Question for the Pros

[One Still Sheep]

I'm not a current iMac owner, but a forlorn, and somewhat disgruntled, Mac Pro user. I like the idea of having everything crammed into the screen (though I do worry about the heat), but I've never bought an iMac because I've suspected that it just didn't offer the power I needed for serious video work. However, after waiting for so long for an update, I can feel myself being seduced by the iMac, and I may just give in and by an AIO, if it meets my expectations for a high-end desktop computer.

So my question for the Pro users lurking about is simply, what will Apple need to bring to the table this Tuesday in order for you to not wait until the (somewhat mythical) 2013 Pro update?

As I said before, I like the idea of something smaller (not a smaller iMac, but smaller as compared to a workstation), but it would need a decent video card, and the ability to upgrade certain features. Of course, it also would need to be a decent price, I can't justify a $3500 iMac, even if it means another six months of God-awful render times.

So what would it take for you to abandon the tower?

 

[12dylan34]

So I'm not precisely your target user for the question, but I could use the power of a 12 core Mac Pro, but I'm a poor college student and can't afford it.

Honestly, I'm just getting the iMac because it's a better value than the Mac Pro, even though it's slower. You get basically a quad core Mac Pro (actually it might be in line with the hex core) and a good quality 27 inch screen for about the same price as the lowest Mac Pro. You also will get USB 3.0, thunderbolt, and newer processors that produce less heat.

The only disadvantages that I would say are: I gets hot, which may or may not lead to speed throttling (I honestly don't know) and it has limited power. It also doesn't have any PCI slots if that's important to you.

I would go for it if you're having agonizing render times like me. You can also sell it at a loss of only like $200-$300 when the 2013 Mac Pro is released.

 

[Lone Deranger]

So what would it take for you to abandon the tower?

More than any iMac could offer. At the very least, they should offer a non glossy display that can either be calibrated through external hardware, or, like some of the high end Eizo displays, can calibrate itself.
It should also improve upon the current dual core Hex CPU offerings found in the 2010 Mac Pros, and be able to run 24x7 at full throttle without becoming noisy, and have the ability to take on board at least 8 sticks of Ram and a few extra HD slots.

None of that looks even remotely likely, so I'll bide my time and "make do" with the 2010 MP.

 

[One Still Sheep]

[...]and be able to run 24x7 at full throttle without becoming noisy,

Out of curiousuty, how loud do iMacs get when going full tilt (as compared to either standard desktops or workstations)? I've only ever done light tasks on an iMac, I've never pushed it to render for hours.

 

[Lone Deranger]

Out of curiousuty, how loud do iMacs get when going full tilt (as compared to either standard desktops or workstations)? I've only ever done light tasks on an iMac, I've never pushed it to render for hours.

I don't know. I don't own one. But I've heard mixed reports from those that do. Some say they remain pleasantly quiet, while others claim the opposite.
With a Mac Pro you can bet your bottom dollar that even after three days (or more) of solid rendering with all cores firing at 100%, it'll be no louder than at any other moment.

I think the heat build-up itself would indeed be a greater concern for the iMac than any potential noise problem associated with it. That is to say I can't see an iMac standing 5,6... 7+ years of heavy "abuse" like a Mac Pro can.