It depends how you define more powerful. Mac Pros do offer certain functionality that you can't fully duplicate in an imac. For a lot of people the imacs may be more practical, but the cpu bump will be quite modest compared to the laptops. If you don't believe me, check geekbench scores on the appropriate cpu types for yourself.
All of that doesn't change the fact : right now, getting the Retina display is essentially a cost free option at the spec levels of the machine. There is no reason to believe an iMac would use a different strategy.
Again : Just providing evidence to support the fact that a Retina iMac would not be more expensive than a comparably configured normal iMac following Apple's strategy for it in its other devices (iPhone/iPad/MBP).
You did notice all the posts in this thread saying an iMac would be ludicrously expensive with a Retina display right ?(and they keep posting this stuff, even after we keep refuting it. I think some people just post without reading the comments first).
I read the majority of the comments. There's no real way of knowing if yields would be high/cheap enough to make this currently viable. I kind of doubt it. Notebook displays like I said were inching up a lot faster even if Macbook Pros didn't always incorporate the highest resolution. They mostly stayed with stable designs. It'll be interesting to see what they do here. This is the first time I've seen them use a fully custom panel as opposed to just a custom implementation.
