I definitely agree. M1 mini plus 2x 4K monitors will be a more productive, cheap and well-look solution. single monitor is too limited today for desktop usage.
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.
M1 iMac Configurations and Pricing Breakdown
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree, and I think it's great that for once, people opting for a Mac mini + external monitor route no longer have to compromise when it comes to performance.
I believe the iMac still has its unique value proposition. In education, for example, I imagine the IT dept in charge of procuring them may prefer simply purchasing a few dozen iMacs outright, rather than contend with having to source for separate peripherals. Easier to set up and deploy overall.
Whichever Mac you end up buying at the end of the day, Apple wins either way.
If you are using ethernet, this will reduce visible cable clutter.
It makes no sense to compare RAM on an M1 with RAM on an Intel based computer.
If you are really into specs, please look for Max Tech on Youtube. He posted a nice benchmark review on if you should be getting the 8G or 16GB of memory on an M1 computer. Getting the 16GB will only give you a 10% performance boost in imaging editing applications so boosting that to 32GB will have little to no impact. The only case where it did have a serious impact was when exporting 8K red raw footage (which is crazy) to 4K footage.
What kind of work are you doing on your computer?
If you don't need a camera, built in speakers, a high quality screen, a nice looking keyboard and mouse and don't mind how things look, then yes, it might be better value...
What were you hoping to do with it (when 16GB only offers a 10% speed boost compared to 8GB in the M1)?
I will order the $1299 iMac. Haven't used ethernet in years and the wifi6 could be better then the basic wifi(?), at least I see that my router supports wifi6 ... only about 12 feet away. I did check my storage needs and I am using about 180 GB but I need to clean off a bunch of 'old stuff' so probably need only 150 GB or less. Basically, I mostly use Apple apps ... lite office work with Numbers, Mail, Notes, and Safari. I do use Apple Music and the iCloud so some things are in those clouds (plus Mail). Don't have that much on the internal drive. Plus, I do need to archive some of the videos in Photos ... taking up the most room. Biggest app is Xcode (only 'lite' coding). So, with my 2017 iMac trade-in ... it looks like $1299 - 420 = $879. Of course, most people may not have a trade-in ... unless I am mixed up with how the trade-in works it looks good for me. -- just a low-level user. My only question is: which color?
Too bad it isn't 5 or 10gbE Ethernet, because that's pragmatically the only way that one is going to be able to have both a "clutter free" desktop and fast data I/O storage, since there are still no internal bays for accommodating various customer workflow use cases that need more than just 1-2TB.
This M-iMac could have easily been made 9mm thicker and been provisioned for a bank of NVMe (or even SATA) SSD's internally onboard, and no one outside of Apple would have complained that it wasn't thin enough.
Which is why we'll end up with a pile of ugly externals & their cable clutter, a self-pwn on its design aesthetics.
I’m not sure I understand. 200 dollars for one more core, Touch ID, and ethernet? That seems.... steep. Ah, wait, plus 2 USB ports. I’m still not sure that makes sense. Seems like up the RAM to 16GB, get a new power cable with ethernet, better deal than the next level up. All storage will have to be external.
In summary, I am good with 256 GB of storage (I have the 2 TB iCloud with the family) ... plus the back-ups with Time Machine will only be intermittent on the external disk ... therefore, the two USB/Thunderbolt ports are fine for my case. The ethernet is a non issue with my Wifi6, and the 8 GB of memory are good for me ... I mostly just use those optimized Apple applications. This design seems well balanced and having a slightly larger screen with better audio is really what I like ... if only those algorithms with the camera could smooth my wrinkles. For 1299 - 420 (old iMac trade-in) plus a color option ... perfect. I just wish there were those old rainbow stickers ... likely the only shortcoming with the purchase (I would pay more for the rainbow stickers to be included as an option).
I use the internal SSD mostly for my apps and some files and then the iCloud to sync though to other Macs and devices. I am not sure how the iCloud works ... but it seems to work fine ... I also clicked the box to sync my Desktop and Documents to the iCloud. Of course files are continually shuffled from the iCloud as needed. The back-up drive is for my archive and Time Machine syncs. The internet bandwidth I have is the mid-tier cable (up to 400 Mbps down and 20 Mbps up). So the Wifi handles that fine. I am more limited by the provider than the ethernet speed ... if I were to use ethernet. I am only worried about Wifi saturation with all the devices and computers, but it seems ok.
