PowerColor's Thunderbolt 3 Devil Box is the easiest way to get an external GPU on the MacB...

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 17
New third-party hardware releases make the external GPU situation for macOS both less expensive, and slightly less "hacky" to install. AppleInsider examines the PowerColor Devil Box -- so far the best way to get your MacBook Pro to Mac Pro tower GPU speeds and even give older hardware a significant boost without doling out the cash for a new computer.




As we've mentioned before, the Thunderbolt protocol nearly from release suggested that an external enclosure could be used to install an external graphics card, boosting performance on connected hardware.

Despite some amazing efforts from valiant third parties, it wasn't until Thunderbolt 3 that the bandwidth of the protocol fully caught up with the idea. Realizing this, the group responsible for the spec created implementations with the possibility of some configurations being able to pass the video signal back to the computer it was boosting.

While the pass-back isn't possible on macOS, using an external GPU to accelerate video on an external screen is.
Perhaps Apple will take notice of the Devil Box and similar solutions, and make the process easier for adopters.
The first iterations of this technology were very, very expensive, and required some hacks to pull off. More recent versions of the external enclosures require fewer, and simpler hacks, plus are cheaper and more compatible with macOS.

Enter, the Devil Box

The $379 PowerColor Devil box clearly didn't spring from Jony Ive's design lab. It isn't simply styled, and adopts much of the design aesthetic from customized gaming PCs. Besides adornments including the gaudy case lighting, there is a single USB-A port on the front, and room for a two-slot wide video card and 2.5-inch drive inside.




The back of the case has three more USB 3.0 type-A ports, a Gigabit Ethernet port, a USB 3.1 generation 1 type-C port, and the Thunderbolt 3 input. Video outputs are dependent on which video card you choose to install.

No matter what you pick as a GPU for the enclosure, be mindful of the card's physical size. While the Devil box is spacious, it still will only accommodate a card 310 mm long, 140 mm high, and 50mm deep.

The case is heavy, and large. If you want to keep a minimalist desk, you may need to buy a longer Thunderbolt 3 cable and put the enclosure on the floor.


Setup

Our test Mac is a 15-inch MacBook Pro with 2.9 gigahertz quad-core processor, 512GB SSD, and the Radeon Pro 460 GPU. Connected to it is the PowerColor Devil Box.

Out of the box, with no drivers, the USB 3.0 type A and 3.1 type C gen 1 ports work, as does the Gigabit Ethernet port.

To get an external PCI-E GPU working inside the Devil Box with macOS, you have to disable system integrity protection, as well as run a script for automated installation of the drivers, and some other system modifications.

If all you're going to do is game in Windows, then there's no need to install anything in macOS.

The performance is astounding

We tested several Nvidia cards with the Devil Box, and we got essentially the same numbers that we did for the earlier test with the Razer Core.

In macOS, the Nvidia GTX 980 managed 4.8 teraflops, with the two-year-old Nvidia 770 pulled down 3.1 teraflops. In Windows, the same cards came in at 4.85 and 3.4 teraflops respectively.




In Windows, the Nvidia 1070 managed 6.4 teraflops, and the 1080 pulled down 9.8 teraflops, but as a reminder, there are currently no macOS drivers for these cards.

All of our benchmarks for the GTX 980 remained the same in the less expensive PowerColor Devil Box versus the Razer Core.

Bigger and brighter, but quieter

The Devil Box has better airflow, and is quieter than the Razer Core partially as a result of its size. Fully stressed, the enclosure hit 64dBA at three feet from the case, versus 71 on the Razer Core. Idle, the Devil Box is 44dBA, with the Razer Core sitting at 49dBA

For comparison, A 2016 MacBook Pro under load is about 36dBA and about 31dBA idle or under light load.




The case lights are very, very bright and sufficient to illuminate a small office at night to a brightness suitable for reading. We strongly recommend that you disconnect the white Molex connector to the LED strips as seen in the above picture.

A note about power from the Devil Box

The Devil Box will provide 60W of power, unlike eGPU boxes that require the Thunderbolt 3 hack, like the Razer Core. However, the MacBook Pro prefers 85W.

There's no real problem here. With the MacBook Pro lid closed, and the Devil Box connected to an external display, the system even under load never exceeded the power that the Devil Box was supplying.

With the lid open, and the CPU's integrated graphics powering the MacBook Pro's screen, the battery still charges. If the laptop's screen shifts to the discrete Radeon Pro, then the battery does drain, but very slowly.

Inducing a worst-case situation, we forced he laptop's screen to the discrete GPU, loaded the CPU with a video transcode, and ran GPU-intensive benchmarking software on the external screen to test the 60W supply. We stopped our battery drain test after 20 hours, with 40% battery remaining.

Older gear, and external GPUs

Apple faced a lot of criticism for its CPU and GPU choices in the 2016 MacBook Pro. Many users have elected to stay with their older Retina MacBook Pro models because there isn't a giant difference in real-world performance.

