Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.


macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001

While the iMac Pro doesn't launch for another six weeks or so, possible benchmarks for the computer may have already surfaced on Geekbench. The results provide us with an early look at just how powerful Apple's $4,999-and-up desktop workstation will be when it is released in December.


Interestingly, the iMac Pro models benchmarked appear to have custom, downclocked Xeon chips that Intel hasn't publicly announced yet. There is a benchmark result for a model with a 3.2GHz 8-core Xeon W-2140B processor, while a third listing exists for a model with a 3.0GHz 10-core Xeon W-2150B chip.

All of the models are identified as "AAPJ1371,1," and unlike other Xeon chips, the processors have a "B" suffix. A few of the benchmark results are from late August, while the rest are from October.


MacRumors spoke with Geekbench founder John Poole, who speculated that the iMac Pro may require chips with lower thermal design power, and thus lower frequencies, due to its all-in-one form factor. He noted that the other chips in the Xeon Processor W family have relatively high TDPs of up to 140W.

The multi-core Geekbench score for the 8-core model averages out to 23,536, which is the highest performance of any iMac ever. It's nearly 22 percent faster than the latest 5K iMac equipped with a maxed-out 4.2GHz quad-core Core i7 processor, which has an average multi-core score of 19,336.

The higher-end 10-core iMac Pro has a multi-core score of 35,917, which is roughly 41 percent faster than the latest Mac Pro maxed out with a 2.7GHz 12-core Xeon E5 processor. Even its single-core score of 5,345 is faster than all but the highest-end 5K iMac released earlier this year.

All in all, the benchmarks point to the iMac Pro being unsurprisingly powerful from top to bottom. And that's not even looking at the 18-core iMac Pro, which hasn't been benchmarked yet and will surely blow every other Mac out of the water--at least until the modular Mac Pro is ready.

Apple said the iMac Pro will also feature top-of-the-line Radeon Pro Vega graphics, up to 4TB of SSD storage, and up to 128GB of ECC RAM. The computer will share the same design as the standard iMac, but with an all-flash architecture, a new thermal design, and four Thunderbolt 3 ports.

Article Link: iMac Pros With Custom Xeon Chips Possibly Appear on Geekbench Ahead of December Launch


macrumors 68020
Jun 13, 2016
Very impressive, although similarly the jump with the standard iMacs next year will yield much better performance than the current offerings. It’ll be interesting to see how the 6 core and 8 core stack up in terms of value for certain pro use cases.

Return Zero

macrumors 65816
Oct 2, 2013
Holy s*** this thing looks amazing. I have absolutely no need for one, yet I have never desired to own a computer more (except the G5 powerbook, which wasn't actually real).
  • Like
Reactions: richhh


Dec 7, 2013
Interestingly, the iMac Pro models benchmarked appear to have custom, downclocked Xeon chips.

So, it's custom made to downclock? Interesting indeed.
  • Downclocked Suffocated-Air-Cooled CPU
  • Second Classed GPU
They might win the numbers somehow but they are shipping a caged beast with the potential of a World War Hulk. That's sad.
The one December I wish I was made of money.
Got great news. You can sell your kidney, eyes, blood, liver, bone-marrow, sperm..
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jb-net


macrumors 68000
Jul 6, 2012
This is great, but I just want an iMac with the highest end desktop chips (not server chips), user expandable memory, space for 2 user upgradable desktop (not laptop) hard drives for large enclosed storage (and SSD's) and top of the line nVidia game card options not ATI's poor second's. These would be much cheaper than these server class iMac's we're getting & probably sell alot better...that said these look awesome.
Last edited:


macrumors 68020
Aug 27, 2017
Silicon Valley
Holy s*** this thing looks amazing. I have absolutely no need for one, yet I have never desired to own a computer more (except the G5 powerbook, which wasn't actually real).
Funny that your other choice is another machine that would've melted itself, haha
When would one use multiple cores all firing at the same time?

It's an honest question.
When you use software that solves a problem that parallelizes well. Lots of tasks do, like video transcoding since you could split the video file into any number of parts and operate separately on each. I used to regularly utilize 100% of 32 cores on my data processing machine for Apache Spark or Postgres. Orrr you just have a lot of separate heavy tasks open.

You need to avoid having the threads share data too much, else you have to waste time with locks. And it's best if you can, for most of the time, keep the data required for the task in RAM or, better yet, in CPU caches (usually, each core has its own independent L1 and L2 caches, while each chip shares an L3 cache).

The thing is, if a task parallelizes well to 32 cores, chances are it parallelizes well to several thousand cores. Then you bring in the GPUs. But GPU compute is in its early stages.
Last edited:


macrumors 65816
Feb 22, 2010
Northern Ca.
When would one use multiple cores all firing at the same time?

It's an honest question.

First for all those saying convert to ARM.... Okay, with what processor?
Now that that is out of the way.
The use case for all core is something like ProTools host only, video encoding or rendering for multiple streams, image rendering, etc.

I'll admit, I have a 2.8GHz eight core MacPro at home and keeping all eight cores busy is difficult.

Michael Scrip

macrumors 604
Mar 4, 2011
It's a sick (the good kind) computer but also kinda stupid at the same time. Having to downclock your high-end CPUs due to thermal limitations... What a shame.

This thing should just be a separate box that can keep itself cool.

So... like a standard desktop computer? :p

This makes me wonder what the new Mac Pro will be. Let's hope they don't get all "clever" with crazy designs.

A workstation doesn't have to be pretty. It just needs to work. It literally has "work" in the name.

The people who spend that kind of money on a machine aren't buying a piece of art. :D


macrumors newbie
Jan 2, 2017
I'm not impressed. My 1,5 Year old OCd, 32GB DDR4, 4.5GHz Skylake i7 Hackintosh has a 6100/22000 single/multicore score. For 3k less. With a 38" 4K display...

And before you say "but professionals can't rely on a Hackintosh": Yes, you're probably right - because content creators are not tinkerers - BUT! - that doesn't change the fact that this machine is a bad value!
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.