# New iMacs released. Up to 8 cores on non-pro model.



## Alex Fraser (Mar 19, 2019)

https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2019/03/imac-gets-a-2x-performance-boost/
A comparison between the new models and the "pro" would be interesting, considering the new multicore options..


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Mar 19, 2019)

256GB max RAM. For only $5200 USD . 

Are the days of slave / secondary computers finally over? 

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbre...56gb-ram-imac-pro-5200-update-configure-build


----------



## Zhao Shen (Mar 19, 2019)

Fully kitted out for $16,000. Makes me appreciate the hell out of the PC market.


----------



## WaveRider (Mar 19, 2019)

Zhao Shen said:


> Fully kitted out for $16,000. Makes me appreciate the hell out of the PC market.



Oh lordy, I shutter to think of pricing for the new Mac Pro to be released this year.


----------



## JohnG (Mar 19, 2019)

Zhao Shen said:


> Fully kitted out for $16,000



Sounds like someone I used to date...


----------



## Alex Fraser (Mar 19, 2019)

Sure, but this $16K being bandied about is for a specced out PRO model, before the thread gets derailed too much!


----------



## Soundhound (Mar 19, 2019)

You went out with my ex-wife?



JohnG said:


> Sounds like someone I used to date...


----------



## Jeremy Gillam (Mar 19, 2019)

I'm running Pro Tools and VEP on a Hackintosh with the 9900k i9 that is now an option for the non-pro iMac. It's amazing processor for audio work, sounds like this iMac refresh will be a great machine if it stays cool enough without the fans going into overdrive.


----------



## ironbut (Mar 19, 2019)

After checking out Apples site, a basic 8 core 5Ghz processor 5k monitor with 1T ssd and base Ram it was $3199. OWC has 64G of Ram for $450. 
Seems like a reasonable alternative to me.


----------



## gpax (Mar 19, 2019)

Alex Fraser said:


> Sure, but this $16K being bandied about is for a specced out PRO model, before the thread gets derailed too much!


Thank you for clarifying, though your title and OP were both very clear that you were talking specifically about the newly updated iMac, not the Pro. I'm not sure why some ran with the 16k scenario. The top-most iMac option is one-third of that cost.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Mar 19, 2019)

Jeremy Gillam said:


> I'm running Pro Tools and VEP on a Hackintosh with the 9900k i9 that is now an option for the non-pro iMac. It's amazing processor for audio work, sounds like this iMac refresh will be a great machine if it stays cool enough without the fans going into overdrive.


My thoughts too. The fan on my (now vintage) 2011 iMac only kicks in when my office heats up in the summer, not usually under heavy workloads.

I think these new iMacs might be the spec/price "sweet spot" for audio.


----------



## CGR (Mar 19, 2019)

A little perspective from a long time Mac user. I'm still in shock from the thought of having paid $1600 for a 32MB RAM upgrade (yep that's right *Mega*Byte) years ago on a Mac desktop.


----------



## dzilizzi (Mar 19, 2019)

CGR said:


> A little perspective from a long time Mac user. I'm still in shock from the thought of having paid $1600 for a 32MB RAM upgrade (yep that's right *Mega*Byte) years ago on a Mac desktop.


Yes, but I bet it ran better than the current models.


----------



## ironbut (Mar 19, 2019)

Calling Storyteller,.
I'd love to hear how he's getting along with his 5k iMac. I remember he was loving it a year or so ago.

I have to keep telling myself to wait to see what the new Mac Pro is because this one has given me an itchy trigger finger!


----------



## Soundhound (Mar 19, 2019)

This does look like a good setup. I want a big screen though, so will hold out for the mac pro reveal. 'Twould be nice if the entry level mac pro were reasonable in cost and similar in power to the top 2019 iMac. Not very likely though, methinks.


----------



## CT (Mar 19, 2019)

Alex Fraser said:


> The fan on my (now vintage) 2011 iMac



I'm still on one of these as well. I've replaced the HD with an SSD, pushed the RAM up to 32. It's a faithful machine, but I know it's only a matter of time. Really dreading having to tangle with Apple's pricing vs. my needs when the time comes.


