2019 iMac i9 + PT 2018 + Mojave

[Loudnoize Ent.]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

Oh dear, well spotted.

To the OP: I hope you really do not have only 8GB installed... not on a new i9 class system.

This iMac is really a laptop hiding inside and so has a mobile i9 CPU with only two memory channels (not the 4 in a “real” desktop i9). It has two DIMM slots on each memory channel. You have to keep both those channels populated with identical DIMMs configurations. So could, as suggested above, keep your 2x4GB DIMMs and add 2x8GB DIMMs, but if me I would probably buy all new 4x8GB DIMMs and get 64GB. That iMac actually supports up to 128GB if you want to go crazy. Buy from OWC or similar high quality seller.

Lots of memory always helps, modern Pro Tools systems requirements is 16GB, it’s possible but a challenge to run on less, being able to throw lots of stuff at disk cache is great, even a web browser (cough Chrome) nowadays can easily burn 8GB.

Darryl, I couldn't agree more. 32GB of ram would be good, 64 would be even better. You mention 2 memory channels vs 4 in the latest 2019 iMac i9. Is there a noticeable difference in performance? Also, I currently run the latest Mac mini 2018 i7 6 Core (32gb ram). It's pretty much a little beast and I'm able to run large sessions with VI's, plugins, tracks, etc, including Vienna Ensemble Pro (18 channels) but the Mac mini temperature does fluctuate between 85 degrees Celsius and 98... sometimes even hitting 100. I'm running this setup roughly 10 hours a day. Would I be better off with the iMac i9 8 core? The overall specs seem to be good, almost doubling what I can get now, according to what I've read. Thanks.

Btw, I don't mean to take away from the original post. Error -6101 is a huge concern for me too.

[rwbreck]

Re RAM, everyone you are for sure correct, 8GB is not ideal but Apple charges ridiculous amounts of money to buy it configured with more. I'm intending to upgrade myself once the budget recovers a bit.

(Interestingly enough, can verify that the built-in output only supports Fs up to 48kHz... unlike my dinosaur 2010 MBP which can go up to 96k, though I suppose I will never be taking my 27" iMac to a coffee shop for editing.... would have been helpful for troubleshooting though.)

I am running 10.14.4 which is the latest version of Mojave; it's what came installed on the machine. I'm not quite a week in so can't give a comprehensive assessment of fan noise, but I have not noticed any obvious issues with it yet.

AlexLakis, glad to hear you are running Mojave without issues. I tried a different brand TB3-2 adapter yesterday and still had the problem, so I can confirm that the Apple adapter was not the issue. (Also, surprisingly the cheapest one out there...)

CPU overloads have cleared up a ton since disabling hyperthreading, to what I think is a reasonable amount, and meanwhile my sessions are much more responsive. As others have mentioned, I anticipate that will only improve with even more RAM. The main question left is where the clicking is coming from.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/atsucg0s44...licks.wav?dl=0

Here are a few seconds from a recent bounce that demonstrates what I am hearing. Does this sound like anything anyone has heard before?
Edit: Note that, in this session, I am using AFX onboard my Antelope interface as a hardware insert in Pro Tools, so the bounce path includes a round trip to/from my interface via Thunderbolt. I suspect the Thunderbolt connection is where the clicking is coming from, but not sure if it's PT or Mojave or interface that is at the root of Thunderbolt issue.

[Darryl Ramm]

Originally Posted by Loudnoize Ent.

You mention 2 memory channels vs 4 in the latest 2019 iMac i9. Is there a noticeable difference in performance? Also, I currently run the latest Mac mini 2018 i7 6 Core (32gb ram). It's pretty much a little beast and I'm able to run large sessions with VI's, plugins, tracks, etc, including Vienna Ensemble Pro (18 channels) but the Mac mini temperature does fluctuate between 85 degrees Celsius and 98... sometimes even hitting 100. I'm running this setup roughly 10 hours a day. Would I be better off with the iMac i9 8 core? The overall specs seem to be good, almost doubling what I can get now, according to what I've read. Thanks.

Well there can be a noticeable difference in performance, for the right definition of noticeable Easy to show in a micro benchmark that looks at memory bandwidth. But for real world Pro Tools use... I would not worrying about that specifically, well not compared to all the other stuff... the iMac is kinda a laptop architecture systems shoved into an all-in-one desktop package. It's larger performance issues for Pro Tools may be thermal management performance limits/throttling... which is what you touch on with your Mac Mini. While I expect the i9 in an iMac to outperform an i7 in a mac mini for lots of workloads, comparing Mini and iMac performance differences under heavy load/CPU throttling is an interesting interesting question and I'd not want to guess how they perform in that situation. You really want both side by side running the same workload to see.

