What's Next for the iMac? What We Know on a New Design, M3 Chip, and More

[RSB96]

In my case I've been waiting for that big iMac with the M1/M2 Pro for two years.

In the end I ended up buying the Studio Display and the Mac Studio M1 Max 10CPU/24GPU and 32GB unified memory with 1TB SSD. Seeing the price hikes in Europe, and that there is absolutely no word on that supposed iMac "Pro" or the Mac mini "M2 Pro" and the price they might have... I decided to go ahead and buy the Mac Studio, which is an incredible device and exceeds in power the use I'm going to give it, but it is an incredible device.

I've always been a fan of the iMac, I like its minimalism, that with one cable you have everything in its place. I like its aesthetics, and it is a perfect device as a home and semi-professional equipment.

The 24" iMac fell short for me both in power and screen size, and I have always lacked that "plus" in desktop computers. For me, the M1 Pro would have been enough, but it's only available on the MacBook Pro, and I don't want a laptop, I want a desktop.

A 27" iMac with the M1 Pro would be great, and has been rumored for years, but in the end wait and wait for something that does not come, like the mac mini "M1/M2 Pro" and more now that every time they renew products they raise prices in Europe exorbitantly ... I did not want to keep waiting for three reasons:

- Nothing indicates that this device is going to come out (neither the iMac "Pro" nor the Mac mini M2 Pro).
- The price that both devices would have. Seeing how prices are rising in Europe, surely the Mac mini M2 Pro with some extra would cost about the same as the base Mac Studio. And an iMac Pro I don't think it would go below 2500 euros for the most entry-level option.
- That price increase will affect the rest of the devices, even if they are not updated, such as the Mac Studio and the Studio Display, which could rise in price in Europe more than 400 euros, seeing what has been seen with the iPad Pro and the iPhone 14 Pro/Pro Max.

I'm sure if they do eventually bring out a "Pro" iMac it will be a great device and will be spectacular in every way, but it has taken too long to come out, if it comes out at all in the near future. The same goes for the supposed Mac mini "M1/M2 Pro".

 

[Boidem]

In my case I've been waiting for that big iMac with the M1/M2 Pro for two years.

In the end I ended up buying the Studio Display and the Mac Studio M1 Max 10CPU/24GPU and 32GB unified memory with 1TB SSD. Seeing the price hikes in Europe, and that there is absolutely no word on that supposed iMac "Pro" or the Mac mini "M2 Pro" and the price they might have... I decided to go ahead and buy the Mac Studio, which is an incredible device and exceeds in power the use I'm going to give it, but it is an incredible device.

Fairs. I'd been contemplating a new Mac for some years, but the MacPro kept chugging along. In the end, it's woefully inadequate graphics led to me deciding to replace it; it could barely cope with a lot of web content, couldn't display anything beyond 1080p video, and was struggling with files from my camera, so I needed something with better capability. The MacMini was a big improvement in the graphics dept, and could be updated to the latest OS. The MP was stuck on OSX 7.5! A bit sad because in other respects, the MP was very capable indeed. But the move to the M1 iMac was a revelation. So, so much more capable. I'm glad the Mac Studio came out after I'd bought the iMac, because I'd have been very tempted by that, would have spent a shedload more money, and ended up with a computer that was far more capable than I needed, so it would have been somewhat wasteful tbh.

For me, the actual worst bit of the waiting was between ordering the new iMac, and it actually being delivered. 2 months. That 2 months was harder than the previous 2 years! 🤣

 

[RSB96]

Fairs. I'd been contemplating a new Mac for some years, but the MacPro kept chugging along. In the end, it's woefully inadequate graphics led to me deciding to replace it; it could barely cope with a lot of web content, couldn't display anything beyond 1080p video, and was struggling with files from my camera, so I needed something with better capability. The MacMini was a big improvement in the graphics dept, and could be updated to the latest OS. The MP was stuck on OSX 7.5! A bit sad because in other respects, the MP was very capable indeed. But the move to the M1 iMac was a revelation. So, so much more capable. I'm glad the Mac Studio came out after I'd bought the iMac, because I'd have been very tempted by that, would have spent a shedload more money, and ended up with a computer that was far more capable than I needed, so it would have been somewhat wasteful tbh.

For me, the actual worst bit of the waiting was between ordering the new iMac, and it actually being delivered. 2 months. That 2 months was harder than the previous 2 years! 🤣

In my case I tested some M1 computers and in some aspects it was short in comparison with the 2013 iMac I had, especially in the graphics section. That was the main reason for not buying the iMac 24" (in addition to the screen size, since I was used to 27" and 24" makes me a bit small).

As I say, for my use, the M1 Pro would be my ideal processor, since the Max is a beast that I will rarely be able to take advantage of. But I'd rather go a little over than under, since in the end these are computers that are worth a lot of money (a Mac mini M1 top in Europe is around 1600 euros approximately and the Mac Studio has cost me around 1900) and Macs are devices that I put up with for a long time (my iMac was around 9 years old).

