Apple beefs up the intel based iMac

[ElmerJFudd]

Most powerful non-Xeon based iMac ever. Up to 10 Core i9 turbo boost to 5ghz, 128gb of RAM, 5k Retina Display, 8tb SSD, etc. They say it can run 65% more plugins in Logic Pro. Not cheap, but not as much as a Xeon based iMac Pro.

 

Tough sell with Apple processors right around the corner.

 

https://www.apple.com/imac/

[Joe Muscara]

I noticed they upgraded the FaceTime camera, I'm guessing because of everyone using these now for Zoom chats and the like.

 

I don't think it's a tough sell for some. If you need a faster iMac now, you get one of these and you know your stuff will work. We all know there will be some transition and growing pains when the Apple silicon models ship, and we don't even know where the iMacs will be in that pipeline. Those might be a year away, especially if the enclosure is changing.

 

They bumped up the "low-end" iMac Pro as well, keeping the price the same.

 

iMac Pro now comes standard with a 10-core Intel Xeon processor. Designed for pro users who require workstation-class performance, iMac Pro features Xeon processors up to 18 cores, graphics performance up to 22 teraflops, up to 256GB quad-channel ECC memory, and a brilliant 27-inch Retina 5K display.

[ElmerJFudd]

I agree. Everything in the Mac ecosystem works today on intel based Macs. They"ll support them for life of product and often beyond what they say.

[Geoff Grace]

While I agree that the new iMac is more compatible with current apps than the next generation will be, it should be noted that support for 32-bit apps is gone as of Catalina. This may or may not be an important consideration moving forward.

 

Best,

 

Geoff

[Reezekeys]

The first Intel MacBook Pro came out in January 2006. In June of that year I bought a.... PowerBook G4. When you're using your computer to make a living you go with what's working, not what promises to work better sometime in the future. Apple has a pretty good track record of making significant hardware & software changes smooth; dual-binary, Rosetta, Classic, etc. The idea that music software developers will suddenly stop developing or updating for Intel Macs seems far-fetched to me. I wouldn't be concerned at all buying a new Intel Mac right now if I actually needed a new computer.

 

I am curious to see how fast music software is updated for Apple Silicon and what the performance gains will be, if any. To join in on the speculating: I predict that Apple will use their silicon first to make their laptops smaller & slimmer and have better battery life â not necessarily to get the Geekbench numbers up. And truth be told, I haven't heard any musician here grumbling about how their current Macs are underpowered. So down the line you'll have a $700 laptop that runs a Logic session with 500 tracks and 200 instances of Space Designer. Great! I'm sure you'll get that hit song then! /s :-)

[Geoff Grace]

I haven't heard any musician here grumbling about how their current Macs are underpowered, either. I think we're mostly set for live gigging.

 

For recording and composing, however, there are a handful of plugins that demand a lot of current systems. Waves CLA MixHub and Spitfire Audio's new Symphonic Motions are two that come to mind. It seems that no matter how much processing power we get, there will be those who use it to expand software's limits.

 

Best,

 

Geoff