Some life can be wrung out of older Retina-era hardware without having to buy a new computer. If you don't install a drive, keep data demands from the USB 3.0 ports low, and don't use the Ethernet port on the Devil Box, we found that a 2015 MacBook Pro with Retina Display only sees about a 10% performance hit from the slower Thunderbolt 2 interface, connecting to the Devil Box through Apple's Thunderbolt 2 to Thunderbolt 3 adapter.

Older equipment with the original Thunderbolt port still see major benefits from the eGPU versus what they've got, but experience an approximately 50% performance hit on faster cards. Performance from the eGPU assembly on the 2012 15-inch Retina MacBook Pro seems limited to about 1.8 tflop, so the best choice for this is the inexpensive Nvidia 950, which can be had second-hand on eBay for less than $100.

You've got the data, but there are choices to be made

There are a few things to consider before you delve into building an external GPU for your Mac.

While the cost may seem prohibitive, you're really looking at both a Thunderbolt dock, and the cost of the GPU. Thunderbolt 3 docks routinely cost between $200 and $300 with a few exceptions greatly higher than that.

The PowerColor Devil Box is $379 if you use the included cable. Even if you don't, and get a $55 or so longer active Thunderbolt 3 cable (which we have done), the full price is still less than that of the Razer Core, which we examined previously, and has the same ludicrously stumpy cable.

Alone, with no GPU or an incompatible one for macOS, the PowerColor Devil Box can be considered the same as a Thunderbolt 3 expansion chassis that you may be in the market for anyway. So, what you're really paying for, if you were going to get a Thunderbolt box anyhow, is a slight price premium to allow for external GPU compatibility with the Mac.

Speaking of compatibility, we're a little concerned that there aren't drivers for the 1000-series Nvidia cards yet. Nvidia hasn't returned our requests for comment on the matter, so we have concerns that there may never be a macOS-compatible driver set for the newer cards, limiting compatibility to the 900 series.

The Nvidia 900 series is still very good, but the price to performance in the Nvidia 1000-series is better, as is the peak performance on the 1080 versus the 980ti.

Also, while Apple isn't putting any significant roadblocks in the way, other than system integrity protection which we lived without for decades, it could, if it so chose. It hasn't yet in the third version of Sierra, and there are no new blocks in the latest beta.

This all said, the $379 PowerColor Devil Box can alleviate many of the concerns with the new 15-inch MacBook Pro and add a bunch of USB ports as well as a 2.5-inch drive for mass-storage. In macOS, for about $700, you can quadruple your GPU performance when at your desk, in line with the Mac Pro tower, and still be able to take your main workstation with you.

As Thunderbolt 3 is adopted by more and more companies primarily driven by the MacBook Pro, the external GPU marketplace looks like it will grow -- as practically demonstrated by the Devil Box. Perhaps Apple will take notice of the Devil Box and similar solutions, and make the process easier for adopters.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 45
    nhtnht Posts: 3,420member
    Evidently newegg is the US distributor.
    rezwits
  • Reply 2 of 45
    As Thunderbolt 3 is adopted by more and more companies primarily driven by the MacBook Pro, the external GPU marketplace looks like it will grow -- as practically demonstrated by the Devil Box. 
    I highly doubt that. 

    Other companies are way out ahead of this kind of solution. LiquidSky, which will be launching soon, really destroys the idea of an external GPU. Granted this is mostly (but not exclusively) for gaming, but that is the single largest use case for external GPU shoppers.

    The idea of Free-to-Cheap access to a cloud computer with specs far beyond your own, allowing you to use virtually any device but still take advantage of the power of a massive PC will be the go-to option for the majority of people who would potentially be in the market for an external GPU.

    The truth about external GPU's is that they simply took too long to get here. Other, better alternatives to complete a user experience have sprung up in their absence.
  • Reply 3 of 45
    As Thunderbolt 3 is adopted by more and more companies primarily driven by the MacBook Pro, the external GPU marketplace looks like it will grow -- as practically demonstrated by the Devil Box. 
    I highly doubt that. 

    Other companies are way out ahead of this kind of solution. LiquidSky, which will be launching soon, really destroys the idea of an external GPU. Granted this is mostly (but not exclusively) for gaming, but that is the single largest use case for external GPU shoppers.

    The idea of Free-to-Cheap access to a cloud computer with specs far beyond your own, allowing you to use virtually any device but still take advantage of the power of a massive PC will be the go-to option for the majority of people who would potentially be in the market for an external GPU.

    The truth about external GPU's is that they simply took too long to get here. Other, better alternatives to complete a user experience have sprung up in their absence.
    We'll see. There were no less than five TB3 eGPU enclosures at CES. I'm bullish on LiquidSky and similar, but they can be hamstrung by poor Internet and LAN conditions.
    pentaeDonvermocgWerks
  • Reply 4 of 45
    Wow, that is one ugly case :D
    Metriacanthosaurussmiffy31baconstangSpamSandwich
  • Reply 5 of 45
    Wow, that is one ugly case :D
    But it's got a demon on it! A demon! But yeah, pretty horrible but I guess they know who their customers are. 
    baconstang
  • Reply 6 of 45
    As Thunderbolt 3 is adopted by more and more companies primarily driven by the MacBook Pro, the external GPU marketplace looks like it will grow -- as practically demonstrated by the Devil Box. 
    I highly doubt that. 