----------



## ironbut (Mar 19, 2019)

After pricing out an iMac, I thought about how it compares to the 2012 Mac Pro I bought refurbished in early 2013.
Its a single processor 6 core 3.3Ghz, that came with 16G of ram and a 500G HD. I paid about $2.6k for it then.
IMHO, getting an 8 core with a great GPU, a great ssd, plus a 27 inch 5k monitor for about the same price doesn't seem out of line at all.
I'd be trading the easy upgrade path of my cheese grater for a 5k monitor and no big ass chassis to have to work around and that seems like a fair trade.

I'd order one today if it weren't for the upcoming Mac Pro.
After seeing the pricing of these machines, I'm actually more optimistic that the base price for the new Mac Pro won't be too much more than $3k (for similar specs) since it would be competing against this machine and the bottom of the iMac Pro line (sans monitor).


----------



## dflood (Mar 19, 2019)

Zhao Shen said:


> Fully kitted out for $16,000. Makes me appreciate the hell out of the PC market.



The PC market is always there for anybody, but I remember why I left it. I think about all the PC landfill I created over the years, averaging a new machine every 2-3 years. And then there’s the hours I will never get back, yelling f—k! out the window before yet another complete reformat and reinstall of Windows. 

Playing around with configurations, the most I could rack up was about $6,619 Canadian for a new non-pro iMac. Expensive yes, but if it’s as bulletproof as my 2013 iMac, I’m interested. I’ll be looking for the performance benchmarks.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Mar 19, 2019)

I am always completely mystified to no end why anybody would fall for this iMac concept.

Almost no ways to expand/upgrade, no way to service the thing yourself, limited connectivity, often outdated technology. The built-in screen - good heavens! When that thing dies, you have to throw the whole thing away (or the other way around) and therefore a nightmare to dispose of or re-cycle.

As for me, I'll wait what the new Mac Pro will have to offer and if I don't like it I will have to switch to a Windows machine. At least there you can get cutting edge hardware.


----------



## Soundhound (Mar 19, 2019)

Unlike the iMac pro, you can put more ram in the 2019 iMac yourself, like previous iMacs. I've never had an iMac screen die, though I have had have my current iMac serviced a few times. Actually I think I've replaced the entire thing piece by piece, except for the screen. Oh well, it's lasted 6 years and done everything i needed it to do. With the requisite begging and pleading of course.


----------



## Soundhound (Mar 19, 2019)

Just noticed that the new iMac has two Thunderbolt ports, whereas the new Mac mini has 4. So right now it's more processing power vs more connectivity. Arg.


----------



## VinRice (Mar 19, 2019)

Wunderhorn said:


> I am always completely mystified to no end why anybody would fall for this iMac concept.
> 
> Almost no ways to expand/upgrade, no way to service the thing yourself, limited connectivity, often outdated technology. The built-in screen - good heavens! When that thing dies, you have to throw the whole thing away (or the other way around) and therefore a nightmare to dispose of or re-cycle.
> 
> As for me, I'll wait what the new Mac Pro will have to offer and if I don't like it I will have to switch to a Windows machine. At least there you can get cutting edge hardware.



Well never mind. If you haven't worked out the appeal of the concept after 20+ years and millions of sales it's unlikely you ever will.


----------



## Guido Negraszus (Mar 19, 2019)

CGR said:


> A little perspective from a long time Mac user. I'm still in shock from the thought of having paid $1600 for a 32MB RAM upgrade (yep that's right *Mega*Byte) years ago on a Mac desktop.



I can beat that. $900 for 2MB for my Akai S-1000 sampler in 1991. Lol, crazy!


----------



## JohnG (Mar 19, 2019)

Wunderhorn said:


> I am always completely mystified to no end why anybody would fall for this iMac concept



I have one. It rocks.

With Thunderbolt the "can't upgrade" problem is at least partially solved, plus they are wicked fast.


----------



## Zhao Shen (Mar 19, 2019)

dflood said:


> The PC market is always there for anybody, but I remember why I left it. I think about all the PC landfill I created over the years, averaging a new machine every 2-3 years. And then there’s the hours I will never get back, yelling f—k! out the window before yet another complete reformat and reinstall of Windows.
> 
> Playing around with configurations, the most I could rack up was about $6,619 Canadian for a new non-pro iMac. Expensive yes, but if it’s as bulletproof as my 2013 iMac, I’m interested. I’ll be looking for the performance benchmarks.



Yeah, I've heard lots of these horror stories. Guess I'm lucky, because every PC I've ever owned still functions really well. Never had to replace one out of pure _need_. Never needed to do a clean install on any of them either. 

