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.
is the iMac Pro still worth getting?
- Thread starter techmeoutbaby
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A friend has one, which I've used extensively... He bought it well before the 2019 iMac came out, and it was a reasonable value against the 2017 iMac because it's close to twice as fast. It's a darned nice machine. The only problem buying it today is the value proposition. Against the 2019 iMac configured similarly, you gain a few specialty features - a modest GPU bump, dual Thunderbolt 3 busses and 10 GB Ethernet, and somewhat better cooling. You can get a 2019 iMac with the 9900K, Vega 48, 1 TB of fast SSD and 32 GB of RAM for about $3600 (buying the RAM from OWC - it's easy to pop in).
If you can get the iMac Pro under about $4000-$4200 (occasional sales bring it that low, especially for a refurb - but occasionally brand new), the extras may well be worth it, but not at or near $5000 unless you REALLY need something that was left out of the 2019 iMac.
The other Mac that plays with the value proposition is the 16" MBP. It can be configured right into base iMac Pro territory, and it's right around $4000 once you've upgraded everything except the storage (you can pay as much as $2000+ more for really big SSDs). I've had a high-end one for only about a week, but it's certainly the best laptop I've had the pleasure of using, and it's (early days) right up there on the list of "best Macs...".
The CPU-upgraded iMac Pros will run away from anything Apple makes (except the new Mac Pro) in heavily threaded applications - but they're VERY expensive until Apple adapts to Intel's new CPU pricing. Once the upgrades are priced at 2019 levels, a high-core count iMac Pro could be attractive for uses that need the cores.
If you can get the iMac Pro under about $4000-$4200 (occasional sales bring it that low, especially for a refurb - but occasionally brand new), the extras may well be worth it, but not at or near $5000 unless you REALLY need something that was left out of the 2019 iMac.
The other Mac that plays with the value proposition is the 16" MBP. It can be configured right into base iMac Pro territory, and it's right around $4000 once you've upgraded everything except the storage (you can pay as much as $2000+ more for really big SSDs). I've had a high-end one for only about a week, but it's certainly the best laptop I've had the pleasure of using, and it's (early days) right up there on the list of "best Macs...".
The CPU-upgraded iMac Pros will run away from anything Apple makes (except the new Mac Pro) in heavily threaded applications - but they're VERY expensive until Apple adapts to Intel's new CPU pricing. Once the upgrades are priced at 2019 levels, a high-core count iMac Pro could be attractive for uses that need the cores.
extra $1k? hardly, especially when taking into consideration of needing a monitor.maybe over the abosolute base model MP, but even then...
I am also considering an iMacPro as a replacement for my 5,1. I've checked all the opportunities and came along with these possibilities (with local prices):
For all: 32GB RAM, 5K monitor (LG5K) & ext. keyboard & mouse (where no Monitor&Keyboard is incl.), 1TB SSD. I have:
MacMini (with eGPU Verga 56): 5500.-
MBP 16": 5300.-
iMacPro (8 cores): 4850.-
MacPro (8 cores): 8300.-
iMac (i9;vega 48): 4300.-
Doing Webdesign, Programming, Photoshop stuff etc.
Would you recommend the iMacPro?
For all: 32GB RAM, 5K monitor (LG5K) & ext. keyboard & mouse (where no Monitor&Keyboard is incl.), 1TB SSD. I have:
MacMini (with eGPU Verga 56): 5500.-
MBP 16": 5300.-
iMacPro (8 cores): 4850.-
MacPro (8 cores): 8300.-
iMac (i9;vega 48): 4300.-
Doing Webdesign, Programming, Photoshop stuff etc.
Would you recommend the iMacPro?
Apple should be able to spec-bump the current-design iMac Pro soon now that the new W-2200 series Xeon CPUs and new AMD GPUs are starting to ship.
If they really are going for an overall redesign next year, then I agree WDCC 2020 is probably the place they will show it.
If they really are going for an overall redesign next year, then I agree WDCC 2020 is probably the place they will show it.
Last edited:
ok, but what other specs will it have? New CPUs are not around and the 5500/5700 is not that much faster to justify paying 6500 instead of 4850. I really don't need that much GPU power. I have no time for gaming and I am not working in the video business. It is more a question of having a good retina monitor along with a good Mac to a reasonable price that lasts the next 3-4 years.
