VIDEO: The new iMac Pro, hands on impressions

Written by

Marques Brownlee has had the new iMac Pro for about a week. In the video embedded below, he shows it off, shares his first impressions.

If you are in the market, this is absolutely worth your time.

Couple of notes here:

– Important to note that the new iMac Pro is not user upgradable. So if you are ordering, future proof best you can.

– Marques priced out a home built PC using the iMac Pro parts (or similarly specced parts where the actual parts are not yet available) and came up with a price of $5100. Comparing that to the iMac Pro base price of $4999, my take is that the iMac Pro is fairly priced.

– The fact that I cannot upgrade over time is an issue for me, though I suspect iFixit will eventually sell a kit to get me inside and 3rd parties will sell parts to upgrade. Eventually.

– The iMac Pro is very quiet, runs cool. That’s impressive, given the high end workstation grade parts jammed in to that svelte enclosure.



61 thoughts on “VIDEO: The new iMac Pro, hands on impressions”

  2. I expect that this is the start of Pro types of announcements with the Mac Pro and External GPU’s to follow. I know all the buzz is around graphics and video but I think that it looks like a great developer machine.

  8. He doesn’t give a source in the video but they don’t surprise me that much. Some of those parts will be VERY expensive in single unit quantity. A 2Tb SSD is around $1000 by itself. The video card is likely several hundred to a thousand. Toss in a 27″ 4k screen of high quality, a 10 core CPU that’s even close to comparable, etc and I’d be surprised if it’s not in the $4-6k range.

  9. Oh god, another person who thinks they get to define ‘pro’ for everyone else.

    Wait for the Mac Pro.

  10. Will it compile meaningfully faster than a current i7 iMac?

    Enough to even possibly justify the extra expense?

    I mean, I don’t do OSX development (I’m a professional developer, but for a Windows product; I use OSX for personal stuff), but generally speaking I’ve never seen a great move to development on the N>4-core chips, as being not especially optimized for that, enough to justify the expense.

  13. (Serious question, note, not sarcasm or snark; I don’t know how the experience works with Xcode!)

  14. While I get that the lack of upgradeability is a negative I wonder just how much of one it is.

    If I have a professional need for a machine like this (meaning I make money doing something that needs this level of power and that more power translates into more productivity and/or the ability to do things I couldn’t do before) then I can’t see myself keeping a machine for more than ~3 years. Even if you can replace the video card, storage, etc you can’t easily upgrade CPU, etc.

    So, the question for me would be “Can I spec out a machine that’s good for about 3 years and what percentage of that machine’s price will I get when I resell it?” This is what I do with my MacBooks – I buy new every 3 years, selling the old one. The old ones get about 40-50% of the price of the new one so a $1500 machine ends up costing me, net out of pocket, about $7-900. If you bought this iMac Pro for $5k now and sold it for, say, $2k in 3 years, it cost you $3k. If you spend on upgrades, is that more or less than what they would cost? Even if it’s more, you’ve also had the use of the machine which counts for something.

    This has all been a long way of saying that I don’t know if the lack of upgradability is as big of an issue in terms of ROI as it’s cracked up to be. Where I CAN see an issue is that you can’t tailor this via targeted upgrades in the same way as you could a machine that’s more modular. But that’s a different post…

  15. NOPE!

    iMac Pro has pro in the name. Pro’s need user upgradability. I’m not defining it for everybody, that is the definition already.

    Not going to wait for the Mac Pro either, especially when I shouldn’t have to.

  17. “The fact that I cannot upgrade over time is an issue for me, though I suspect iFixit will eventually sell a kit to get me inside and 3rd parties will sell parts to upgrade. Eventually.”

    I’m sure they will, but I bet you’re going to have to cut through a ton of glue and otherwise risk damaging essential parts to upgrade this.

  20. CPUs don’t improve very quickly anymore, but other components do, so I think it’s still valuable to be able to upgrade them on different time cycles (or as prices drop). It’s much nicer to have the option to move up to 128GB RAM a couple of years from now rather than having to guess up front if you might need it in the future.

    The cheesegraters were useful forever. Some people ran the same machine for a decade. Every couple of years, they’d pay a few hundred bucks and add something (more RAM, extra drives, SSDs, better and/or second displays), etc. I think a lot of people prefer this model to the approach of “sell the old one and migrate to a new one every 2-3 years” that you’ve mentioned.

    As nice as this machine is, I think it misses the mark in the same way the old G4 cube did and the current 15″ MBP does. I think what most people in this market segment want is a modern cheesegrater. Which leaves the iMac Pro with a small share of a very small share of the overall Mac market.

  21. Not at all! You just proved my point, thanks!

    Mine does, I hope yours doesn’t, since you don’t understand basic logic!

  22. You’re… not bright are you? There IS no universal definition of pro. There’s yours and given your posts here I’m not inclined to worry much about what you think. Also, /bye. Not spending more time on the cognitively impaired.

  23. Actually, I am. There is an universal definition of pro, and that includes user upgradability. There isn’t just mine, its universal for all people. And since you can’t recognize that as you are cognitively impaired, I understand why you can’t spend more time on this conversation. Its over your head.