The iMac Pro has a Xeon W CPU and it does have quad memory channels and a lot higher-end thermal design. On memory: it's a PITA as there is no memory access door to allow easy memory DIMM upgrades. That's likely becase there are more DIMMs supported and you would gave to have to gave large access doors, and the heavier end cooling heat pipes and venting for the Xeon get in the way more (and you also need more cooling airflow for all those DIMMs). The Xeon has ECC and that and the extra cores on the higest end Xeon Ws really the only benefit, otherwise these core for core are just equal to desktop Core i9/i7 processors... but more to the real desktop versions of those Core i7/i9 CPUs with higher TDP that the near laptop ones used elsewhere. And at the very high end can a iMac Pro really keep all those cores running and the cool enough, the thermal design in the iMac Pro looks pretty light for a high-end system, so I'm dubious, but don't have one to try. Basically I'm just opposed to the design tradeoffs of jamming all that heat in either an iMac or iMac Pro into a compact all-in-one computer and really really wish Apple would finally deliver a serious Mac Pro computer for you know, actual professional users.

The Mac Mini finally got an upgrade and is a nice little box, but still expensive. It's also a close to laptop design, personally I'd stick with it and wait and see if Apple is able to deliver a decent new Mac Pro and a non-totally-obscene price. Apple keeps screwing up the high end, other folks will step in. Dell announced pretty impressive looking Precision 7000 workstations this week, maybe time to wake up Apple (not that I actually would buy anything from Dell).

Editorial over

[Loudnoize Ent.]

Thanks for the in-depth information I'll probably hang on to the mini until we hear news of a Mac pro, which I'm hoping within the next few months but I'm convinced that it won't be cheap. Back to the i7 mini versus i9 iMac, I would like to run my sessions side by side and see the results. I'm almost sure the iMac will run better but by how much. We'll begin seeing results here on the DUC soon enough, so this too will be interesting (thumbs up).

[Adupr]

Just wondering if anyone has a/b’d i7 mini vs iMac pro vs imac i9? Looking to pull trigger on one of these machines since I can say the Mac Pro is a little overkill for me.

[TimothyJohn]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

Well there can be a noticeable difference in performance, for the right definition of noticeable Easy to show in a micro benchmark that looks at memory bandwidth. But for real world Pro Tools use... I would not worrying about that specifically, well not compared to all the other stuff... the iMac is kinda a laptop architecture systems shoved into an all-in-one desktop package. It's larger performance issues for Pro Tools may be thermal management performance limits/throttling... which is what you touch on with your Mac Mini. While I expect the i9 in an iMac to outperform an i7 in a mac mini for lots of workloads, comparing Mini and iMac performance differences under heavy load/CPU throttling is an interesting interesting question and I'd not want to guess how they perform in that situation. You really want both side by side running the same workload to see.

The iMac Pro has a Xeon W CPU and it does have quad memory channels and a lot higher-end thermal design. On memory: it's a PITA as there is no memory access door to allow easy memory DIMM upgrades. That's likely becase there are more DIMMs supported and you would gave to have to gave large access doors, and the heavier end cooling heat pipes and venting for the Xeon get in the way more (and you also need more cooling airflow for all those DIMMs). The Xeon has ECC and that and the extra cores on the higest end Xeon Ws really the only benefit, otherwise these core for core are just equal to desktop Core i9/i7 processors... but more to the real desktop versions of those Core i7/i9 CPUs with higher TDP that the near laptop ones used elsewhere. And at the very high end can a iMac Pro really keep all those cores running and the cool enough, the thermal design in the iMac Pro looks pretty light for a high-end system, so I'm dubious, but don't have one to try. Basically I'm just opposed to the design tradeoffs of jamming all that heat in either an iMac or iMac Pro into a compact all-in-one computer and really really wish Apple would finally deliver a serious Mac Pro computer for you know, actual professional users.

The Mac Mini finally got an upgrade and is a nice little box, but still expensive. It's also a close to laptop design, personally I'd stick with it and wait and see if Apple is able to deliver a decent new Mac Pro and a non-totally-obscene price. Apple keeps screwing up the high end, other folks will step in. Dell announced pretty impressive looking Precision 7000 workstations this week, maybe time to wake up Apple (not that I actually would buy anything from Dell).

