Benchmarks for high-end iMac 5K show 75 percent speed gain over 2017 model

A set of new benchmarks for what appears to be the high-end iMac 5K have surfaced, with the published results from Geekbench suggesting it will be a considerable upgrade compared with the 2017 refresh of the Mac product line.

Appearing on the Geekbench results browser as "iMac19.1," the model tested is described as having an Intel Core i9-9900K processor, an eight-core chip with a base frequency of 3.6GHz. Reportedly running macOS 10.14.4, the device is also equipped with 16 gigabytes of DDR4 memory.

The results claim it has a single-core score of 6314 and a multi-core score of 33,713. Both are considerable improvements on the mid-2017 27-inch iMac, which was equipped with an Intel Core i7-7700K in one set of benchmarks, with single-core and multi-core scores of 5,684 and 19,372 respectively.

In AppleInsider's own testing of the 2019 iMac 4K, the test unit achieved a single-core score of 4,819 and 14,410 for multi-core tests. That particular model had the base configuration of a Core i3 processor clocked at 3.6GHz and 8 gigabytes of memory.

Apple refreshed its iMac lineup on March 19 as part of a collection of product changes. Among the changes includes upgrades to 8th-generation processors for the 21.5-inch iMac, 9th-generation six-core and eight-core processors for the 27-inch iMac, and GPU options for the Radeon Pro Vega 20 and Vega 48 respectively.

The current 5K iMacs start from $1,799 with a 3.0GHz six-core processor, 8GB of RAM, a 1TB Fusion drive, and Radeon Pro 570X graphics. The higher-priced $2,299 configuration boasts a 3.7GHz six-core i5 processor, 8GB of RAM, a 2TB Fusion drive, and a Radeon Pro 580X, with options to upgrade to a Core i9 processor for $400 and Vega 48 graphics for $450.

22 Comments

entropys 4298 comments · 13 Years

About 5 years ago

I think I will have to get one. My questions are:

will it take faster RAM?
Will it be noticeably faster to insert a 256GB SSD than the 2TB fusion drive?
will it be noticeably faster with a bigger SSD?
Will the i9 throttle, especially with the Vega 48?

randominternetperson 3095 comments · 8 Years

About 5 years ago

Interesting to see the difference in how two different AI writers present similar benchmarks (about different machines).

In the review of the 4K iMac, Mark Linsangan writes:

"In our testing, the iMac 4K posted a CPU score of 1472. For comparison, our 2018 MacBook Pro with a six-core i7 Processor posted a CPU score of 2396 which is only about 1.6x higher than the iMac 4K."

In this article, Malcolm Owen, writes:

"The results claim it has a single-core score of 6314 and a multi-core score of 33,713. Both are considerable improvements on the mid-2017 27-inch iMac, which was equipped with an Intel Core i7-7700K in one set of benchmarks, with single-core and multi-core scores of 5,684 and 19,372 respectively."

So a 63% difference (between a high end MacBook Pro and an iMac; 1,472 versus 2,396) is no big deal, but a 11% different (between newer and older iMacs; 6314 versus 5684) or 74% (33,713 versus 19,372) is "considerable."

I don't think I'd call 11% "considerable" and I wouldn't dismiss the 63% difference between a MacBook Pro and an iMac.

randominternetperson 3095 comments · 8 Years

About 5 years ago

entropys said:

I think I will have to get one. My questions are:
will it take faster RAM?
Will it be noticeably faster to insert a 256GB SSD than the 2TB fusion drive?
will it be noticeably faster with a bigger SSD?
Will the i9 throttle, especially with the Vega 48?

No, or if even if it would it wouldn't run any faster.
Absolutely for large I/O intensive tasks (which blow through the fusion cache).
No.
Dunno.

dewme 5736 comments · 10 Years

About 5 years ago

entropys said:

I think I will have to get one. My questions are:
will it take faster RAM?
Will it be noticeably faster to insert a 256GB SSD than the 2TB fusion drive?
will it be noticeably faster with a bigger SSD?
Will the i9 throttle, especially with the Vega 48?

The Fusion drive is a paired small SSD + large HDD that operates as a single logical storage device. The macOS determines how applications and data are managed between the SSD and the HDD. I suppose they try to keep the most recently used apps, paging files, and the kernel on the SSD part. If your entire app and its working set and data fit into the SSD part then I'd assume you'll get near pure SSD performance. I think the 2TB and 3TB Fusion drives have 128GB SSDs while the 1TB Fusion has a 32GB SSD.

Most every computer and microprocessor/microcomputer are highly invested in taking advantage of statistical locality of reference, spatial and temporal, for optimizing all memory operations. So coming up with a blanket statement about performance for a broad range of applications is a bit tough. But it is very safe to say that having an all-SSD configuration will always be as fast as a hybrid (Fusion) configuration and will continue to be just as fast in cases where the Fusion configuration is on the wrong side of the statistical gamble that the Fusion configuration benefits from in a lot of cases. If you want fast all the time, go full SSD and have lots of RAM.