  24. However, do people who ran the old Pros for 5, 7, 10 years REALLY need cutting edge performance? Because they weren’t getting it after right first few years.

    If one does add things here and there you might come close to spending the difference between new and resale of old machine but you’re still stuck with the old bus architecture and CPU. That compromise will become more and more of a detriment over time.

    I’m not considering there the desire to tinker. I don’t care about that. I’m coming at this from the point of view of someone who truly needs the best performance possible where it makes a real difference in their ability to do their job. Scratching an itch to play etc isn’t relevant here.

    I think you’re also wrong about the market for this – it’s specifically targeted at people like Brownlee and others who rationally desire the best performance possible and are fine with replacing a machine every 3 years or so vs insisting on tinkering. There’s a market for the latter but it’s not really a pro market. The Pro market for the people who really DO need to customize their machines is tiny. Oh, a lot of others will jump on that… but many of them will always make the BS comparison to building a PC where they compare older, slower SSDs with the kind we have here and try to pass off the i7 as if it’s pretty much the same as a Xeon.

  25. Also… for the “CPUs don’t improve much” argument: http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2017/12/12/apples-new-imacpro-has-an-impressive-200-300-speed-bump/

    “Whether you’re editing 8K RED video, H.264 4K Drone footage, 6K 3D VR content or 50 Megapixel RAW stills – you can expect a 200-300% increase in performance in almost every industry leading software with the iMac Pro.”

    Anyone who doubts if this machine is truly pro is more interested in gatekeeping than actual discussion. Sorry.

  26. Sure, there’s a big boost. But it’s unclear to me that’s due to the CPU… maybe it’s mostly the GPU? And he’s comparing a consumer-level iMac (i7 and some rando mid-level consumer GPU) to Xeon and Vega. That doesn’t tell us much about how Xeon performance has improved over time.

    I didn’t say the iMac Pro wasn’t “pro”. I am saying I think most people who are in the market for a workstation mac (i.e. “pro” desktop) would prefer a modular, upgradable system.

  27. think about what you’re saying… that you know what ‘most people who are in the market for a workstation Mac’ want. But APPLE doesn’t? Do you really think they just decided to build this over lunch?

    It never ceases to amuse me to see people think they know precisely what the market wants and Apple doesn’t when most of you are going off wha you and perhaps your acquaintances want.

  28. Wow, that’s an incredible example of black-and-white thinking, and flawed to boot. You define something (“pro machine”) in an arbitrary way and then use your arbitrary definition to make a judgment without any actual thought.

    You need to engage the rest of your brain.

  29. I have engaged the rest of my brain. Maybe you need to to likewise.

    It not arbitrary to define pro machines as upgradable. That’s a big different that separates them from consumer.

    So I use the correct definition to make a proper judgement that this isn’t a pro machine.

  30. First principles: what is the purpose of a “pro” machine? Clearly, to be suitable for professional use.

    Many will find the iMac Pro to be so, and that by itself invalidates your claim.

  31. Correct. And pro’s grow, sometimes quickly. Unable to upgrade means they’ll have to spend another $5000.

    Many will find the iMac not to be suitable, so that invalidates your claim.

  32. Apple doesn’t bat 1.000. The G4 Cube was a mistake. The trashcan Mac Pro was obviously a mistake.

    Of course, in this case they’re hedging their bets by also releasing a new Mac Pro (and taking the unprecedented step of pre-announcing it more than a year ahead of time), so… remind me, what was the point of your appeal to authority?

  33. Not sarcasm taken. We’ll see how it looks and beyond Craig Hunter that Rick Gregory linked to below I haven’t seen anything yet. DHH was given one so we’ll see what he says.

    For single threaded tasks like compiling it should make some difference because of shear horsepower – also I/O and memory figure heavily into things like compile times. Also the whole deploy cycle to emulators and such should be faster. I would also hope Apple’s dev team takes advantage of extra processors.

    However when I’m developing I’m rarely just doing one thing. I have docker containers loading/unloading, databases, servers, and a couple of different dev environments running. It think in these situations it will help a lot. But that’s just spidey sense, not real data.

    I also think having a really cool iMac Pro would make me more cool by association. 😉

  34. Wrong from the get go and throughout subsequent posts. The iMac Pro will sell like hotcakes, despite is price and its non-upgradeability. Doesn’t matter what it’s called.

    What counts is that it’s a kick-ass machine, well worth its price to those who need the power.

    If you can’t properly estimate how many cores or how much memory you’ll need, then that’s YOUR fault, not Apple’s.

    Those who need the power and who put it work well will easily be able to buy the next bigger thing, too. It’s easy to sell such machines for re-sale, both on the sale and the re-sale.

  35. Correct from the get go and throughout subsequent posts. Its irreverent how it will sell, because once people realize they’ve been gipped, they’ll be pissed because they can’t upgrade it.

    What counts is its lack of upgradability, and it won’t be worth it to those who need the power, because they can’t upgrade it later.