It's funny, I love my MacBook and would never give it up for a Windows equivalent. Just so much more convenient to work on a Unix-based system. At the same time, the tasks I use my PC for... Well, I'd never switch to Mac for those either.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Mar 20, 2019)

Wunderhorn said:


> I am always completely mystified to no end why anybody would fall for this iMac concept.
> 
> Almost no ways to expand/upgrade, no way to service the thing yourself, limited connectivity, often outdated technology. The built-in screen - good heavens! When that thing dies, you have to throw the whole thing away (or the other way around) and therefore a nightmare to dispose of or re-cycle.


Well, the average iMac user doesn’t care about the things you listed, so there’s your answer! As for disposing, I think Apple offers to recycle old machines. 

I love my vintage iMac. Best machine I’ve ever owned. Perfect service for 7 years despite 12 hour workdays and abuse. It’s paid the mortgage and fed the kids.

I’ll happily buy another.


----------



## scoringdreams (Mar 20, 2019)

marclawsonmusic said:


> 256GB max RAM. For only $5200 USD .
> 
> Are the days of slave / secondary computers finally over?
> 
> https://www.theverge.com/circuitbre...56gb-ram-imac-pro-5200-update-configure-build



That's a good initiative by Apple at a bad cost.

Probably considering upgrading my iMac Pro from 64GB to 128GB RAM, but using up to of 256GB RAM in a single project is quite insane.

Possible but insane.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 20, 2019)

scoringdreams said:


> That's a good initiative by Apple at a bad cost.
> 
> Probably considering upgrading my iMac Pro from 64GB to 128GB RAM, but using up to of 256GB RAM in a single project is quite insane.
> 
> Possible but insane.



Possible and great, not insane. I have 2 trash cans fully loaded with OWC ram and want for nothing....


----------



## FriFlo (Mar 20, 2019)

If they could just offer that without a screen and maybe. A little bigger case for good air flow and easy access to ram, internal sata ports, possibly even PCIe slots ... you could call it the “Mac Maxi” and I’d buy it.


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Mar 20, 2019)

gpax said:


> Thank you for clarifying, though your title and OP were both very clear that you were talking specifically about the newly updated iMac, not the Pro. I'm not sure why some ran with the 16k scenario. The top-most iMac option is one-third of that cost.



My confusion, sorry. They must've made a couple different announcements the same day. My jaw dropped when I saw iMac and 256GB memory in the same sentence. Sounds like it's only for the pro version.


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Mar 20, 2019)

I bought an iMac around 4 July 2017 because it was an extended five day weekend (from the point of view of specialty stores being open, USPS, etc.), because my 2010 MacPro became a toaster suddenly, and though I knew it was likely the video card (indeed it was), I couldn't wait a couple of weeks for a new one to arrive and possibly find out that wasn't the only issue.

I didn't want the trash can model because it defeats much of the purpose of going the pro route vs. the iMac route. The replacement video card fixed the MacPro but it was too late; I had already transitioned a few weeks before it arrived, so have that computer to my housemates.

If we could pick when our computers die, many of us would stick with a more rigid policy on which models to consider, but fate rarely aligns with opportunity. And as it stands, I've been very happy with the top-end 27" 2017 iMac -- especially after upgrading recently to 64 GB of RAM.

Obviously I was nervous about going "backwards" in some senses, and I had a rough first year regarding reliability of connections for external drives, but mostly I remembered the first seven years of my music computer life, with a G4 iMac that was basically useless for anything serious the entire time I had it (until late 2010), throwing me very far behind schedule on ALL of my music projects.

I have no idea what the new MacPro will look like or how much it will cost, but am happy to hear about this new iMac upgrade because I need a new Mac at work so I can test my software on Mojave, as my 2010 MacPro (same model as I had at home) can't upgrade anymore without doing some tricks with special video cards etc. and our I.T. department won't allow us to do anything with a non-Apple part.


----------



## gpax (Mar 20, 2019)

I usually don’t do gear speak, but in the context of the discussion here I go...

Just ordered the 8-core configuration. Arriving April 4. Will be going with 64gb of ram from OWC. I went for a 512 Gb SSD, as all my sample streaming is external already (Black Magic dock). FWIW, I’ve been running a streamlined system the past few years, limiting system and production to around 120 Gb (to limit it to the ssd portion of drive), as I encountered performance quirks in Logic when filling up the fusion drive early on. My 2014 machine has a trade-in value of $570, btw.

For anyone contemplating a configuration with a fusion drive, I advise avoiding it, mainly as the specs of the SSD partition are now quite bare bones on iMacs. 32 Gb SSD partition on the 1tb drive, and 128 Gb on the 2 larger drives. Go SSD if you can afford it.

Now I’m near broke.


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Mar 20, 2019)

The SSD portion of the Fusion Drive is strictly for bootstrapping the computer, and I don't think it's even available to the end user. I got this info from someone who works at Apple, but it's readily available if one know how to read the specs (not an easy thing, even for an engineer).


----------



## gpax (Mar 20, 2019)

Mark Schmieder said:


> The SSD portion of the Fusion Drive is strictly for bootstrapping the computer, and I don't think it's even available to the end user. I got this info from someone who works at Apple, but it's readily available if one know how to read the specs (not an easy thing, even for an engineer).


Interesting. I’m no expert here either, understanding only how fusion distribution is handled by software, according to prioritized tasks of what gets used most. I also read somewhere a couple of years back that priority is given to Apple production apps, though I cannot say for sure. You may know more than I do on this front. 

My early experience in early 2015, as Logic was freezing up, was to surmise then that the drive was at a threshold where (and I was only following intuition at the time), it was juggling something in an adverse way. This after troubleshooting exhaustive scenarios of other external drives and so forth for weeks. Indeed, I did a clean install and offloaded everything like photos, files, etc, onto external drives, and hence kept that drive streamlined to the theoretical use of the SSD, only - which I’d understood is only accessed until what point the HDD becomes utilized. Or at least that was the advise being published at the time. Perhaps a fluke, but the problems I had were all rectified once I pared everything down.

As for actual end-user partitioning, at least in 2016, I discovered this was possible, when around the same time I did an OS update, I got a disk install error which would not recognize the drive at all. I recall a meticulous set of command prompts I researched, and had to follow like brain surgery, with details for formatting the drive into two partitions, if desired, or “seaming” these for the hybrid use for which it was designed. 

But there it was, in this resource posted online. And for a brief period I had two drives, before then entering the prompts that “seamed” these into one drive. I figured I might mess things up if I didn’t do this, considering the drive was intended to be used in a hybrid way. But that was the fusion drive as it existed on the late 2014 machine I had. Maybe now it’s a different matter.

If my previous advice above seems off-kilter, I apologize. In looking at those Fusion specs tonight, and recalling how the SSD was partitioned downward for consumer use a couple of years back, it seems like a flag worth waving as some might be factoring a choice based on budget.


----------



## scoringdreams (Mar 20, 2019)

I just hope external RAM is made possible; solves most common issues and upgrade costs... 

And in other news, OWC and Akitio have merged - we might see more affordable TB3 external storage solutions!


----------



## gpax (Mar 20, 2019)

https://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2019/20190318_0904-iMac5K2019.html

The above puts into perspective some potential limitations (or advantages) compared to an iMac pro. A single bus for a shared TB port on the iMac is not an issue for me, though worth noting for those who may need the bandwidth a pro options offer (at a greater price considering some other 2019 specs are equal to the iMac pro. As with previous iterations of iMacs, the memory slots are still user accessible.


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Mar 21, 2019)

My response above was overly simplified due to lack of time and fatigue (Wednesday is always my worst sleep deprivation day due to "multiple time zone friendly" conference calls). The main point is just that the SSD part of the Fusion Drive is useful from an OS developer's point of view, and some would argue is better than all-HD, but it is essentially "reserved memory" that is targeted for special purposes and not generally accessible for applications and sample libraries (for example).

In many ways, Apple is going back to an earlier approach that I am familiar with from my early days in the computer industry, which is why I brought up the bootstrapping analogy. It still pertains today, it's just that many computer designs over the years have moved away from that old philosophy of insulating the stuff that is essential for getting past startup issues or is just necessary for incremental initialization of a complex device. Partly it's a matter of discipline; of decoupling things so that there's less chance of design errors or programming mistakes blowing up on unrelated stuff.

Anyway, it's boring stuff frankly. I got into computers as a means to an end and focus primarily on domain knowledge for mechanical, acoustical, and other stuff. But sometimes the boring geek talk becomes moderately important for helping people deflect typical marketing hype and to better understand their options. The more important point is what was brought up about the bandwidth of a shared buss, which will affect some of us more than others. But Fusion Drives are a mixed bag.


----------



## ridgero (Mar 21, 2019)

Soundhound said:


> Just noticed that the new iMac has two Thunderbolt ports, whereas the new Mac mini has 4. So right now it's more processing power vs more connectivity. Arg.



Whats more important: Its a shared bus in the iMac 2019

iMac 2019 = Single Bus (!) / 2 Ports

iMac Pro = Double Bus / 4 Ports
Mac mini = Double Bus / 4 Ports
MacBook Pro 13 / 15 with Touch Bar = Double Bus / 4 Ports


----------



## GtrString (Mar 21, 2019)

Sigh, buying a new computer has become like buying a car. With this pricing, we are getting closer and closer to the expense of buying a console in the old days. Feels like a giant leap backwards.


----------



## Salorom (Mar 21, 2019)

Hackintosh.

Do yourself a favour and build one. If you fear you won’t be able to put it together yourself then pay someone who knows how to.

Hackintosh.

You end up with a machine that’s tailored to your needs, at a fraction of what you’d pay for an iMac. Those computers have parts that belong in laptops, and will not be upgraded.

Hackintosh.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Mar 21, 2019)

I can see the iMac Pro being "squeezed" a little from either side: "Normal" iMacs are getting more powerful, and a new Mac Pro is soon to drop.


----------



## Grégory Betton (Mar 21, 2019)

gpax said:


> Just ordered the 8-core configuration. Arriving April 4 [...]



Could you update us with your first impressions? Especially regarding thermal throttling and fan noise? I'm on the edge of buying the same model as you. Thanks a lot!


----------



## danbo (Mar 21, 2019)

I had a iMac once, back in the old days. Never again. They're glorified laptops on the back of a unchangeable monitor. Then they introduced the 'pro' model which is more desktop like (but still not remotely like a desktop - the backplane and PCB is still laptop). And as others have mentioned, for a fortune, and I believe still only takes more expensive _laptop_ ram sticks.

The cheese grater MP's were a good deal. Just a little more than a PC and you can upgrade to the sky. I have hacked and modded my 2009 and it's still current (using it now actually), and runs Logic just fine. Biggest issue is no TB. 

A possible leaked MP2020 looks like it will be a winner, as long as they don't go crazy with the price (yeah what am I saying).


----------



## Soundhound (Mar 21, 2019)

Great point, and really important.

You are going make me buy a new mac pro. My wife would like a word with you.



ridgero said:


> Whats more important: Its a shared bus in the iMac 2019
> 
> iMac 2019 = Single Bus (!) / 2 Ports
> 
> ...


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 21, 2019)

So the 8-core with a 512GB SSD instead of that useless fusion thing is $2800.

But can you update the memory yourself? $1K to bring it up to 64GB is silly, but if it's affordable elsewhere this looks like the best machine Apple has come out with in years.


----------



## Grégory Betton (Mar 21, 2019)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> So the 8-core with a 512GB SSD instead of that useless fusion thing is $2800.
> 
> But can you update the memory yourself? $1K to bring it up to 64GB is silly, but if it's affordable elsewhere this looks like the best machine Apple has come out with in years.


It's still the same design as before, so yes, you can  You can save hundreds when buying the RAM yourself. Very easy to install too.


----------



## Soundhound (Mar 21, 2019)

64gigs at owc is $449 for the 2019 iMac, Nick. Unless you meant the mac mini? 64gigs for that is still... whoops just checked it's now $549 for 64gigs for mac mini at owc. Still stupid expensive, but no longer at Tony Soprano vig level I guess.




Nick Batzdorf said:


> So the 8-core with a 512GB SSD instead of that useless fusion thing is $2800.
> 
> But can you update the memory yourself? $1K to bring it up to 64GB is silly, but if it's affordable elsewhere this looks like the best machine Apple has come out with in years.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 21, 2019)

Soundhound said:


> 64gigs at owc is $449 for the 2019 iMac, Nick. Unless you meant the mac mini? 64gigs for that is still... whoops just checked it's now $549 for 64gigs for mac mini at owc. Still stupid expensive, but no longer at Tony Soprano vig level I guess.



So $3200 for an 8-core with a 512GB SSD and 64GB of RAM (EDIT: if you put in your own drive and memory). Pretty good.