Editorial over

This fellow is comparing video benchmarks between the iMac i9 8 core and the iMac Pro, and is very complimentary to the i9 iMac. He states that heat and throttling are NOT issues. The tradeoff is the graphics card and the number of thunderbolt ports. Others seem to recommend the 2019 i9 iMac 8 core for audio. They claim that this is the only "bone" Apple is throwing to users like us. As I'm sure you're aware now, the Mac Pro comes in at 6 grand. Both the iMac i9 8 core and the iMac Pro (base model, 32 gb RAM and 1tb ssd) seem to be compelling choices. But the i9 is a bit cheaper. Yet even though he is animate regarding the heat and fan noise of the iMac i9 being excellent; the iMac Pro's heat dissipation just seems to be more robust...industrial strength. The Mac Pro at $6,000 grand is an engineering marvel, if the claims are true-maxed out processors running indefinitely at full capacity with no thermal issues. If Apple let go of it's neurotic obsession with "thin", and refocused their efforts on quiet and cool, well we'd have nothing to complain about other than price, would we? Oh, and their ridiculous obsession with making us all buy dozens of adapters and port bays...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X40N0HSm6Yw

By the way, my 2011 17" i7 MacBook Pro is getting long in the tooth. It ALWAYS had heat issues, and Apple actually replaced the graphics and motherboard (out of warranty-free of charge--class action lawsuit). Any ideas on replacing? My reading of the reports shows that the 2019 i9 isn't AS HOT as the 2018. Are there any MacBook Pros that can handle on-the-fly, portable, untethered editing, both Pro Tools and video? The lack of ports and MagSafe is distressing. Not to mention the fact that my UAD Laptop solo express card SHARC won't be usable; AND I'll miss having 2 internal 1tb SSD's. But the UAD Arrow is thunderbolt bus powered. I digress. But the heat thing with Apple is getting to be a boring story at this point; not to mention the lack of ports on their pro laptops...

Oh, and the iMac i9 8 core does NOT use the T2 chip, for whatever that's worth. And the RAM is EASILY upgradable...

Here's the thermal test on the i9 iMac...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXIaSXU99-k

[Darryl Ramm]

Video applications that may be relatively single threaded and/or use a GPU a lot may not be that relevant to behavior running large Pro Tools sessions. Your best bet is finding other users here who run what you want to on a similar computer. Starting a new clear thread with that question may help you.

I'm not sure why you mention the T.2 I don't believe that affects updating DRAM. It sure does affect third parties changing security related things, like touch ID sensors.

The new Mac Pro and standard iMacs are at very different thermal design points. If spending that sort of money anyhow I would likely run past the iMac Pro to the new Mac Pro...

I am picking up a maxed out 2019 MacBook Pro i9 in a few days (maxed everything except 2TB SSD), will know more about them when I get to play with it... but my sessions absolutely do not need that much horsepower. So I'll have to play with stuff just to see what it can do. My 2016 Quad core i7 MacBook Pro is less of a heat hog that my previous 17" MacBooks, they would get so hot to handle. Even if the i7 quad is throttling I don't notice issues wit my workloads.

[Meads]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

I am picking up a maxed out 2019 MacBook Pro i9 in a few days (maxed everything except 2TB SSD), will know more about them when I get to play with it...

Are you aware of the rumored redesigned models that are probably going to be released soon?
https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-has-...a-report-says/

I wouldn't buy a new Macbook right now, without knowing what that is all about.

[Darryl Ramm]

Originally Posted by Meads

Are you aware of the rumored redesigned models that are probably going to be released soon?
https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-has-...a-report-says/

I wouldn't buy a new Macbook right now, without knowing what that is all about.

It's complicated. Apple is paying for most of this.

[TimothyJohn]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

Video applications that may be relatively single threaded and/or use a GPU a lot may not be that relevant to behavior running large Pro Tools sessions. Your best bet is finding other users here who run what you want to on a similar computer. Starting a new clear thread with that question may help you.

I'm not sure why you mention the T.2 I don't believe that affects updating DRAM. It sure does affect third parties changing security related things, like touch ID sensors.

The new Mac Pro and standard iMacs are at very different thermal design points. If spending that sort of money anyhow I would likely run past the iMac Pro to the new Mac Pro...

I am picking up a maxed out 2019 MacBook Pro i9 in a few days (maxed everything except 2TB SSD), will know more about them when I get to play with it... but my sessions absolutely do not need that much horsepower. So I'll have to play with stuff just to see what it can do. My 2016 Quad core i7 MacBook Pro is less of a heat hog that my previous 17" MacBooks, they would get so hot to handle. Even if the i7 quad is throttling I don't notice issues wit my workloads.

I mentioned the T2, because some are reporting i9 MacBook Pro crashes related to the T2. It is used on the iMac Pro, MacBook Pro and Mac mini. However, the T2 ideally is for performance enhancement.