    If I can’t estimate how much memory I need, because its impossible, and I can’t fix it after purchase, that’s not my fault, but APPLE’S fault. Apple is simply aiming for lower costs upfront and higher costs down the road. I have plenty of use upgradable memory, and in 20 years I’ve never had to remove the modules and clean them to remedy system failures. This isn’t 1985.

    Those who need the power will be pissed they’ll have to spend another $5000 just to upgrade the memory and go through the hassle of selling it just to get a little back.

    Its a bad idea to not allow user upgradable memory.

  37. The fact that you can’t sense the irony, means everyone else will continue to laugh at you.

    By your definition, Macbook Pro/Powerbook were never “pro” machines, despite all the “pro” customers who have loved theirs throughout the years.

    Btw, I’m pretty sure Apple were one of the first to dub the “pro” moniker in their product marketing. No, I’m not saying they invented the professional market. I’m saying they dubbed the pro branding. They can call whatever the hell they want “pro.” Its all just branding.

    Pro means peak performance. Thats what it has always meant. Nothing more.

  38. Oh I sense the irony, that people who are laughing at me should be laughing at themselves at how wrong they are.

    Apple can’t call pro whatever they want, because they’ll be wrong.

    Pro means peak performance and upgradability. That’s what it has always meant. Definitely more.

  40. <

    blockquote>Google is paying 97$ per hour,with weekly payouts.You can also avail this.
    On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $11752 this last four weeks..with-out any doubt it’s the most-comfortable job I have ever done .. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
    !da270d:
    ➽➽
    ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleCashDesignCareerPartTimeJobs/get/hourly… ★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫:::::!da270uuu

  41. Now, this looks like a fast computer. And an expensive one. No user upgradeability will certainly be a point for some, especially taking apple’s premium markups on RAM and SSD into account.

    It is a great successor to the nMP, though. Fast, silent, with a small physical footprint and a much welcomed hardware und form-factor update at a comparable price.

    Otoh, it feels like a stopgap until the new, new MacPro comes out. By then, regular iMacs could easily reach similar speeds as the iMac Pros (e.g. using a successor of intel’s 8700k cpu, which is already is faster than the iMac Pro’s Xeons in a lot of use-cases). And the new MacPro would take over the faster configurations of the iMac Pro and expand on it’s target audience with more modularity. Maybe we’ll get the option of a space-gray iMac then, for just $200 more 🙂

    Btw., what happens to the old new MacPro until it’s official successor comes out ? I don’t see much reasons why anyone would want to buy one now.

  42. Just caught myself drooling just a little bit. Now, if only there was a suitable matching Apple Display to add to it.

  43. another dude confusing “DIY tinkerer” for “pro”. as pros in the office, we aren’t tinkering with ram upgrades. we order loaded, use, earn money, then retire machine years down the road. IT depts aren’t performing ram upgrades on the fleet. nor am i at home any longer — loaded imac lasted me 7 years so far. my time is worth more than dicking around.

  44. that’s what it’s meant to you. you forgot that part.

    if you buy a high performance sport car, do you imagine you’d be performing your down DIY maintenance? nope, too complicated. you drop it off with a pro mechanic. same thing.

  46. Not at all! Its not tinkering to upgrade your memory. As pros in the office, we are upgrading our memory. We don’t order the biggest configuration at first, because we don’t need it. We earn money, expand our business, and expand our computers.

    IT departments ARE constantly upgrading memory in the fleet- its the cheapest way to get more performance out of an older computer.

    I bought an iMac with 8GB, upgraded to 16GB, then to 32GB as my needs increased. I don’t have to buy a new computer each time.

  48. Nope I didn’t forgot that part because its wrong.

    Yes, I do expect to be able to tune my high performance sports car.

  50. facts negate your bullshit claims — IBM and others showed a LOWER TCO after switching to macs. they weren’t using MPs.

    dur dur. so long charlie.

  51. There is one- its the one everybody talks about. Don’t need a link. You also don’t need to “work” on computers to upgrade memory. Its very simple nowadays.

  52. Actually facts negate YOUR claims. The TCO had nothing to with whether they were upgradable or not, but the fact that the hardware and software was high quality.

    DUR DUR I DON’T UNDERSTAND BASIC LOGIC.

  53. Xcode does a decent job of distributing compile tasks across cores. Of course the linking phase is less “parallelizable.”

  54. A pro is someone who makes money at doing something. A pro machine is a suitable machine for making money with.

    Do a lot of professional users want user-upgradeable components? Sure!

    But does that mean that it’s a universal definition and any other professional user who thinks otherwise is wrong? To say that is just being childish.

    Lots of pros buy brand new machines before they ever need to upgrade components. Component-upgradeability isn’t relevant to them.

  56. NO ONE bats 1.000. That’s a ridiculous standard. You keep bringing up the G4 Cube which was, what, 15 years ago? You also skip over the fact that you keep claiming to know the market better than they which is patently silly. And no, the occasional misfire by Apple doesn’t put them on the same footing as an anonymous commenter on the web.

  60. … which isn’t much of a thought, except in the fully imaginary sense, if we’re being honest 😉

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *