someone disassemble, clean, and reassemble the iMac. Not something which I can (or would want to attempt) do myself. And since it's a 27" model and I live in Manhattan, the thought of transporting this offsite (from home) to an Apple Store (or authorized tech place) for this kind of maintenance is too much. And I'm sure very expensive. Enough that I will just probably replace the computer when this becomes intolerable in about another year or two.

 

[era86]

I cannot stress enough how wrong this statement is. He is comparing his mid to high end iMac Pro configuration to the entry level prices. He has NOT the entry level model!

 

[citysnaps]

So you couldn't answer my simple question. Thought so.

It was a stupid question, that had absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand; i.e. my claim that most professionals, as opposed to tech enthusiasts who hang out on tech forums, do not tinker with upgrading (swapping GPUs, RAM, SSDs, etc) computers. I listed a wide range of professionals who use computers to make that point.

You're trying to make that into an issue of who an iMac Pro is appropriate or not appropriate.

Go back to post# 199, which was actually in reference to a MBP.

 

[akbarali.ch]

Nobody is using the internal SSD in an iMac Pro for anything else than a scratch disk. You obviously have no clue about what a workstation is being used for if you think a replacable SSD/HDD is of any importance. Thunderbolt 3 and 10 gigabit ports are there for the storage solutions.

Ram would be nice though, but even then upgrades are usually not being done in the workstation world. Because by the time you need new RAM you also need a new mobo/cpu with new sockets for the CPU and the RAM. So the only interchangeable thing should be the screen, everything else may sound nice to you but is of no importance to companies buying these types of workstations.

Upgrades to workstations just happen seldom, usually the big users just buy a whole new system when they need one. Remember that is is not a PC this is a workstation. The only problem is just that people now also have to buy a new screen when they upgrade to a new workstation.

Well, i'm a 3d professional and was just working on a single 3d file of 5.6GB! Work in VR too, you name the vr hardware and we have it, psds often go beyond 1-2 gb, easily.

So was speaking keeping all those in mind, 8gb was fine for me 2 years back, upgraded to 16gb, planning to upgrade again to 32. Had 1TB hd, upgraded to 2tb and now i have 3tb. Not only that, video card to went through a few upgrade.

 

[Stella]

That 11 TFLOPS on their webpage is the maximum configuration. So they are indeed running downclocked.

That wouldn't surprise me. The AMD Vega cards run HOT and are energy hungry, and very inefficient compared to Nvidia 10x range, which (Nvidia ) still offer better performance despite being released some 16 months prior. There's little chance of putting the full Vega 64 inside an iMac.

The AMD Pro that Apple have going with AMD are an indication that they've been compromised due to heat concerns.

Very disappointing to read that the Vega 64 *Pro* is comparable to a full desktop Vega 56. That makes it on par with a Nvidia 1070 - a good GPU without a doubt, but especially with VR will struggle with some VR.

 

[ACST]

Well, i'm a 3d professional and was just working on a single 3d file of 5.6GB! Work in VR too, you name the vr hardware and we have it, psds often go beyond 1-2 gb, easily.

So was speaking keeping all those in mind, 8gb was fine for me 2 years back, upgraded to 16gb, planning to upgrade again to 32. Had 1TB hd, upgraded to 2tb and now i have 3tb. Not only that, video card to went through a few upgrade.

Then you're the exception to the rule and as I said interchangeable RAM would have been nice (especially seeing the prices of the extra RAM now on the Apple site ). But for the big companies (which make up the majority of the workstation sales) upgrade-ability really isn't that big of a deal. I've never seen a company with lots of workstations getting extra RAM or internal storage for their workstation suite.

As for storage with all the Thunderbolt 3 ports you can have nvme-speed external storage nowadays so expendable internal storage still isn't a real necessity anymore. You basically only need internal storage for the OS and the suite of programs you're using. Sure it's neater on your desk having more internal, but you're already losing an entire case compared to other workstations.

 

[Glasgreat]

That wouldn't surprise me. The AMD Vega cards run HOT and are energy hungry, and very inefficient compared to Nvidia 10x range, which (Nvidia ) still offer better performance despite

Those power hungry, hot AMD Vega cards will have thermal temperature running amok inside that slim design, but I’m sure Apple will throttle performance to control those temperatures. I hope the power supply units are good in these new iMac Pro’s. If Apple throttle GPU and CPU to align with internal temperatures, then is the buyer truly getting the full potential of the specifications that he is bought ?

