"Late 2016" '16 or '17? ->Which CPU?

[komiez]

Been following almost all threads here on MR regarding the next update.
To me, I mostly care about which CPU they will use, as a daw user I will benefit from RAM but the higher clock/boost will be the highest prio.
The current i7 Skylake has 4.2Ghz turbo boost (no OC on mac here) which I really want.
Atm it looks like I will have all the cash for buying the 27" mac in late Oct or latest the 25th of Nov.
But, my worries are that it Might be a "new" model up at that time, perhaps difficult to get the current one with the Skylake - if they upgrade it.

So, what are the possibilitites it WILL be a newer update (or silent update) this Fall and what are the chances they will include the current i7 Skylake in the 27" iMac?
USB-C and DDR4 does not worry me that much, what would be the "best" benefit of DDR4 btw for me who still don't understand All the benefits with DDR4 (speed?)

thanks in advance, would be super nice to have this explained. And yes, if I had the cash I'd just go buy the Late 2015 today but I need to wait.
[doublepost=1473142532][/doublepost]would go for a 256 or 512GB SSD, 8GB RAM (upgrade those later 3rd party), buy an external SSD for samples etc (mydigitalSSD BP5 or Evo) and fix small addons later.

So like, what would DDR4 do for the newer iMacs if they will add/support it? Is the M390 Radeon any good btw?
And if they "announce" the newer update, is it only announcement and then we will get a date? Because then I would still have time to buy the current one...Bc if they will use only USB-C etc and I'd have to buy adapters etc...I prefer the current Late 2015 one.

 

[Samuelsan2001]

The differences between desktop i7's are minor, unless they add 6 core xeons it makes little difference which i7 you have.

They already use skylake and I don't think they'll wait for Kabylake, I see an update with the same or slightly faster skylake CPUs, with a swap to Polaris AMD GPU's, that will be the major change, and the only thing that will make any real difference to be honest. Then USB c / TB3 ports, a slightly better screen and ddr4 ram that's all they'll do if they come this year.

If they wait for Kabylake it may be to do a full redesign and that may mean a wait until March til June next year.

 

[komiez]

Thanks for that Sam!
Stressed about what the "newer" one will include. Yeah I'm aiming towards the desktop iMac 27" and really need the highest clock speed (the 4.0Ghz->4.2)

Ofc no one knows, but I hope and I really hope they will include the ability to replace the RAM on the iMacs?
It would be strange if they removed this, correct?

DDR4 would only be a plus compared to DDR3 right? Or is it just new standards...?

Will check the AMD Polaris (read from other threads), it would for sure be put in the iMac if they can?

 

[mullock87]

Ofc no one knows, but I hope and I really hope they will include the ability to replace the RAM on the iMacs?
It would be strange if they removed this, correct?

Do not be surprised if Apple make the RAM non-user upgradable soon.

 

[Samuelsan2001]

Thanks for that Sam!
Stressed about what the "newer" one will include. Yeah I'm aiming towards the desktop iMac 27" and really need the highest clock speed (the 4.0Ghz->4.2)

Ofc no one knows, but I hope and I really hope they will include the ability to replace the RAM on the iMacs?
It would be strange if they removed this, correct?

DDR4 would only be a plus compared to DDR3 right? Or is it just new standards...?

Will check the AMD Polaris (read from other threads), it would for sure be put in the iMac if they can?

Honestly the clock speeds don't mean much anymore, we've pretty much reached the limit at 4.0ghz and that's been the case for about a decade, most gains are architectural now. Unless you are running apps that only use one core of course in which case you may want to look at different software solutions that make use of multi core processors and may even leverage the GPU for extra performance.

They should keep ram upgradeability in the 27 inch, ddr4 has the potential for much faster ram and bigger bandwidth allowing some software changes to take advantage of this,they haven't really done so yet but in the future it should make a difference.

Yeah the only really big advances are in graphics at the moment so Polaris seems very likely unless they go back to NVIDIA. However the Polaris mobile chips are still to be announced and mobile chips are what currently go in the iMac, however it's possible that the changes in thermals on the new GPU's may allow desktop parts in the iMac.

 

[komiez]

Ahh alright...then I should just aim getting the current one then as every thread narrows me down to doing.
Since I haven't much knowledge in how they usually do with the announcements...
How was it last/previous times? Did it take much time before the newer versions...let's say The New Mac Pro announcement and when it could be purchased.. how long did the 2012 ones still stay/be available before they were drawn back?

If ppl still would have chance to buy the current imacs before the "new" one comes? That's my question...

