is the iMac Pro still worth getting?

[ridgero]

do you guys think the imac p
















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

In the next couple of weeks I‘m buying a refurbished 10 Core and upgrading the RAM to 128 GB by myself.

I am a Logic Pro X user and I am sure this machine will have power enough for the next 5 years.

 

[Macshroomer]

In the next couple of weeks I‘m buying a refurbished 10 Core and upgrading the RAM to 128 GB by myself.

I am a Logic Pro X user and I am sure this machine will have power enough for the next 5 years.

Agreed on longevity, I have it and it's sweet machine. Not for the faint of heart on the memory swap though:

 

[CWallace]

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.

Of all the things I am confident about concerting the next iMac Pro, the one I am most confident about it is that it will not be using AMD GPUs. That would require an all new system board and possibly other changes whereas they can drop in the new Xeon CPUs and probably the new GPUs in the existing system board.

Apple has had plenty of advance knowledge of what AMD is bringing to the table and they could easily have had parallel Intel and AMD designs for at least the Mac Pro and the MacBook Pro to test against each other before committing - again - to Intel at WWDC.

If Apple wanted to move to AMD, they had their best chance. The next CPU architecture will start with an "A", but it will be ARM, not AMD.

do you guys think the imac pro is still worth getting at this time?

If you need one now, then buy one now.

If you can wait a year, then wait. It likely won't take a year for Apple to update, but one never knows.

 

[JacobHarvey]

Remarkably the regular 2019 21.5" and 27" iMacs appear to support the Apple Pro XDR display at its native 6K resolution while the much more expensive iMac Pro is limited to 5K (when using its internal GPU).

However, it makes sense when you consider that the iMac Pro is from 2017 and is using an older Alpine Ridge TB3 controller that originally came out in 2016

 

[CWallace]

Remarkably the regular 2019 21.5" and 27" iMacs appear to support the Apple Pro XDR display at its native 6K resolution while the much more expensive iMac Pro is limited to 5K (when using its internal GPU).

However, it makes sense when you consider that the iMac Pro is from 2017 and is using an older Alpine Ridge TB3 controller that originally came out in 2016.

This is correct.

The Mac Mini, Retina MacBook Air and 2018/2019 13" MacBook Pro all have Titan Ridge controllers. but the Intel iGPUs they use either do not support DisplayPort 1.4 or they do not have the horsepower to support native 6K, which is why they are not listed as compatible devices.

 

[Mago]

Of all the things I am confident about concerting the next iMac Pro, the one I am most confident about it is that it will not be using AMD GPUs. That would require an all new system board and possibly other changes whereas they can drop in the new Xeon CPUs and probably the new GPUs in the existing system board.

Here we go again, another one who believes macOS can't run on AMD CPUs, it's so supine it doesn't deserve to argue, in the other hand he ignores switching from the old Xeon CPU to the newer also needs an entirely new logic board, it's not just ignorance about the fact that is Intel which licensed AMD's x64 architecture indeed macOS is running in top of AMD's 64bit instruction set, also forget the fact about updating the system also implies a new logic board, new Xeon need new PCH and all new board layout.

If Apple wanted to move to AMD, they had their best chance. The next CPU architecture will start with an "A", but it will be ARM, not AMD.

Another arm fan, there is no ARM macOS neither this year neither next, it's an absolute no-sense has no economical neither technical reasons to require it, is not the IBM power pc panorama where there is no alternative to powerpc than switch architecture, for Intel x86 you have AMD CPU based on AMD x64 (which indeed Intel licensed from AMD), ARM is not even close to be viable performance desktop CPU, a thing is synthetic benchmark where you test an small routine w/o massive I/o or subsystems interaction, where x86 excels, not to say the AMD Zen introduced the needed competition to push. IPC efficiency etc, beyond the reach of ARM.

Meanwhile what Apple needs is control on it's hardware, it could be granted easy by AMD as they also license Zen IP the same way ARM holdings license ARM v8, this enable Apple to co-desing and in-house manufacture it's custom CPU without need to migrate macOS to an new instruction set and architecture.

FYI latest AMD Zen runs exactly the same instructions as the latest Xeon including AVX2 except avx512 extensions which are not part of the Xcode toolchain, and which requires Intel compilers and do not restrict an application to run in a system withi8 avx512 as most Intel CPU (as i5) lacks these extension.

Seems you're not aware apple is testing AMD Zen as the latest macOS included drivers for AMD Apu (Zen CPU + Vega/Navi GPU).

And AMD Apu as the one in the latest Xbox series X support not just 6K also 8K.