For me the iMac is one of my favorite devices, but it's a pity that they haven't released a bigger and more powerful version than the 24". I guess it will come out in the medium term, but maybe it's more wish than reality.

 

[Boidem]

In my case I tested some M1 computers and in some aspects it was short in comparison with the 2013 iMac I had, especially in the graphics section

In what way? The new iMac graphics supports a 6k external display. As well as having nearly twice the on board screen resolution. And a lot more ooomph in terms of graphics processing and memory.

 

[RSB96]

In what way? The new iMac graphics supports a 6k external display. As well as having nearly twice the on board screen resolution. And a lot more ooomph in terms of graphics processing and memory.

Playing games.

Yes, I play with a mac often, there is not much variety and I know it would be better to have a gamer computer, but I want a computer "for everything" and I value having macOS. And although some games go very well on the M1, it is not to play hours of sustained play, after a while you start to notice slowdowns and starts to run a little worse than on my old iMac 2013 with the graphics at medium / high level.

However, the M1 Max runs everything with far superior graphics (high/ultra) and sustained over hours, without dropping fps or overheating (in fact, I haven't heard it louder than it usually sounds).

 

[wolf amri]

Anyone else thinks it is super weird that you can’t get a decent 24“ display on the market but are forced to buy a 27“, while Apple decides to only produce 24“ models.
I like to work with 2 displays. 2x27“ is too big, so I can neither get the Mac studio, nor the iMacs.

 

[Steve121178]

My late 2012 iMac is on its last legs. I had hoped to replace it with a new M2 iMac this year but it looks like I might have to wait well in to next year before a new iMac is released. Makes little sense to buy an M1 iMac now this late into its lifespan.

I have a feeling the 24" iMac will get a very minor refresh, probably nothing more than a CPU upgrade. Meanwhile the 27" version will be the "Pro" model and cost a ludicrous amount of money.

 

[escargot3]

The iMac Pro should be an Ultrawide 32:9 curved with retina resolution. Such a display does not exist yet, but has been announced as the new Samsung Odyssey G9 8K in early 2023.

They would basically compete with just one product on Earth. Perfect timing.

It won’t be retina. It’s only 8K horizontal. It will still be a relatively low vertical resolution. It’s not “true” 8K and even if it were it still wouldn’t be close to retina at the size of 49”.

 

[PsykX]

It won’t be retina. It’s only 8K horizontal. It will still be a relatively low vertical resolution. It’s not “true” 8K and even if it were it still wouldn’t be close to retina at the size of 49”.

Yeah I heard about this horizontal thing, but I was confused.
How can they have a pixel density horizontally and a different one vertically ? Their pixels will be rectangular ? Never heard of that before.

 

[escargot3]

Yeah I heard about this horizontal thing, but I was confused.
How can they have a pixel density horizontally and a different one vertically ? Their pixels will be rectangular ? Never heard of that before.

They don’t have a different pixel density. The density is the same across both axes. If a 49” display were to have a true 8K resolution (7680x4320) it still wouldn’t be retina, as that would only be a PPI of just under 180. But this forthcoming display is going to have an even lower resolution than that (perhaps as low as 7680x1400 or something anemic like that), so the pixel density will be even lower. Basically they are passing off a display as “8K” when it’s not.

The horizontal resolution is only so high because the display is so wide. Basically it will look like two non-retina displays next to each other, with no seam in the middle. If you put two HD displays next to each other, you don’t get a 4K display either, but rather just the same pixel density as HD but twice as wide a workspace.

 

[George Dawes]

I'd like the logo put back on the front please

 

[PsykX]

They don’t have a different pixel density. The density is the same across both axes. If a 49” display were to have a true 8K resolution (7680x4320) it still wouldn’t be retina, as that would only be a PPI of just under 180. But this forthcoming display is going to have an even lower resolution than that (perhaps as low as 7680x1400 or something anemic like that), so the pixel density will be even lower. Basically they are passing off a display as “8K” when it’s not.

The horizontal resolution is only so high because the display is so wide. Basically it will look like two non-retina displays next to each other, with no seam in the middle. If you put two HD displays next to each other, you don’t get a 4K display either, but rather just the same pixel density as HD but twice as wide a workspace.

The current resolution is 5,120 x 1,440.

I don't know how they can increase the resolution horizontally without increasing it vertically. If they do this, the pixels will be rectangles instead of squares.

I did the calculation and I suspect it will rather be 7,680 x 2,160. It will look as sharp as a retina display from your seat, and while I agree that a retina display still has a higher ppi density, at this point Samsung's biggest flaw will be fixed in my book and this monitor will finally fall in the category of "good purchases" for a Mac user in 2023. If the computer can handle the resolution that is.