 

[colodane]

Do not be surprised if Apple make the RAM non-user upgradable soon.

Yes, this is my biggest concern. I'll be getting a new 27 inch toward the end of the year. I'm fine with the graphics and possible CPU updates and USB-C. But having to pay the Apple premium for the RAM I want will be painful.

 

[Brookzy]

Yes, this is my biggest concern. I'll be getting a new 27 inch toward the end of the year. I'm fine with the graphics and possible CPU updates and USB-C. But having to pay the Apple premium for the RAM I want will be painful.

If they make the RAM non-user upgradeable I will be both very surprised and very angry.

Angry obviously because they charge up to four times more than getting your own RAM (which is absolutely outrageous).

Surprised because changing RAM upgradability is normally something that comes during a redesign rather than a spec bump.

For example, the 21.5" iMac had non-user-upgradeable RAM from its launch in 2012. Note, the RAM in these machines can still be upgraded by Apple Stores or service providers for a fee. In 2015 when the 21.5" 4K iMac came out, the RAM went totally soldered and can't be upgraded by anyone.

So my opinion is that if the 27" iMac would go to non-user-upgradeable RAM, it would have happened when the 5K display was introduced in 2014.

So the next opportunity for it to happen will be the next full redesign.

 

[HallStevenson]

For example, the 21.5" iMac had non-user-upgradeable RAM from its launch in 2012. Note, the RAM in these machines can still be upgraded by Apple Stores or service providers for a fee.

What were Apple stores or repair places able to do that users couldn't do ? I realize it may not be easy, but still doable by those who want to try it.

 

[Brookzy]

What were Apple stores or repair places able to do that users couldn't do ? I realize it may not be easy, but still doable by those who want to try it.

Yes absolutely, but it is not "user upgradeable" in the sense that it is simply a case of popping off a lid and putting RAM sticks in.

The ones that are upgradable by Apple require taking the screen off and getting inside the machine.

The ones that are totally unupgradeable have RAM soldered to the board.

 

[mildocjr]

Going back to clock speeds, most are correct in stating that clock speeds mean little.

Back in the day (80's and 90s) clock speed adjustments per 100 Mhz meant about a second faster.

Since we hit Ghz it hasn't really mattered, however, it all depends on what you plan to do with it, what kind of software you are using, what market you are in.

If you only use a program that does not support Multi-threading, it doesn't matter if you get a 2.5 Ghz quad-core or a 2.5 Ghz octa-core CPU, you will still process at 2.5 Ghz no matter what.

If your program is multi-threaded/multi-core then the octa-core is going to be ~twice as fast.

If you are doing some low intensity stuff, word docs, presentations, it won't matter if you have a 2-core or a 12 core cpu, it's never going to use enough CPU to notice a difference in speed.

If you are doing photo edits, a quad-core i7 @2.6 Ghz will do in-touch editing at about 3/4 of a second, a dual-core at the same speed will take about 1.5 seconds.

Movies and Music will be noticeably faster on quad-cores, hexa-cores, and octa-cores, as they are multi-threaded/multi-core applications.

Wouldn't worry about clock speed, just number of cores and if your application supports using the extra cores.


As for computers in general, the biggest bottleneck anymore seems to be network speed. SSD + quad-core + high-end DDR3 has got it covered (DDR4 shows negligible difference).

 

[danielwsmithee]

I'd love to see a new iMac Pro and an updated Mac Pro but I'm not holding my breath.

iMac Pro intel i7 6700K to 6900K (4-core, 6-core, & 8-core options).

Mac Pro going back to dual socket Xeon E5 v4 (16-cores to 44 cores).

I'd also like to see Apple support multiple user accessible M.2 slots, and drop SATA completely.

 

[mildocjr]

I'd love to see a new iMac Pro and an updated Mac Pro but I'm not holding my breath.

iMac Pro intel i7 6700K to 6900K (4-core, 6-core, & 8-core options).

Mac Pro going back to dual socket Xeon E5 v4 (16-cores to 44 cores).

I'd also like to see Apple support multiple user accessible M.2 slots, and drop SATA completely.

Apple using an unlocked intel processor would be a dream...

M.2 slots would be nice, but again that falls under Apple including an unlocked intel processor.

 

[danielwsmithee]

Apple using an unlocked intel processor would be a dream...

M.2 slots would be nice, but again that falls under Apple including an unlocked intel processor.

They use the 6700K currently as a BTO option. Isn't that unlocked? Personally I don't care if it unlocked, not one to play with overclocking, but I would like the iMac to have the higher performing parts.