 

[JacobHarvey]

AMD has thankfully torn Intel a new one with their latest Ryzen and Threadripper CPUs.

The only thing that might really stand in the way would be some behind the scenes business deals or incentives.

AMD desktop cpus are now more power efficient, cheaper, and perform significantly better than intel offerings in the vast majority of workloads

 

[CWallace]

Here we go again, another one who believes macOS can't run on AMD CPUs...

It is not a question of ability, but of will. I do not believe Apple has the will to do it.

...he ignores switching from the old Xeon CPU to the newer also needs an entirely new logic board...

The W-2200 series use the same LGA 2066 socket as the current W-2100 series CPUs. I would not be surprised if they can use the same RAM traces and sockets for the DDR4-2933 memory bump.

Another arm fan, there is no ARM macOS neither this year neither next...

I am 110% positive Apple has been testing ARM versions of macOS and while I fully agree that when it launches it will be on the low-end (12-inch MacBook size), eventually it will scale to workstation levels suitable for the iMac Pro (and Mac Pro). But until that happens, I don't see Apple moving away from Intel at the top end.

Meanwhile what Apple needs is control on it's hardware, it could be granted easy by AMD as they also license Zen IP the same way ARM holdings license ARM v8, this enable Apple to co-desing and in-house manufacture it's custom CPU without need to migrate macOS to an new instruction set and architecture.

What incentive does AMD have to license x86 to Apple so they can make their own CPUs (and GPUs) and cut AMD out?

For that matter, what incentive does Apple have to make its own x86 chips? Those fabs are hugely expensive and the production volumes would be extremely low.

Seems you're not aware apple is testing AMD Zen as the latest macOS included drivers for AMD Apu (Zen CPU + Vega/Navi GPU).

I'm well aware of it - the "Waiting for Mac Pro" thread turned into a general AMD discussion thread months ago and the AMD Acolytes have been singing the OEM's praise non-stop (to the general derailment of the original topic). Doesn't mean Apple is going to switch over. Hell, I expect they have Nvidia cards running in the 2019 Mac Pro. Doesn't mean we'll see 2000-series and Quadros in Apple Stores next year.

 

[Mago]

I do not believe Apple has the will to do it.

Stated it's only your belief.

The W-2200 series use the same LGA 2066 socket as the current W-2100 series CPUs. I would not be surprised if they can use the same RAM traces and sockets for the DDR4-2933 memory bump.

Reads simple, actually much more complex than switch chips, even motherboard manufactures introduce revisions on current chipset sometimes requiring an all new logic board just to address new wattages, much more tricky is the memory interface. No chance here, not just an biased opinion, I have developed logic boards for industrial applications.

AMD have to license x86 to Apple so they can make their own CPUs (and GPUs) and cut AMD out?

Is something AMD already did with some Chinese MFR, it's not AMD resignation, it's an tactical move, AMD already manufactures it's chips with the same GloFo waffers, besides providing a custom Apple-tailored solution it grants AMD more Halo over Intel, no gain loses, and for Apple bit allows to do something with their waffer excedent, besides providing the much valued supply chain continuity which Intel do not warrant, also brings Apple a full 7nm lineup another plus.

For that matter, what incentive does Apple have to make its own x86 chips? Those fabs are hugely expensive and the production volumes would

Read about GloFo, Apple owns an excess. Of 7nm waffers, switching it to Ryzen / Threadripper/ Epyc only requires Tim cook's signature.

Doesn't mean Apple is going to switch over. Hell, I expect they have Nvidia cards running in the 2019 Mac Pro. Doesn't mean we'll see

Have you see before an macOS having drivers for mali(arm) GPUs ? No, but now we have drivers for AMD APUs, that's huge.
It's not the same as the nVidia issue, first AMD or Intel CPU do not interfere with Apple control, as neither is enforcing a proprietary API as nVidia, while Intel's avx512 maybe considered a such attempt, actually is not, AMD could implement it even with CPU microcode update (some not all avx512), I'm not saying what Apple will do, I'm not Tim cook, neither Craig federighi, I'm only exposing facts and possibilities, and never AMD CPU have been so close to debut in a Mac as now.

 

[techmeoutbaby]

AMD has thankfully torn Intel a new one with their latest Ryzen and Threadripper CPUs.

The only thing that might really stand in the way would be some behind the scenes business deals or incentives.

AMD desktop cpus are now more power efficient, cheaper, and perform significantly better than intel offerings in the vast majority of workloads

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.

Excellent, thoughtful analysis.

