# iMac: Mid 2017 vs iMac Pro ?



## Opa (Jun 6, 2017)

Surprised I couldn't find this posted yet.

So, buy an almost fully tricked out Mid 2017 iMac (4.2Ghz Quad / 64gb RAM) for $3,899 this week or wait 7 months for a nice space grey iMac Pro for $5k? 

Any idea how LR, Affinity, and other photo apps will run on the Mid 2017 vs the iMac Pro? I'd guess that there'd be little difference in LR? Or perhaps a lot? Other thoughts? Likely worth the wait?

I've been limping along on my mid 2010 Mac Pro (2.8Ghz Quad) since, well late 2010. I've bumped up the RAM and added SSD's. It functions but can be kind of boggy sometimes. It'd be nice to upgrade now but I could make it until the end of the year. I'm assuming that 

Thanks.


----------



## clee01l (Jun 7, 2017)

Save your pennies. I think I'd wait longer than 7 months to see the traffic report first.


----------



## LouieSherwin (Jun 7, 2017)

I running a Mac Pro (Mid 2012) 3.2 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon with 32GB memory and a 480 GB SSD that I purchased refurbished in 2013. Since switching to a Sony A7R2 this year this system is working pretty hard to render the Sony raw files. 

I am thinking upgrading to a refurbished Mac Pro (2013) 3.7GHz 6 core. I think it may give me the processor speed bump I need without the extra expense of an all-in-one iMac. We shall see. 

One of the things to keep in mind is that as far as I know Lightroom will only use 4 cores even if you have more available. This may have changed in recent releases. If someone knows differently I would like to know.

-louie


----------



## clee01l (Jun 7, 2017)

LouieSherwin said:


> One of the things to keep in mind is that as far as I know Lightroom will only use 4 cores even if you have more available. This may have changed in recent releases. If someone knows differently I would like to know.


No first hand knowledge, but I've seen comments that LR will use up to 6 cores but no more (If you have 8 or 12)


----------



## Opa (Jun 7, 2017)

Good point about the cores as that seems one of the more critical benefits of the iMac Pro. It'd be nice to know what the plans are to take advantage of coming machines.


----------



## rob211 (Jul 1, 2017)

Yeah, I dunno. Some stuff on the iMac Pro is irritating, like no user replaceable RAM. And I agree about the cores; maybe it'll change, but I don't think you'd see much boost from that. And then there's the graphics; does Adobe support what's gonna be in the iMac Pro? Frankly on my 2014 iMac 4.0 I don't see real significant slowdown until I start messing with an image with a lot of edits, esp something like a fisheye I've corrected to remove the fish and also have denoised, etc.


----------



## Hub (Jul 20, 2017)

I'm considering purchase of a new iMac 27" for editing RAW files on Lightroom (previously used Aperture on an old 21" iMac). As a 70-year-old, I comprehend only A BIT about Mac internals. I'm considering the most basic configuration (3.4 GHz quad-core i5; Radion 570 with 4 GB v.ram) with 512 GB SSD option. I would upgrade RAM to 16 GB. I'm not a pro photographer, and typically shoot 100 images a week, and might want to do edits on a half dozen (no work flow considerations!). Appreciate any advice on iMac model/internals suitable for the task. Thanks!


----------



## clee01l (Jul 20, 2017)

Welcome to the forum.  As one 70 y.o. to another.  I'd heartily recommend the larger screen and even a second monitor.  If your visual acuity is like mine, you will not appreciate LR's small gray characters on a grayer background for panel information.  But these effects can be minimal


----------



## Hub (Jul 20, 2017)

Thanks for the tip, Cletus.  Planning on the 27" screen for image size, hadn't even considered gray on gray small print!


----------



## Opa (Jun 9, 2019)

Updating an old post. I did wait on the iMac Pro and glad I did. Ended up with a 3.2GHz Xeon W w/ 8 cores, 64Gb RAM, Radeon Pro Vega 64 w/ 16Gb.  Overall great performance.

Next up is better external storage for it.


----------

