But you are talking about the price on a NEW computer and not a 3 year old used computer. So it is like orange and apple comparison, no?
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 Updated With 256GB RAM and Radeon Pro Vega 64X Graphics Options
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What occupation is out there that would require this much memory? Also, is this same Professional upgrading every year since they would probably also want a more capable processor and storage to match this amount of memory?
I’m very curious of what kind of heavy work would be done on these high end machines
I’m very curious of what kind of heavy work would be done on these high end machines
Exactly this. To me this says "the Mac Pro still isn't coming any time soon but here's a nod to the Pro market to show that we still have you in mind". Nice one - so initially, for those in the market for one, but who don't actually 'need' the extra 128GB or the upper level graphics offered from this morning, they're all still sitting in the exact same boat that they were in last night. The iMac Pro/Mac Pro relationship will no doubt echo that of the iMac/Mac Mini - ie both pretty much the same, only one is an all-in-one version of the other, although in the case of the latter, neither are particularly expandable anyway! So when this Modularly Expandable Mac Pro DOES finally come to fruition and people have already jumped in now to purchase £15k's-worth of iMac Pro because they can't wait, just how disappointed are they going to be? My bet is that it will probably not be all that much as it's already a very powerful machine, despite its flaws. But I think that it's safe to say that the new Mac Pro, when it arrives, is going to make the iMac Pro look like the bargain of the century!
After Effects loves RAM; the more RAM you have the better.
With that said, these upgrades are not making me go OMG! Sick and tired of Apple assuming everyone wants to buy machines every 2-3 years with new monitors. I "ALREADY HAVE" a nice monitor Apple, for the love of God release a high end machine that is headless.
I know someone who's work just bought 2 iMac Pro's, should have waited.
I'm sorry but "pro" doesn't mean you can upgrade components, that would be "hobbyist".
Professionals just need something that works well and reliably at the high end.
Professionals just need something that works well and reliably at the high end.
At this rate the new "modular" MacPro will start at $9,000 and top out at $23,000...without displays.
Only Tim Cook will be able to afford one.
Only Tim Cook will be able to afford one.
And just when is AMD supposed to ship new Navi GPUs? Apple has been taking heat for quite a while over the lack of iMac updates, and it clearly shows that they had to regroup on the GPU choices at some point.
I read that 7nm Navi will be announced in May, but that was right after I read another article that said they would be pushed out to October or November, so who knows how long Apple might have to wait for AMD to be up and running with sufficient numbers to put in new iMacs. Its fairly obvious that the GPUs choices for the updated iMac are more like a forced confession, along with the bottom two tiers of the 27" iMac using 8th Generation CPUs instead of 9th Gen.
Just looking at the ARK - Intel has still not released both the Core i5-9500 and Core i5-9600 that Apple would have put in the $1799 and $1999 iMacs. I can accept, and in fact predicated, that 8th Gen would go in the 21.5". I even predicted that Apple might end up having to use 8th Gen in the 27" if Intel did not have CPUs announced and launched in time. I think Apple waited until it was clear Intel and AMD could not give them what they needed and had to punt. Hell, Intel is still having supply issues with 14nm CPUs and is predicted to continue having issues for the rest of the year.
Blame Apple all you want, but I am not. AMD is focused on Ryzen and Threadripper, and they should be. However, you cannot blame Apple for wanting to shift to in-house GPUs at some point.
On the other side, Intel is still battling its 10nm woes while 14nm production suffers despite what has been record demand. Anyone waiting for Sunny Cove, Ice Lake, et al and thinks Intel will have volume production by the end of Q3/2019 should refrain from ever stepping foot in a casino.
The frustration on these forums towards the lack of an iMac revision was palpable in November after the iPad Pro/mini/Air event. I do not think Apple had the luxury of waiting until WWDC or a fall event at this point and decided that they had to get something out the door before the torches and pitchforks were outside the spaceship.
I have done some research into After Effects rendering, the new iMac with the 8-core i9 will actually probably be faster than the iMac Pro at doing AE renders because it can clock higher; and After Effects no longer renders in the way that lots of cores matter.
My research concluded that the i9 9700K is the best CPU for After Effects rendering; which is what the new iMac looks to have in it.
