is the iMac Pro still worth getting?

[techmeoutbaby]

I looking at the imac pro.

However the specs on it havent been updated since december of 2017. 2 years ago.

Is it still fairly up to date?

Think it will get a spec bump aytime soon?

 

[Pro7913]

nah dont buy it.

 

[SecuritySteve]

It's only worth it if you are purchasing it from a source other than Apple for a significant discount.

 

[techmeoutbaby]

It's only worth it if you are purchasing it from a source other than Apple for a significant discount.

would a refurbished imac pro from apple be considered a siginificant discount?

 

[SecuritySteve]

would a refurbished imac pro from apple be considered a siginificant discount?

It looks like you can get a refurb for up to 750$ off regular sticker price. That seems significant to me. Kinda depends on the deal though. What specs are you aiming for?

 

[jerwin]

Depends on the spec. If it's base-- sure, the fully loaded imac (i9, vega 48) is, by comparison, a really good deal. But if you need a vega 64, or a 10, or 14, or 18 core processor, there's no alternative but to get an imac pro (or a loaded mac pro).

 

[zedsdead]

best deal on them right now.

https://ipowerresale.com/product/27-imac-pro-8-core-3-2-5k-late-2017-space-gray-2/

However the components are two years old and with the release of the Mac Pro it’s possible the iMac pro will see a spec bump. There have been no real rumors about it though.

 

[CWallace]

Intel has (finally) released a new generation of the Xeon processor used in the iMac Pro (W-2200) and AMD has released a new GPU family so I expect the iMac Pro will see a spec-bump within the next six months or so.

 

[satchmo]

I wouldn’t be surprised when the Mac Pro finally ships, that the iMac Pro is killed off. It basically bridged the two product lines when the trash can MacPro was removed.

The top of the line (i9 iMac) suits most prosumers. That small audience requiring something in between the two is so niche, I’m not sure it’s worth keeping it in the product line.

 

[techmeoutbaby]

Intel has (finally) released a new generation of the Xeon processor used in the iMac Pro (W-2200) and AMD has released a new GPU family so I expect the iMac Pro will see a spec-bump within the next six months or so.

thats to long of a wait XD

 

[ondert]

I wouldn’t pay more than 3500€\$\£ for it. Intel has already refreshed the cpu line suits for iMac Pro and cut the prices to half thanks to AMD Ryzen. AMD has also Navi gpus.
If it isn’t urgent I would wait but even then it is not certain if we’ll see a new iMP while Mac Pro is waiting at the door.

 

[nihil0]

I wouldn’t be surprised when the Mac Pro finally ships, that the iMac Pro is killed off. It basically bridged the two product lines when the trash can MacPro was removed.

The top of the line (i9 iMac) suits most prosumers. That small audience requiring something in between the two is so niche, I’m not sure it’s worth keeping it in the product line.

I wouldn't be surprised when they will do it and bring that thermal and space gray design and call it iMac 2020 (the internals will be of course of consumer CPUs & GPUs, non-ECC RAM and so on).

 

[CWallace]

I wouldn’t be surprised when the Mac Pro finally ships, that the iMac Pro is killed off. It basically bridged the two product lines when the trash can MacPro was removed.

An entry level iMac Pro is $1000 cheaper than an entry-level Mac Pro, has better specs in most areas, and includes a monitor that is an over $1000 option on the Mac Pro. For software developers and folks who do lots of audio editing (podcasters, etc.) it's a perfect machine and it works very well for folks editing 2K/4K video.

So I expect the iMac Pro to remain in the line-up as it's market (especially "prosumer") is unlikely to spend significantly more for a Mac Pro.

thats to long of a wait XD.

Well the long-poles in the tent will be how quickly Intel and AMD can ramp their production to provide enough chips.

 

[techmeoutbaby]

An entry level iMac Pro is $1000 cheaper than an entry-level Mac Pro, has better specs in most areas, and includes a monitor that is an over $1000 option on the Mac Pro. For software developers and folks who do lots of audio editing (podcasters, etc.) it's a perfect machine and it works very well for folks editing 2K/4K video.

So I expect the iMac Pro to remain in the line-up as it's market (especially "prosumer") is unlikely to spend significantly more for a Mac Pro.




Well the long-poles in the tent will be how quickly Intel and AMD can ramp their production to provide enough chips.

would u say base model specs would be sufficient for 4k video editign with final cut? particularly the 8gb video memory and 8 core base CPU?

 

[CWallace]

would u say base model specs would be sufficient for 4k video editign with final cut? particularly the 8gb video memory and 8 core base CPU?

Based on threads in this forum and web articles and videos, it seems to do well for H.264 and exceptionally well for H.265 (thanks to the T2 chip).

 

[satchmo]

An entry level iMac Pro is $1000 cheaper than an entry-level Mac Pro, has better specs in most areas, and includes a monitor that is an over $1000 option on the Mac Pro. For software developers and folks who do lots of audio editing (podcasters, etc.) it's a perfect machine and it works very well for folks editing 2K/4K video.