Sure, there are new CPUs (November 19)
https://www.macrumors.com/2019/10/07/intel-xeon-chips-imac-pro/
It will assuredly move to the Titan Ridge TB3 controller so it will be able to directly connect to the XDR Pro Display. Not sure if the Mac Pro's SSD storage is any faster, but if it is, I would expect that to be added, as well.
Not discard apple to move to more powerful, safe, efficient and "in-house" baked semi-custom AMD Zen 2 Threadripper 3 APU/ CPU-GPU combo, as Intel is no more the "Halo" CPU it used to be and given latest macOS evidence Apple is testing Zen based Apu (which implies CPU) and given AMD license it's Zen IP like ARM does with A-x and T-x this will enable to manufacturer it's own (likely semi custom) CPU with it's excedent waffers at GloFo.
Thunderbolt 3 is no more an Intel exclusive, and given Ryzen/Threadripper TDP (and 7nm) is an advantage within the thermally constrained iMac form factor, also releases the user's to choose among ECC and non ECC udimm, with the same roof upto 256GB, in an fully 7nm-pcie4 setup, with no supply shortage.
Major obstacle for an Zen based iMac Pro is it will be cheaper and faster than every Mac Pro configuration only short on Max RAM but this likely not an issue for 95% pro users.
In a semi-custom APU apple could order 8-32 core configurations (Zen 2) and which ever GPU from Vega II to rx5700xt all into the same APU complex also with deeper T2 (t3) integration for increased security and better management.
Ryzen 3000 series offers CPU/APU options with upto 32 CPU pcie 4 lines (good for a full 16x GPU, 2/4 tb3 Titan ridge headers and 2 pcie 4 SSD).
While TRX 40, provided 64 pcie4 CPU lines (exceeding the needed by iMac Pro), but no APU configurations, that only implies mandatory discreet GPU soldered to the motherboard with an independent cooling system.
Last edited:
I was hoping my new 16” 2.4/64GB/8GBVRAM/4TB would come really close to my near maxed out 10 core iMac Pro in terms of things like raw file exports and other heavy photo and video lifting but it simply does not.
All in all my iMac Pro still crushes it doing things in substantially less time. I can’t help but wonder if it is Catalina but in reality, the much higher price tag of a Mac Pro and monitor make the iMac Pro about one of the all time best computer investments I have ever made.
I’ll use it at least another two years and then decide if I want to either have OWC upgrade the ram to 256GB or move to a new Mac Pro for about $20K
I'm very happy with mine (8 core, 64 gb RAM, 2 tb SSD, Vega 64) for the same reason I loved my Mac Pro 5,1. It works quietly and then when I ask it to do something like export a 40 minute 4k video or have Lightroom make 1:1 previews of 900 D850 images -- it just does it.
I like never worrying about what's going to happen or how it's going to handle some difficult task.
Can't say I liked the price tag, though. So there's that.
I like never worrying about what's going to happen or how it's going to handle some difficult task.
Can't say I liked the price tag, though. So there's that.
Just for fun I priced an iMac i9 vs a refurb iMP. The i9 was a little bit cheaper than a refurb base iMP ($3623 v $3824 iMP). Given that price differential I’d go for the iMP - better cooling, T2, etc.
However - the i9 I configured as new (can’t configure refurbs) and the iMP was a refurb. I also included Apple RAM, not 3rd party, which adds ~$200 to the i9. Also, I’m going through the veterans/military store, so both may look lower price-wise than they will to many people.
However - the i9 I configured as new (can’t configure refurbs) and the iMP was a refurb. I also included Apple RAM, not 3rd party, which adds ~$200 to the i9. Also, I’m going through the veterans/military store, so both may look lower price-wise than they will to many people.
do you guys think the imac p
I am flirting with the iMac Pro as well. For your needs, I think it would be an excellent fit, especially if you can get it for 3500 US$ 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 imac pro is still worth getting at this time? i like it, but dam, specs from december 2017 is really turning me off given its what 2 years old now? technology times thats a long time passed. in canada its gonna be at least just $6500 with taxes and the onl y upgrade im doing is changing the graphics card from 8gb to 16gb since im assuming it would help improve final cut pro . cpu, ram, and ssd are fine.
its also funny the imac pro can work with the new apple pro XDR display....but only drive 5k on it not 6k
I wonder if Apple will even update the iMac Pro or try to steer those to the Mac Pro. They probably don't need to invest the R&D effort for both the iMac Pro and Mac Pro given the quantity of their "Pro" machines they sell compared to the rest of their Mac line up.
