Looks like Apple just ate Alder Lake for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. They even hinted at a revised Mac Pro. I cannot even imagine.
Some wait is probably in order before such definitive comment: in the x86 camp AMD Threadripper is to beat in the HEDT sector, while Intel is surely not sitting idle. Also M1 CPU architecture as a platform is well over a year old at this point: Why don't they upgrade all their platforms to M1 within a short window can't fathom, with M2 Pro/Max/Ultra away at least in mid to late 2023
What's missing? No upgradeability. At all. None. Zero. Nada. No way to upgrade the RAM, SSD or any other components. What you get is what you get. Forever. You are welcome. Not even a M.2 slot for when the built in SSD seems very slow and small two years from now.
Those GPU speed/power charts were missing the name of the discrete GPUs they used for comparison. The charts shown when the M1 Pro and Max when the MacBook Pro was released ended up being very misleading. How exactly does the M1 Ultra stack up to a RTX 3090 when ray tracing in Blender? Who knows? Guess we have to wait for a real review to find out. We do know that that the M1 Max hash rate is around 10.7 MH/s while a 3090 gets 121 MH/s so even if the M1 Ultra is twice as fast, it is still 1/6th the speed of the 3090.
Popular discrete GPU performance data from testing Core i9-12900K with DDR5 memory and GeForce RTX 3060 Ti. Highest-end discrete GPU performance data from testing Core i9-12900K with DDR5 memory and GeForce RTX 3090. Performance tests are conducted using specific computer systems and reflect the approximate performance of Mac Studio.
RIP 27" iMac. End of an era. Back to boxes and cables. Hey, wanna steal my life? Grab this little box off my desk.
I have long wondered about the omission of (and asked for) the ubiquitous lock slot...? The previous mini might have been tight for room, yet this case would seem to afford such with ease... Clearly it is meant to sit on a desk vs in a locked cabinet... Sigh...
OutdoorAppDeveloper said: Those GPU speed/power charts were missing the name of the discrete GPUs they used for comparison.
They definitely included comparisons to the "most popular" GPU configuration in the current Mac Pro as well as the "most powerful" GPU configuration in the current Mac Pro. That's in addition to the specific GPU comparisons for current iMac models.
What's missing? No upgradeability. At all. None. Zero. Nada. No way to upgrade the RAM, SSD or any other components. What you get is what you get. Forever. You are welcome. Not even a M.2 slot for when the built in SSD seems very slow and small two years from now.
Those GPU speed/power charts were missing the name of the discrete GPUs they used for comparison. The charts shown when the M1 Pro and Max when the MacBook Pro was released ended up being very misleading. How exactly does the M1 Ultra stack up to a RTX 3090 when ray tracing in Blender? Who knows? Guess we have to wait for a real review to find out. We do know that that the M1 Max hash rate is around 10.7 MH/s while a 3090 gets 121 MH/s so even if the M1 Ultra is twice as fast, it is still 1/6th the speed of the 3090.
There is no M.2 as fast as the built in storage in these things.
They did name the GPU, the Ultra was being compared to an RTX 3090. It’s at the bottom of the slide just like last time.
Okay, so there were two statements made that sealed the fate of the larger iMac. The first was that the Mac Studio and Studio display were the perfect for 27” iMac users. The second statement was at the very end when he said there was only one Mac left to tradition, the Mac Pro.
So, there will be no iMac Pro, no iMac with a larger screen. The 24” iMac is it. The Mac Studio is the future and I’m okay with that.
I agree. When you consider cost (the entry iMac Pro was $5,000 vs $3600 for the Mac Studio + Display Studio) and performance, there is no reason to release a revised iMac Pro, IMO.
At the end when he said we have one more but that’s for another day and said the Mac Pro… so this studio isn’t going to be their biggest powerhouse but merely a stepping stone.. What the hell will the new Mac Pro be packed with??
What's missing? No upgradeability. At all. None. Zero. Nada. No way to upgrade the RAM, SSD or any other components. What you get is what you get. Forever. You are welcome. Not even a M.2 slot for when the built in SSD seems very slow and small two years from now.
Those GPU speed/power charts were missing the name of the discrete GPUs they used for comparison. The charts shown when the M1 Pro and Max when the MacBook Pro was released ended up being very misleading. How exactly does the M1 Ultra stack up to a RTX 3090 when ray tracing in Blender? Who knows? Guess we have to wait for a real review to find out. We do know that that the M1 Max hash rate is around 10.7 MH/s while a 3090 gets 121 MH/s so even if the M1 Ultra is twice as fast, it is still 1/6th the speed of the 3090.
Exactly, instead of an all-in-one package with a 27" iMac, they release this overpriced monitor and a cpu with no upgradeability in a box. Cool. Cool.
Are you two obtuse? Or sponsored by Intel?
The only possible thing to knock is the lack of RAM upgradeability. Thunderbolt 4 is plenty fast for an SSD upgrade, external GPU, etc. But I guess it lacks the cool cool factor of taking selfies with an exposed motherboard.