Every time I read the word "delay" along whatever bigger than 7nm I, I see the rumors about Ryzen/Threadripper shift comes in Sense.

Of all the things I am confident about concerting the next iMac Pro, the one I am most confident about it is that it will not be using AMD GPUs. That would require an all new system board and possibly other changes whereas they can drop in the new Xeon CPUs and probably the new GPUs in the existing system board.

Apple has had plenty of advance knowledge of what AMD is bringing to the table and they could easily have had parallel Intel and AMD designs for at least the Mac Pro and the MacBook Pro to test against each other before committing - again - to Intel at WWDC.

If Apple wanted to move to AMD, they had their best chance. The next CPU architecture will start with an "A", but it will be ARM, not AMD.




If you need one now, then buy one now.

If you can wait a year, then wait. It likely won't take a year for Apple to update, but one never knows.

Remarkably the regular 2019 21.5" and 27" iMacs appear to support the Apple Pro XDR display at its native 6K resolution while the much more expensive iMac Pro is limited to 5K (when using its internal GPU).

However, it makes sense when you consider that the iMac Pro is from 2017 and is using an older Alpine Ridge TB3 controller that originally came out in 2016

Here we go again, another one who believes macOS can't run on AMD CPUs, it's so supine it doesn't deserve to argue, in the other hand he ignores switching from the old Xeon CPU to the newer also needs an entirely new logic board, it's not just ignorance about the fact that is Intel which licensed AMD's x64 architecture indeed macOS is running in top of AMD's 64bit instruction set, also forget the fact about updating the system also implies a new logic board, new Xeon need new PCH and all new board layout.


Another arm fan, there is no ARM macOS neither this year neither next, it's an absolute no-sense has no economical neither technical reasons to require it, is not the IBM power pc panorama where there is no alternative to powerpc than switch architecture, for Intel x86 you have AMD CPU based on AMD x64 (which indeed Intel licensed from AMD), ARM is not even close to be viable performance desktop CPU, a thing is synthetic benchmark where you test an small routine w/o massive I/o or subsystems interaction, where x86 excels, not to say the AMD Zen introduced the needed competition to push. IPC efficiency etc, beyond the reach of ARM.

Meanwhile what Apple needs is control on it's hardware, it could be granted easy by AMD as they also license Zen IP the same way ARM holdings license ARM v8, this enable Apple to co-desing and in-house manufacture it's custom CPU without need to migrate macOS to an new instruction set and architecture.

FYI latest AMD Zen runs exactly the same instructions as the latest Xeon including AVX2 except avx512 extensions which are not part of the Xcode toolchain, and which requires Intel compilers and do not restrict an application to run in a system withi8 avx512 as most Intel CPU (as i5) lacks these extension.

Seems you're not aware apple is testing AMD Zen as the latest macOS included drivers for AMD Apu (Zen CPU + Vega/Navi GPU).

And AMD Apu as the one in the latest Xbox series X support not just 6K also 8K.

AMD has thankfully torn Intel a new one with their latest Ryzen and Threadripper CPUs.

The only thing that might really stand in the way would be some behind the scenes business deals or incentives.

AMD desktop cpus are now more power efficient, cheaper, and perform significantly better than intel offerings in the vast majority of workloads

thanks guys. well i think i kinda "need" a machine so im gonna drop the ball on one.

my primary use is final cut pro as most intensive application.

the only upgrade im considering doing is the 8gb of video memory to the 16gb vega 64. would i see much improvement going to double the video memory? or just stick with base for everything. refurb in canad is 5349. the one with upgraded graphics is $6383 for new / education discount. yes our canadian dollar tanked compared to the american dollar LOL

also if i ever resell this, assuming i get a refurb, does a refurb deter buyers or lower future value?

 

[CWallace]

also if i ever resell this, assuming i get a refurb, does a refurb deter buyers or lower future value?

It shouldn't. Arguably a refurb is a safer choice since it has gone through two Quality Assurance cycles (once when new and again when refurbished). I have purchased a number of refurb Macs and they have all been perfectly serviceable and looked like new.

 

[Coyote2006]

Got an offer $1000 off for a new iMacPro (8c,32GB,1TB,56). I am about to pull the tricker ... great monitor, way fast enough compared to my 5,1, looks great, solid workhouse and quite. The fans on my 5,1 drive me crazy

 

[xgman]

This made me feel better about the im and imp's.

Base and Middle Tier Mac Pro Models Offer CPU Performance Similar to iMac Pro

Geekbench 5 benchmarks of some of the new Mac Pro processor options are now available, giving us an idea of how the Mac Pro performs relative to...

www.macrumors.com