If you can wait, I would wait...Apple will either refresh it in Q1/2020 or at WWDC in June.
If you can’t wait, go to OWC(Macsales.com) and buy an Apple Certified Refurbished iMac Pro. They only offer the 8-core version ($3,649.00), so if you want something better, then you have to head to Apple.com and find refurbished 10-, 14- and 18-core models there.
I would NOT recommend anyone buy a brand new iMac Pro from Apple or a reseller unless they get a whopping discount. We’re just too close to a refresh with Cascade Lake Xeon W-22xx CPUs to spend that kind of coin. Plus,the iMac needs newer GPUs and 512GB DRAM capability and those are gimmes now that the Mac Pro is out.
No I wouldn't get one, it's 2 year old machine and while still really powerful, their are new chips out that would be perfect replacements, plus new AMD graphics cards. I would wait it out personally. Unless you really need it right now (then it shouldn't be a question imo, just buy it)
Let's not forget that the regular iMac is coming up to 1 year old in March. Although the CPUs may not get a refresh if Apple refresh in March (9th generation CPUs aren't that much of a boost over the 8th generation) I think Apple would use AMD 5500/5700 GPUs and given the drop in price of NAND storage they could actually go all SSD and get rid of Fusion drives.
If they delay the iMac refresh until October 2020 then Comet Lake S (another 10Nm iteration) could come into play with Hyperthreading on i5 as well as i7 CPUs. This would be seen as a significant boost in performance but would also bring the iMac benchmarks closer to the iMac Pro.
The iMac Pro CPUs have been superseded as mentioned in this thread already. Apple would need to engineer a new motherboard too and we'd obviously get the powerful AMD GPUs and maybe more storage for the money as standard seeing as Apple seem to have got good deals on NAND if you look at the MacBook Pro 16" specs (double the storage for no additional cost).
For me, I'd like to see Apple introduce a lower entry iMac Pro to replace the top SKU 27" iMac - it would help them justify the cost of re-engineering an iMac Pro refresh.
The forthcoming Comet Lake S CPUs allegedly start with 6 cores/12 threads as i5, through 8 cores/16 threads as i7, and then 10 cores/20 threads on i9. This could, in theory, see an appropriately specified iMac able to compete with the 8 and 10 core versions of the iMac Pro.
If they go all SSD on the 2020 27" iMac they could just as easily kill off the iMac Pro and use the same engineering solutions to go with Comet Lake-S (up to 10 cores/20 threads) with the i9 and AMD 5300/5500/5700. Obviously there would be an issue with locking away the RAM, but it's a good time for Apple to consider making 16Gb of RAM standard on the 27" if they have to lock it away.
If they delay the iMac refresh until October 2020 then Comet Lake S (another 10Nm iteration) could come into play with Hyperthreading on i5 as well as i7 CPUs. This would be seen as a significant boost in performance but would also bring the iMac benchmarks closer to the iMac Pro.
The iMac Pro CPUs have been superseded as mentioned in this thread already. Apple would need to engineer a new motherboard too and we'd obviously get the powerful AMD GPUs and maybe more storage for the money as standard seeing as Apple seem to have got good deals on NAND if you look at the MacBook Pro 16" specs (double the storage for no additional cost).
For me, I'd like to see Apple introduce a lower entry iMac Pro to replace the top SKU 27" iMac - it would help them justify the cost of re-engineering an iMac Pro refresh.
The forthcoming Comet Lake S CPUs allegedly start with 6 cores/12 threads as i5, through 8 cores/16 threads as i7, and then 10 cores/20 threads on i9. This could, in theory, see an appropriately specified iMac able to compete with the 8 and 10 core versions of the iMac Pro.
If they go all SSD on the 2020 27" iMac they could just as easily kill off the iMac Pro and use the same engineering solutions to go with Comet Lake-S (up to 10 cores/20 threads) with the i9 and AMD 5300/5500/5700. Obviously there would be an issue with locking away the RAM, but it's a good time for Apple to consider making 16Gb of RAM standard on the 27" if they have to lock it away.
Every time I read the word "delay" along whatever bigger than 7nm I, I see the rumors about Ryzen/Threadripper shift comes in Sense.