Okay, so there were two statements made that sealed the fate of the larger iMac. The first was that the Mac Studio and Studio display were the perfect for 27” iMac users. The second statement was at the very end when he said there was only one Mac left to tradition, the Mac Pro.
So, there will be no iMac Pro, no iMac with a larger screen. The 24” iMac is it. The Mac Studio is the future and I’m okay with that.
I agree. When you consider cost (the entry iMac Pro was $5,000 vs $3600 for the Mac Studio + Display Studio) and performance, there is no reason to release a revised iMac Pro, IMO.
Agree on iMac Pro. Disagree on iMac 27". There's no real reason to believe Apple won't release a 27" or larger iMac at a later date. The screen size has nothing to do with the use of M series processors.
Okay, so there were two statements made that sealed the fate of the larger iMac. The first was that the Mac Studio and Studio display were the perfect for 27” iMac users. The second statement was at the very end when he said there was only one Mac left to tradition, the Mac Pro.
So, there will be no iMac Pro, no iMac with a larger screen. The 24” iMac is it. The Mac Studio is the future and I’m okay with that.
I agree. When you consider cost (the entry iMac Pro was $5,000 vs $3600 for the Mac Studio + Display Studio) and performance, there is no reason to release a revised iMac Pro, IMO.
Agree on iMac Pro. Disagree on iMac 27". There's no real reason to believe Apple won't release a 27" or larger iMac at a later date. The screen size has nothing to do with the use of M series processors.
You are right, I was talking specifically about the iMac Pro, considering the Studio is a low / midrange workstation. The closest thing you could have to an iMac 27" is a Mac Mini + Display Studio, and it starts at $2,300. That's more expensive that the entry iMac 27" at $1,800.
Because they mentioned, there's (only) one more transition to go, with mac pro. I think, mac pro will also use M1 chip. Probably, they gonna attach 3 x M1 Max to each other for a price of 6'000 USD and 2 M1 Ultra for a price of 8'000 USD and that will be the highest spec Mac Computer. Size will be probably like the pics on the rumors, a miniaturized form of a current mac pro, like maybe twice as big as mac studio. Because, they mentioned there's one more transition to go, i think, they just killed IMac Pro. With this studio display (27 inches) and a mac studio, there won't be any need for a Imac Pro.
Okay, so there were two statements made that sealed the fate of the larger iMac. The first was that the Mac Studio and Studio display were the perfect for 27” iMac users. The second statement was at the very end when he said there was only one Mac left to tradition, the Mac Pro.
So, there will be no iMac Pro, no iMac with a larger screen. The 24” iMac is it. The Mac Studio is the future and I’m okay with that.
I agree. When you consider cost (the entry iMac Pro was $5,000 vs $3600 for the Mac Studio + Display Studio) and performance, there is no reason to release a revised iMac Pro, IMO.
Agree on iMac Pro. Disagree on iMac 27". There's no real reason to believe Apple won't release a 27" or larger iMac at a later date. The screen size has nothing to do with the use of M series processors.
Very true they could at some point release a larger iMac, they can always change their mind, But John did say there was only one Mac left to transition; the Mac Pro. That would imply everything coming along through the transition is done, leaving the 27” iMac behind.
What's missing? No upgradeability. At all. None. Zero. Nada. No way to upgrade the RAM, SSD or any other components. What you get is what you get. Forever. You are welcome. Not even a M.2 slot for when the built in SSD seems very slow and small two years from now.
Those GPU speed/power charts were missing the name of the discrete GPUs they used for comparison. The charts shown when the M1 Pro and Max when the MacBook Pro was released ended up being very misleading. How exactly does the M1 Ultra stack up to a RTX 3090 when ray tracing in Blender? Who knows? Guess we have to wait for a real review to find out. We do know that that the M1 Max hash rate is around 10.7 MH/s while a 3090 gets 121 MH/s so even if the M1 Ultra is twice as fast, it is still 1/6th the speed of the 3090.
Exactly, instead of an all-in-one package with a 27" iMac, they release this overpriced monitor and a cpu with no upgradeability in a box. Cool. Cool.
You and that other guy haven’t been paying attention for the last two years have you. Get a clue.
Comments
Lonnnggg time in coming and most said it would never be done...
The previous mini might have been tight for room, yet this case would seem to afford such with ease...
Clearly it is meant to sit on a desk vs in a locked cabinet... Sigh...
M1 Zilla.
The only possible thing to knock is the lack of RAM upgradeability. Thunderbolt 4 is plenty fast for an SSD upgrade, external GPU, etc. But I guess it lacks the cool cool factor of taking selfies with an exposed motherboard.
Very true they could at some point release a larger iMac, they can always change their mind, But John did say there was only one Mac left to transition; the Mac Pro. That would imply everything coming along through the transition is done, leaving the 27” iMac behind.