And the high-end iMac is $1000 cheaper than the entry-level iMac Pro and does 80-90% of what most developers and even video editors need.
Like I said, the iMac Pro is a very niche product.

 

[xgman]

This is probably the first time I am in no hurry for a new mac model because of the forced catalina.

 

[CWallace]

And the high-end iMac is $1000 cheaper than the entry-level iMac Pro and does 80-90% of what most developers and even video editors need. Like I said, the iMac Pro is a very niche product.

Yes it is, but that niche is large enough that I expect Apple to keep offering it.

 

[satchmo]

Yes it is, but that niche is large enough that I expect Apple to keep offering it.

Who knows. I guess we’ll see how well the iMac Pro sales are once the Mac Pro is shipping.

I suspect many who are considering the iMac Pro (and remember, these are pros), won’t think twice about spending an additional $1K for a machine that is fully expandable and is an investment for years to come. The same can’t be said about the iMac Pro.

 

[richinaus]

I have the iMac Pro and it is by far the best Apple product I have ever owned [and I have had a lot]. The experience is far better than an imac simply because of cooling, when the computer is pushed.

However if the new macpro had existed when I bought it I would have been much happier to buy that even if it is more $$. The all in one solution is annoying and I already want a better Dgpu.

 

[SecuritySteve]

I have the iMac Pro and it is by far the best Apple product I have ever owned [and I have had a lot]. The experience is far better than an imac simply because of cooling, when the computer is pushed.

However if the new macpro had existed when I bought it I would have been much happier to buy that even if it is more $$. The all in one solution is annoying and I already want a better Dgpu.

I am in the same boat. I love my iMac Pro ... but boy do I wish I could upgrade the Dgpu.

 

[danwells]

The other machine that plays in here (against the base iMac Pro, not the 14 and 18 core versions) is the 16" MacBook Pro. 64 GB of RAM, a decent GPU and a semi-reasonably priced 4TB drive option (8TB for a king's ransom). I like having all of my photographic work on a laptop, because I move it around quite a bit. I just got a new 16" (maxed except for 4TB instead of 8TB).

All the CPU and storage tests are within shockingly little (~10%) of the iMac Pro - but it runs on batteries (not for long at full power, but for a very reasonable amount of time in lighter use).

This is obviously in part an artifact of the old processors in the iMac Pro - a laptop shouldn't be close - but it's also that Apple did a really nice job on the 16" MBP...

 

[Nugget]

The other machine that plays in here (against the base iMac Pro, not the 14 and 18 core versions) is the 16" MacBook Pro. 64 GB of RAM, a decent GPU and a semi-reasonably priced 4TB drive option (8TB for a king's ransom). I like having all of my photographic work on a laptop, because I move it around quite a bit. I just got a new 16" (maxed except for 4TB instead of 8TB).

You and I bought the exact same spec. It's a great machine, definitely the best laptop I've ever used. But if you don't have a need to haul it around quite a bit, it's a significant compromise when compared to an desktop machine.

All the CPU and storage tests are within shockingly little (~10%) of the iMac Pro - but it runs on batteries (not for long at full power, but for a very reasonable amount of time in lighter use).

Sure, but as soon as you press the CPU or GPU into service the fans spin up to 3500rpm and it starts sounding like a petite hair dryer. I always feel guilty when I do something intensive on my MBP because I see those CPU temps creep up past 90C and the fans are trying their hardest to keep things working smoothly. I can't imagine kicking off an hour-long render or huge compile on this thing. Plug up an external monitor and you're stuck using the dGPU instead of the integrated graphics and that's an extra 15W or so of heat that needs to be dissipated.

Don't get me wrong, I love this little laptop. I've switched to it full time (retiring my old trash can Mac Pro) but I'm definitely still in the market for a modern Mac desktop.

The joy of the iMac Pro is that you can flog it and still work in silence.

 

[AlexMaximus]

would u say base model specs would be sufficient for 4k video editign with final cut? particularly the 8gb video memory and 8 core base CPU?

I am flirting with the iMac Pro as well. For your needs, I think it would be an excellent fit, especially if you can get it for 3500 US$ on the webpage stated above. You will have twice as many Thunderbolt 3 ports, a better cooling system and overall a better GPU with faster HBM2 GPU memory. Unfortunately, I can not pick one up in Europe for such a low price point.

 

[techmeoutbaby]

I am flirting with the iMac Pro as well. For your needs, I think it would be an excellent fit, especially if you can get it for 3500 US$ on the webpage stated above. You will have twice as many Thunderbolt 3 ports, a better cooling system and overall a better GPU with faster HBM2 GPU memory. Unfortunately, I can not pick one up in Europe for such a low price point.

do you guys think the base model of the imac pro is sufficient? the only real thing im conteplating on upgrade is the graphics card, to jump from 8gb to 16gb.

upgrading the 1tb to 2tb of memory would be nice, but its over 400 dollar jump :O