My research concluded that the i9 9700K is the best CPU for After Effects rendering; which is what the new iMac looks to have in it.
Much more machine than I need. I’ll stick with the regular iMac.
Yeah, it’s expensive, but I am not in the target market so... That’s the only complaint I’ve got with Apple’s new/updated iMacs and iPads. I find everything else to be priced reasonably.
Yeah, it’s expensive, but I am not in the target market so... That’s the only complaint I’ve got with Apple’s new/updated iMacs and iPads. I find everything else to be priced reasonably.
I though pro meant used for work, just like google or facebook or apple or ibm, or airbnb or dozen other companies use mac to do work...
Also generally those companies have an IT division able to replace an imac pro ram
Yes because the 256GB ECC RAM is the only option available on any Mac ever.
If you need it for your workflow, you can justify the purchase as it'd pay for itself in days. If you don't need that amount of RAM then I don't see why you're whining about the price of something you wouldn't be looking to buy anyway.
There are plenty of applications that need a lot of RAM (sometimes - terabytes of it) especially in CAD/VLSI but Macs are not used in these fields (it's mostly Linux). iMac Pro is definitely a niche machine nowadays which explains Apple's waning attention to it.
Exactly. Without going to Apple or an Authorised Apple Repairer/Seller to do it. Same goes with the iMac 4K.
I wouldn't say Apple's attention to iMac Pro is waning. Yes, it's a relatively niche machine, but Apple just created this machine a couple of years ago, and even then they described it as something to close the gap/tide people over until the Mac Pro is ready. For the life of me, I can't understand why they are taking so long on something that should not be that hard...just provide a new Mac Pro already Apple!
just what decade are you calling "back then?" I've had a Mac since the days when there was only one to buy from. you could have any Mac you wanted, as long as it was a 128k Mac in 1984 lol. I dont recall any day when the base configuration was anything other than base. I think the only thing that is different that back in the day there was less to upgrade. more ram. more spinning platter. maybe some more processor cycles. These days so many different ways, so sure, the base model is not as good as a tricked out version. But for some, the base is still what they need.
So they put a powerful GPU,
that generates a lot of heat,
in a thermally restrictive case,
with no airflow,
that initiates thermal-throttling, slowing your CPU and GPU thus negating the purpose of the new parts in the first place.
...
Brilliant.
Next I hear that the new Apple Cars will try cutting edge square wheels with boat anchor attachments.
that generates a lot of heat,
in a thermally restrictive case,
with no airflow,
that initiates thermal-throttling, slowing your CPU and GPU thus negating the purpose of the new parts in the first place.
...
Brilliant.
Next I hear that the new Apple Cars will try cutting edge square wheels with boat anchor attachments.
Virtual machines. Lots of big virtual machines. great for testing and implementation testing in a non-production work environment.
I can't really recall there ever being a Mac that you could call a really good gaming machine, given what they are sold up against. Only time I ever really had anything by way of a one-upmanship moment in that respect was when I was running 'Marathon' on a Performa 630LC when everyone else was playing Solitaire on their PCs. After that...
"We had the courage to not change the MoBo so you can still use that slow RAM from 2 years ago!"
While Thermal throttling is absolutely a thing on the regular iMac, the new iMac Pro had a redesigned thermal solution. Do we have any evidence of throttling on these? (i'm genuinely curious as i haven't yet seen those tests)
Size itself is not indicative of cooling efficiency. it depends on the technologies and what's inside and how they're designed (and quality of parts used in the cooling).
for example, look at the Corsair one's highest end small form factor computer. small, 1 fan. But no thermal throttling issues. heck, I have a mini-itx system running an overclocked Ryzen 1700 that doesn't thermal throttle, and uses nothing but air cooling.
the laptop's thermal issues tend to be due to poor air flow that is caused by limits air intake due to no vents anywhere in the chassis (air is pulled down through the keyboard layer and through the seems, then pushed out the back between the seems in the hinge. This is insufficient to properly move air. But also why competitors laptops that are around the same volume in size have no thermal problems, Because they have vents typically to allow better airflow.
it's all down to the design itself. So im really curious to see the iMac pro's newer thermal design improves and fixes the problems on the old iMac