 

[Stella]

Those power hungry, hot AMD Vega cards will have thermal temperature running amok inside that slim design, but I’m sure Apple will throttle performance to control those temperatures. I hope the power supply units are good in these new iMac Pro’s. If Apple throttle GPU and CPU to align with internal temperatures, then is the buyer truly getting the full potential of the specifications that he is bought ?

Yes, they have done that, like someone else mentioned, and I referenced in the reply you quoted, the AMD Vega Pro 64 has the same performance as the full desktop AMD Vega 56, which is also misleading ( re: the name AMD Vega Pro 64 ) .

 

[mjsmith1568]

What really scares me is that if you look at the article where Shiller talks about the new Pro Mac, after the iMac Pro, he mentions a modular design, but never says the the parts will be upgradable.
I'd be willing to bet that the next computer has the RAM, FLASH, and CPUs soldered on the motherboard and three or four slots for video and other add in cards.
Wouldn't surprise me at all.

 

[Thunderbird]

It was a stupid question, that had absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand; i.e. my claim that most professionals, as opposed to tech enthusiasts who hang out on tech forums, do not tinker with upgrading (swapping GPUs, RAM, SSDs, etc) computers. I listed a wide range of professionals who use computers to make that point.

You're trying to make that into an issue of who an iMac Pro is appropriate or not appropriate.

Go back to post# 199, which was actually in reference to a MBP.

I did.

You were responding to this quote: "I think the pros are the ones that do tinker with their computers."

You said, "You mean professionals like doctors, architects, economists, real estate brokers, history professors, structural engineers, interior decorators, tax professionals, accountants, dentists, surveyors, musicians, attorneys, statisticians, and on and on?"

I understand that your point was that 'pros' (i.e. professionals) are not necessarily the same as computer tech enthusiasts, who DO like to tinker and upgrade. I agree with you about that point. But by listing those professions, you also implied that those same professions would be interested in an iMac Pro precisely for the reason that they would not have to upgrade or tinker with it.

But I'm saying those professions would not need, nor even be able to use, the full power of an iMac Pro. So your point is moot.

 

[citysnaps]

I did.

You were responding to this quote: "I think the pros are the ones that do tinker with their computers."

You said, "You mean professionals like doctors, architects, economists, real estate brokers, history professors, structural engineers, interior decorators, tax professionals, accountants, dentists, surveyors, musicians, attorneys, statisticians, and on and on?"

I understand that your point was that 'pros' (i.e. professionals) are not necessarily the same as computer tech enthusiasts, who DO like to tinker and upgrade. I agree with you about that point. But by listing those professions, you also implied that those same professions would be interested in an iMac Pro precisely for the reason that they would not have to upgrade or tinker with it.

But I'm saying those professions would not need, nor even be able to use, the full power of an iMac Pro. So your point is moot.

"But by listing those professions, you also implied that those same professions would be interested in an iMac Pro precisely for the reason that they would not have to upgrade or tinker with it."

Wrong. Again... I made no such implication. That's on you not carefully reading what I wrote.

I made a specific response to a poster, in post# 199, who was talking about his MacBook Pro that he upgraded, where I made a general characterization about professionals, rather than tech enthusiasts, not tinkering/upgrading their computers, and then listing a wide variety of professionals who use computers in the course of their work. That characterization has absolutely nothing to do with a iMac Pro, or any other computer.

Once more, the characterization is about people, specifically professionals, and not about specific computers. Surely you know that some professionals might use a MacBook Air, a MacBook, a MacBook Pro, an iMac, an (i)MacPro, or even an iPad in the course of their work. It's about using the right tool, of which there are many. None of which are upgradeable, with the exception of a few very narrow cases (iMac 27" and MacPro).

You created a straw-man, in an attempt to create a "gotcha" you could respond to. And now are unwilling to own it.

 

[Thunderbird]

"But by listing those professions, you also implied that those same professions would be interested in an iMac Pro precisely for the reason that they would not have to upgrade or tinker with it."

Wrong. Again... I made no such implication. That's on you not carefully reading what I wrote.