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Mar 21, 2019)

I just compared the specs vs. the 2017 model, and in spite of all the hype from Apple's marketing lit, it seems the "only" change (though an extremely significant one) is the processor boost.

That should make it easier for people to decide which one they need, as the other specs probably were already the deciding factor (as they were for me) in picking which model.


----------



## SGordB (Mar 21, 2019)

Mark Schmieder said:


> I just compared the specs vs. the 2017 model, and in spite of all the hype from Apple's marketing lit, it seems the "only" change (though an extremely significant one) is the processor boost.
> 
> That should make it easier for people to decide which one they need, as the other specs probably were already the deciding factor (as they were for me) in picking which model.



Looks like the RAM's also a little faster, from 2400 to 2666 MHz.


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Mar 21, 2019)

Hah; I compared the specs three times and specifically looked at RAM speed! I brought back the specs page for the older model just now, and reloaded the new product page. There it is! But scrolling can be very hard on web pages and it's easy to skip past stuff.

Next time I'll load them side-by-side on my screen instead of depending on my not-so-good linear memory, going back and forth between browser tabs. 

At any rate, it will be interesting to see whether the slightly faster RAM changes the upgrades costs for Apple RAM or OWC RAM (which are identical; both the same Samsung RAM that went through the same test procedures, from what I was told a couple of years back).


----------



## Grégory Betton (Mar 21, 2019)

Mark Schmieder said:


> Hah; I compared the specs three times and specifically looked at RAM speed! I brought back the specs page for the older model just now, and reloaded the new product page. There it is! But scrolling can be very hard on web pages and it's easy to skip past stuff.
> 
> Next time I'll load them side-by-side on my screen instead of depending on my not-so-good linear memory, going back and forth between browser tabs.
> 
> At any rate, it will be interesting to see whether the slightly faster RAM changes the upgrades costs for Apple RAM or OWC RAM (which are identical; both the same Samsung RAM that went through the same test procedures, from what I was told a couple of years back).



Which I am quite afraid of, except the lack of upgrability but that’s now what the product is, is the lack of ventilation. Thermal throttling could then drastically low down the performances of the i9.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 21, 2019)

SGordB said:


> Looks like the RAM's also a little faster, from 2400 to 2666 MHz.



That's on the order of the Planck scale.


----------



## ironbut (Mar 21, 2019)

I did quite a bit of work on older iMacs in the Fine Arts Media Center of the college I studied music tech at. It could get pretty freakin hot in there sometimes (32 iMac stations and 2 Mac Pro's with a couple of 55 inch tv monitors, 10 large format printers for the fine arts students). 
I was usually cranking out some serious track counts in Pro Tools (the macs had tons of software installed). I can't remember ever hearing the fans come on.
Also, in the 4 years I was there, I never saw one of those abused iMac's ever go down (saw plenty of crashes).
The school had iMacs everywhere. Probably hundreds.


----------



## gpax (Mar 21, 2019)

Grégory Betton said:


> Could you update us with your first impressions? Especially regarding thermal throttling and fan noise? I'm on the edge of buying the same model as you. Thanks a lot!


Hi Grégory

I am not the guy to push the machine to the limit for the sake of it, so you would not be hearing any benchmark reports from me. My first impressions will be what they are, based on my workflow and template, which I already anticipate being a welcome change from my 2-core, i5, 2014 iMac at this point! 

For what it's worth, these specs represent (as Nick suggests), a robust machine that, for me, hits a sweet spot on many levels. The timing is really good for me. 

Best, 

Greg (also a Gregory, lol).


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 21, 2019)

For me personally the problem with this machine that it's an iMac, and I have all my computers in the garage next to my room. But I think it's no longer true that Apple doesn't offer a viable Mac for music production.


----------



## ironbut (Mar 21, 2019)

gpax said:


> Hi Grégory
> 
> I am not the guy to push the machine to the limit for the sake of it, so you would not be hearing any benchmark reports from me. My first impressions will be what they are, based on my workflow and template, which I already anticipate being a welcome change from my 2-core, i5, 2014 iMac at this point!
> 
> Greg (also a Gregory, lol).