 

[John Frum]

After thermal issues crippled my last 2 iMacs, I swore them off as a poor, doomed design. (If I hadn't ordered them with an internal hard drive for backup in addition to main SSD things might not have gotten so hot, but that's a lesson learned too late.) With the advent of the M series chips and ultra big, ultrafast SSDs, things are much better now. I'm happier with my Mac mini (now Studio) strategy, though—including reusing a monitor that's more cost-effective to begin with.

 

[Boidem]

I'd like the logo put back on the front please

Why? One of the best things aobut the new iMac (well not really but in terms ofdesign and aesthetics) is the lack of any brand logo. I like the Apple logo, from a design point of view but it's nice to not be forced to see it all the time. The lack of easily visible logos across Apple's lineup (from the perspective of the user at least) is a big plus imo. Viewed from the front, none of the current Mac lineup with displays, including the two displays themselves, have user facing Apple logos I think. And even the Mac Mini and Studio only have them on the top. Nice. I prefer it that the Apple design vernacular is strong enough to not need so many logos.

 

[escargot3]

I did the calculation and I suspect it will rather be 7,680 x 2,160. It will look as sharp as a retina display from your seat

I think that is some wishful thinking on your part. That will still be a relatively low PPI of about 162. It will certainly look less bad than the previous (fake) "5K" version, but not even close to retina. It needs to be over 200ppi at least. They are thinly spreading roughly the same number of pixels of the 5K iMac/studio display (which is 27") across a 49" display. Even the 32" Pro Display XDR had to go to 20 million pixels to retain retina pixel density at just 32".

 

[MachooB]

A 27" at 5K will be an instant buy from me. I downsized from my old Intel-based iMac 5K last year to the M1 24" iMac, and the only thing I miss about it is the screen real estate. To me, it's like going from a king-sized bed to a queen: basically big enough but you can't really spread out the way you want.

Me to... but i'm about to defect to a PC. My old 27" is far to slow. Been waiting on this upgrade for 2 years.

 

[xjam13]

Apple released the all-new 24-inch iMac with the M1 chip in April 2021, making it over a year and a half old at this point. As a result, customers may wonder what's next for the iMac and Apple's all-in-one desktop computer.

We've heard several rumors and reports on what Apple has in store, offering us a good idea of what's next, and we've outlined some of the details we know about the upcoming iMac's design, performance, and more below.

Pro or No Pro?

Apple released a 27-inch iMac Pro in 2017, its answer at the time to professional customers who wanted a powerful all-in-one desktop from Apple. Apple discontinued the baseline 27-inch iMac in March 2022 after the launch of the Mac Studio and the 27-inch Studio Display. After its discontinuation, sources were conflicted on whether Apple's next large-screen 27-inch iMac will be branded as a "Pro" product or simply branded as a larger version of the consumer-focused iMac.

Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo believes an "iMac Pro" will launch next year, while other reports say Apple has no plans to release a larger-screened iMac anytime soon. Apple's plans are often shifting, so it's unclear what Apple's current plan is.

Two iMacs in the Works

Apple is working on two new iMacs: a larger-screened model with a 27-inch display and an update to the current 24-inch model. For the current 24-inch model, Apple is reportedly planning to keep the M1 model in the lineup until later in 2023 and then possibly introduce a new version with the M3 chip.

The updated 24-inch iMac could feature the same design and footprint but benefit from the M3 chip. Apple recently introduced the M2 chip in June of this year, so M3 is still a ways off.

'iMac Pro' Design and Performance

The new addition to the iMac family, whether it be called an "iMac Pro" or not, will feature the M3 Pro and M3 Max chips, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. The chips will be the third generation of Apple silicon and build on the performance of the upcoming M2 Pro and M2 Max chips, which are expected to power updated 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pros.

As for the display and design, the larger iMac could adopt the same display technology currently in Apple's highest-end MacBook Pros models consisting of mini-LED and ProMotion. Apple has also tested Face ID for the Mac, but it's unlikely that'll be coming anytime soon.

When Apple announced the 24-inch iMac with M1, it touted the computer's thin design as a tribute to Apple silicon's performance and efficiency compared to the larger motherboard and thermal system needed for Intel-based iMacs.

As for the "iMac Pro," it's not entirely clear what design the desktop will have. Apple could opt to create a thin enclosure while still offering the performance of the M3 Pro and M3 Max chips or make a larger, thicker, and heavier "pro" system, similar to the 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pros. Some rumors have suggested the 27-inch iMac will have a similar design as the Pro Display XDR with black bezels.

Article Link: What's Next for the iMac? What We Know on a New Design, M3 Chip, and More

 

[xjam13]

I am still running a 2013 imac 27". Just added a new HD, because Apple doesn't sell a current 27" imac. I'm waiting, and I will buy one when and if they release it. The only problem I have with my now decade old mac is that it won't run the latest OS. But it runs and does what I need it to do. It's the longest running computer I've ever had, and if it would upgrade to the current OS, even if slow, I'd keep it another ten years.