I made a specific response to a poster, in post# 199, who was talking about his MacBook Pro that he upgraded, where I made a general characterization about professionals, rather than tech enthusiasts, not tinkering/upgrading their computers, and then listing a wide variety of professionals who use computers in the course of their work. That characterization has absolutely nothing to do with a iMac Pro, or any other computer.

Once more, the characterization is about people, specifically professionals, and not about specific computers. Surely you know that some professionals might use a MacBook Air, a MacBook, a MacBook Pro, an iMac, an (i)MacPro, or even an iPad in the course of their work. It's about using the right tool, of which there are many. None of which are upgradeable, with the exception of a few very narrow cases (iMac 27" and MacPro).

You created a straw-man, in an attempt to create a "gotcha" you could respond to. And now are unwilling to own it.

Oh FFS. Just stop it. YOU were the one arguing FOR those professions seeing the iMac Pro as useful and saving time, remember? YOU even cited an architect friend who YOU claimed would "much rather use a high-performance Apple computer". And you went further, by saying, "Just because you have no need for a high-performance computer does not mean others don't." So YOU were arguing that those professions in your list may actually NEED a workstation computer like an iMac Pro.

I asked you: when would those professions need a pro workstation? You said, "Since whenever the processing power will save them loads of time. And money." But most of those professions actually don't need a pro workstation, because they don't do anything that requires things like intensive graphic processing, video editing, 3D modelling, or machine learning. And when I asked you what would doctors, history professors, or attorneys, etc. need with the processing power of the iMac Pro, you couldn't answer.

Now you're trying to shift the goalposts by saying the whole discussion is not about the iMac Pro or workstations, but about upgrading and tinkering.

Whatever dude...

 

[citysnaps]

Oh FFS. Just stop it. YOU were the one arguing FOR those professions seeing the iMac Pro as useful and saving time, remember? YOU even cited an architect friend who YOU claimed would "much rather use a high-performance Apple computer". And you went further, by saying, "Just because you have no need for a high-performance computer does not mean others don't." So YOU were arguing that those professions in your list may actually NEED a workstation computer like an iMac Pro.

I asked you: when would those professions need a pro workstation? You said, "Since whenever the processing power will save them loads of time. And money." But most of those professions actually don't need a pro workstation, because they don't do anything that requires things like intensive graphic processing, video editing, 3D modelling, or machine learning. And when I asked you what would doctors, history professors, or attorneys, etc. need with the processing power of the iMac Pro, you couldn't answer.

Now you're trying to shift the goalposts by saying the whole discussion is not about the iMac Pro or workstations, but about upgrading and tinkering.

Whatever dude...

Still trying. Still wrong.

1) Once more, my original post was about providing a wide range of professionals who use computers who likely will not tinker, in response to an enthusiast with a MBP who upgraded.

2) You came back with a straw-man and said that most of those in my list of professionals would not use the power of an iMac Pro.

3) I cited my architect, as one example of a professional, who definitely would. And is indeed scoping one out now that it is released.

4) From that, you project that somehow I believe everyone in my wide list of professionals who likely would not tinker with their computers, would likely purchase an iMac Pro. That's not just silly, it's absurd.

And now, even with me clarifying your misunderstanding over the last few posts, you keep on going and going, as if you're refusing to understand what I've been trying to clarify for you.

That is just bizarre.

 

[viettanium]

does anyone has the wallpaper in MBKHD video?

 

[ThatSandWyrm]

Maybe some of them who are using photoshop (or whatever they're using), but I think the heavy users who do the actual rendering and **** are using some supercomputer shared **** and they also need even better monitors.

Having worked in film production, I can say that you don't render much on desktop machines (except in the middle of the night when everyone is gone, and they're added to the cluster). You do a couple of test renders on your desktop, and then send the rest of the job to the company's render farm.

While a few editing machines might use special monitors (which could probably be attached to this thing externally), the vast majority of artists will be just fine with the 5K + HDR offered any current iMac.

And when I was working in Animation, I had BOTH a unix box and a Mac on my desk. The latter of which was used almost solely for Photoshop. For that kind of use (Photoshop, Surface Tools, Photogrammetry, etc.), an all-in-one solution like this has a lot of benefits in terms of deployment and upkeep.