If you happen to use Logic, could you run the New Logic Benchmark test linked in this thread when the iMac arrives.
https://vi-control.net/community/threads/newlogicbenchmark-test.77575/#post-4318886


----------



## gpax (Mar 21, 2019)

ironbut said:


> If you happen to use Logic, could you run the New Logic Benchmark test linked in this thread when the iMac arrives.
> https://vi-control.net/community/threads/newlogicbenchmark-test.77575/#post-4318886


I believe answered that above?


----------



## ironbut (Mar 22, 2019)

Sorry about that gpax!
Totally ignored most of your post.


----------



## Vik (Mar 22, 2019)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> So $3200 for an 8-core with a 512GB SSD and 64GB of RAM (EDIT: if you put in your own drive and memory). Pretty good.


I looked at OWC and tried to find SSD prices for the new iMacs, but couldn't find any. Are you sure you can replace the internal SSD?


----------



## Wall Art Music (Mar 22, 2019)

It's +$200 to upgrade from 8-core i5 (3.0 GHz) to an 8-core i7 (3.2 GHz). Does anyone have an idea of how much an improvement an i7 would be over an i5?

Oops.. thanks for the heads up. They're both 6 core, not 8, on the 21.5", which is the one I was looking at.

I see that the 27" does have the 8 core i7 option.


----------



## ridgero (Mar 22, 2019)

There is no 8 core i5...

i5 9600k 6 cores 6 threads
i9 9900k 8 cores 16 threads


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 22, 2019)

Vik said:


> I looked at OWC and tried to find SSD prices for the new iMacs, but couldn't find any. Are you sure you can replace the internal SSD?



I'm not sure, but I'm pretty sure it can at least be changed if you open the case. We had a repair shop do that on my wife's iMac (around a 2012 model).

^ That was to replace the fourth Seagate drive that failed out of warranty in a 4-week period, by the way.


----------



## ironbut (Mar 22, 2019)

Just about any ssd can be exchanged for another of the same form factor.
I wouldn't doubt if this will be the last iMac that everything can be exchanged (once the T2 chip is installed).

The ifixit site is great to learn how to access what can be accessed in Macs.
Here's one for the 2014 5k. (there's also one for the iMac Pro)
https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iMac+Intel+27-Inch+Retina+5K+Display+Teardown/30260?utm_source=iMacRetina5k2014&utm_medium=Description &utm_campaign=YouTube

OWC also sells an install kit with adhesive and tools.


----------



## gpax (Mar 22, 2019)

ironbut said:


> Sorry about that gpax!
> Totally ignored most of your post.


No worries.


----------



## OleJoergensen (Mar 23, 2019)

danbo said:


> I had a iMac once, back in the old days. Never again. They're glorified laptops on the back of a unchangeable monitor. Then they introduced the 'pro' model which is more desktop like (but still not remotely like a desktop - the backplane and PCB is still laptop). And as others have mentioned, for a fortune, and I believe still only takes more expensive _laptop_ ram sticks.
> 
> The cheese grater MP's were a good deal. Just a little more than a PC and you can upgrade to the sky. I have hacked and modded my 2009 and it's still current (using it now actually), and runs Logic just fine. Biggest issue is no TB.
> 
> A possible leaked MP2020 looks like it will be a winner, as long as they don't go crazy with the price (yeah what am I saying).


In old day I had an Imac 24”, 8 GB ram, dual core 2 GHZ (I think) and I loved it, except when the cooling got noisy because of heavy load . 
Now I use Mac/ PC combo and it is powerfull! Yes, I like also the internal expspansion possibilities with the PC.


----------



## gpax (Mar 23, 2019)

In the old days, I had to walk eighteen miles just to use the only Mac in the village.


----------



## ironbut (Mar 23, 2019)




----------



## gpax (Mar 30, 2019)

Per the OP’s initial announcement, I wanted to follow up from my previous posts to say my 2019 iMac arrived Thursday, a week earlier than the original delivery date! I’m still setting up and reinstalling everything, as past experiences with migration and cloning introduced legacy issues resulting in eventual clean installs anyway.

As for the questions/concerns about thermal throttling, I have been reading a number of positive reports (so far) as these new machines are just being delivered. Many of these are preliminary benchmarks, though showing definitively higher single and significant multi core performance compared to a 2017 iMac, and even compared to baseline iMac Pros. And for reasons still being deciphered, no throttling issues are being reported (yet), which will be good news for some potential buyers. Here is one brief synthesis among several I looked at at:



My personal benchmark is that of going from dual core i5 processors on my 2014 iMac, to this beast, lol, though my orchestrations have rarely exceeded 40 tracks (averaging about 35 per my workflow). I suspect other inquiries in this thread reflect much larger templates of preloaded ilk, relative to potentially pushing this machine to its limit. To me, these benchmarks are more theoretical, whereas I know precisely what limitations my 2014 system has had, and hence how this upgrade was timely for me.