For those of you who don’t like the white bezels, Dbrand has a solution to convert them to black.
dbrand.com
dbrand » Official Shop
dbrand is the global leader in device customization. Founded on 11.11.11. Run by robots.
The previous iMac was 21” with a 4K Retina display.
This new model is 24” with 4.5K Retina display.
It is proportionally larger. Still keeps about the same amount of detail.
You need this kind of resolution to get the smooth rendering and detail of Retina.
My work laptop is a MacBook Pro with 256GB SSD and I’ve currently got 100GB free. If you are not keeping lots of photos or videos then 256GB is plenty. My home laptop is a M1 Air with 1TB and that holds my photos and other files. They give you options so you can configure it to match your needs. Obviously you need more than 256GB but don’t assume others need more.
The broader audience does not need what you want man. What the hell are you doing with 2TB of permanent storage that needs to be at your fingertips at any given moment?
The point of RAM is holding more data in memory, reducing the need for swap. Sure, this translates to speed since swap takes time, but it doesn't make processing of the current task faster. If you're switching between previewing and choosing photos in Lightroom, editing several large photos in Photoshop and placing them in InDesign, more RAM is definitely a plus. However, if you only perform one task at a time, with small enough files, more RAM will not provide any advantage at all.
Every time the kids get up to something and I get the camera out another 15-30 GB is added to my Lightroom library. Could I store it on a ~$550 external Samsung X5 drive? Sure, but internal storage is much more convenient, and potentially a little faster.
WiFi 6 is capable of a maximum throughput speed of 9.6 Gbps, whereas Gigabit Ethernet provides 1 Gbps. However, it is unlikely you will ever reach those wireless speeds in real-world use. I would personally always choose a wired connection if it is practical and convenient to do so, even if it is theoretically 10 times slower.
Last edited:
Being able to fit bigger storage capacity would have an impact on the design and would certainly expand supply and manufacturing flows impacting the overal manufacturing cost. This is an iMac, it's not a Mac Pro or a tower type computer that is super configurable.
Also, some people tend to over-dimension out of convenience, even laziness (I'm not saying you are). Every time I load my material from my camera onto my computer, the first thing I do is have a critical look at the material and get rid of anything that is useless. I did not that until I ran into a capacity issue and I'm pretty happy with the fact that this changed my workflow. It reduced my image library from 300GB down to 60GB and I have not yet come across an instance where is said "damn ... I shouldn't have deleted that".
That's a good question. Like my MacBook Pro, If I should decide later I want to add ethernet, couldn't I just use a USB/Ethernet dongle to the base level iMac?
Yes, you can. There are many options available for a few dollars, many in hubs that also provide USB-A, HDMI, audio, SD and more.
Or, you can spend $150 for an option that is 10 times faster than Apple offers on the 24" iMac:
OWC Thunderbolt 3 10G Ethernet Adapter
Connect your Thunderbolt 3 equipped Mac or PC to high-performance wired networks delivering up to 10x the performance of Gigabit Ethernet.
www.owcdigital.com
(The Mac Pro comes with two 10G ports standard, and one 10G port is a configurable option on the 5K iMac and Mac mini.)
Last edited:
Trying to answer the Wifi question. Here is my issue: Wifi congestion. I would say if you have a lot of devices trying to access that wifi router then a direct wired ethernet is definitely better. Also, I think wifi 6 was meant to try to deal with some of the issues of the wifi congestion, but it depends distance, obstructions, too. I am going to try it with just the wifi ... can always get the power block with ethernet later if my wifi isn't consistent.
Besides the totally new iMac design some people may wonder why one would need to trade-in a perfectly fine 2017 iMac (which stays connected to the wifi despite have many other devices connected, too)? Most iMacs are usually fine for 6 or 7 years. Reason: the iMac hard disk. So now, it is really an SSD world. Whereas in 2017 I bought the iMac with the Fusion drive thinking that little piece of SSD and terabyte drive would make it work like a SSD. Well, I found, first of all, I didn't need all that terabyte of storage space and second the tiny SSD didn't seem to cure the slowness of the spinning disk ... or, maybe it was something else? Really, a new iMac purchase, for me, is about getting an internal SSD with the latest Apple technology. Plus, the trade-in just makes so much sense $.