On a personal note, as I’ve spoken about my progressive blindness, the display is also much brighter and at a higher resolution compared to my 2014 first-gen 5KRetina display. This consideration is a huge factor for me, relative those debates about the iMac being all-in-one.

EDIT: per my previous post about the specs I ordered, we are talking the higher i9 specs, as is the various benchmark reporting I referenced. I did not opt for the higher end video card. I added 64 Gb of memory (OWC), which fortunately happened to arrive on Thursday as well. 

The one caveat so far is investing in a Thunderbolt 2 to 3 adapter, which means my samples will still be loading at TB 2 speeds from a Blackmagic and OWC Thunder Bay, which is the one wow factor I’ll have to defer to later TB3 options at some point, lol.


----------



## Grégory Betton (Mar 30, 2019)

gpax said:


> Per the OP’s initial announcement, I wanted to follow up from my previous posts to say my 2019 iMac arrived Thursday, a week earlier than the original delivery date! I’m still setting up and reinstalling everything, as past experiences with migration and cloning introduced legacy issues resulting in eventual clean installs anyway.
> 
> As for the questions/concerns about thermal throttling, I have been reading a number of positive reports (so far) as these new machines are just being delivered. Many of these are preliminary benchmarks, though showing definitively higher single and significant multi core performance compared to a 2017 iMac, and even compared to baseline iMac Pros. And for reasons still being deciphered, no throttling issues are being reported (yet), which will be good news for some potential buyers. Here is one brief synthesis among several I looked at at:
> 
> ...



Cool Greg! I hope you’ll enjoy using it. Keep us posted as I’m curious about it. Actually I’ve fallen and bought the 10-cores iMac Pro. Will receive it mid April.


----------



## ironbut (Mar 30, 2019)

Thanks Greg!
First impression sure sound great. 
Makes waiting to see the new Mac Pro even harder!


----------



## ironbut (Apr 3, 2019)




----------



## Alex Fraser (Apr 4, 2019)

ironbut said:


>



Very interesting. (And expensive!)
Anyone care to venture why Apple only advertise a maximum of 64?


----------



## SGordB (Apr 4, 2019)

I _want _to be tempted by these new iMacs, but my workflow bottom line is single-core performance. The new lineup's flagship i9 model has a single core performance of 6157 -- better than any other Mac, iMac Pros included (https://browser.geekbench.com/mac-benchmarks). But my late 2014 flagship 5K iMac (Core i7, 4.0 GHz, turbo: 4.8) has a single core score of 4766. I'm thinking this would be a very expensive upgrade if it only bought me a 30% improvement playing a CPU-intensive piano VI like the Garritan CFX at a decent buffer setting without crackles and pops, which is where I most often encounter the limits of my current system (32 GB, with the CFX and other major VIs on an external SSD). Am I missing something?


----------



## ironbut (Apr 4, 2019)

Not exactly the first time that it took owc to point out the fact that more ram could be used in a mac.
In the past, it seems like tech advancements were part of the reason. 
This time, wouldn't guess.
I'm not so sure if 128G is something we would need, but if you think you might, it's over $100 cost increase to buy the 2 stick 64G pair compared to the 4 stick 64G set from owc.


----------



## galactic orange (Apr 4, 2019)

ironbut said:


> I'm not so sure if 128G is something we would need, but if you think you might, it's over $100 cost increase to buy the 2 stick 64G pair compared to the 4 stick 64G set from owc.


Two 32GB sticks of RAM for the 2018 Mac Mini are still priced high relative to the 16GB sticks. If you consider the difference in cost, either way you’re getting more for the money with iMac RAM. I don’t think an extra $100 is so bad when it gives you the option of adding more memory later, an option that Mini users don’t have.


----------



## ridgero (Apr 6, 2019)

I‘m considering buying a new iMac i9, 1 TB SSD, 8 GB Ram, 580x Radeon.

Upgrading to 64 GB (2x 32 GB)

Hope it will last as long as possible.


----------