    Other companies are way out ahead of this kind of solution. LiquidSky, which will be launching soon, really destroys the idea of an external GPU. Granted this is mostly (but not exclusively) for gaming, but that is the single largest use case for external GPU shoppers.

    The idea of Free-to-Cheap access to a cloud computer with specs far beyond your own, allowing you to use virtually any device but still take advantage of the power of a massive PC will be the go-to option for the majority of people who would potentially be in the market for an external GPU.

    The truth about external GPU's is that they simply took too long to get here. Other, better alternatives to complete a user experience have sprung up in their absence.
    We'll see. There were no less than five TB3 eGPU enclosures at CES. I'm bullish on LiquidSky and similar, but they can be hamstrung by poor Internet and LAN conditions.
    True, but no more so than gaming in general. In fact, far less so. You only need decent 10 Mbps DL with average latency...thats not asking much.

    And for Mac users, the eGPU isn't the full solution. That's just step one. If a Mac user wants to play PC games, there is much more involved, like Boot Camp, and some of the nightmarish incompatibilities that come with that. Its the lowest common denominator when it comes to hardware device support. Plus...you have to live in Windows. On your Mac.

    I'd stay bullish on LiquidSky and whatever else comes next in a similar fashion. The potential for leveraging the cloud in this way is staggering. A true breakthrough.
  • Reply 7 of 45
    nhtnht Posts: 3,420member
    Wow, that is one ugly case :D
    Yeah...but somewhat fixable with a can of black spray paint.
    cgWerkshmm
  • Reply 8 of 45
    Again, I cannot stress enough, that if you get this case, unplug that molex connector for the LEDs. 
    baconstangrezwits
  • Reply 9 of 45
    As Thunderbolt 3 is adopted by more and more companies primarily driven by the MacBook Pro, the external GPU marketplace looks like it will grow -- as practically demonstrated by the Devil Box. 
    I highly doubt that. 

    Other companies are way out ahead of this kind of solution. LiquidSky, which will be launching soon, really destroys the idea of an external GPU. Granted this is mostly (but not exclusively) for gaming, but that is the single largest use case for external GPU shoppers.

    The idea of Free-to-Cheap access to a cloud computer with specs far beyond your own, allowing you to use virtually any device but still take advantage of the power of a massive PC will be the go-to option for the majority of people who would potentially be in the market for an external GPU.

    The truth about external GPU's is that they simply took too long to get here. Other, better alternatives to complete a user experience have sprung up in their absence.
    We'll see. There were no less than five TB3 eGPU enclosures at CES. I'm bullish on LiquidSky and similar, but they can be hamstrung by poor Internet and LAN conditions.
    True, but no more so than gaming in general. In fact, far less so. You only need decent 10 Mbps DL with average latency...thats not asking much.

    And for Mac users, the eGPU isn't the full solution. That's just step one. If a Mac user wants to play PC games, there is much more involved, like Boot Camp, and some of the nightmarish incompatibilities that come with that. Its the lowest common denominator when it comes to hardware device support. Plus...you have to live in Windows. On your Mac.

    I'd stay bullish on LiquidSky and whatever else comes next in a similar fashion. The potential for leveraging the cloud in this way is staggering. A true breakthrough.
    I disagree with you for several reasons and agree with Mike.

    First, as he pointed out, T3 Docks, like OWC are already running at around $300.. With us seeing only a $80-$100 premium to get a spot for a GPU, thats a no brainer for most who would get an eGPU because I can virtually guarantee you they were likely ALREADY looking for a good Dock anyway.

    Anyone looking for eGPU expandability was highly likely to be looking already for port expandability anyway. /shrug As for Living in Windows; not me.. I game in macOS most of the time.. (Guild Wars 2, WoW, and yes, some PC Games (DAoC) with PlayOnMac service) Yes I give up some performance vs convenience of not having to switch OS's. but I prefer it stay in macOS and I use the GPU for more than gaming.. Many pro's would snap this up simply for Adobe and Final Cut alone. I love portability when I need it; but horsepower when at the office. I hate having to maintain multiple systems, so this is the perfect solution for me.

    Lastly, you're assumption is strictly based on gammers.. when a vast majority of users with a Mac are Pro's doing transcoding and Editing. This solution OPENS UP gaming for Mac, but would largely tailor to professionals looking to eek out more GPU for projects and work.

    My interest, in Mac gaming exclusively, is because my 'hope' is this will vastly even the playing field when it comes to hardware excuses for not creating Mac based games. I know, not likely, but I hold onto this hope with Apple backing Metal in both iOS and macOS.
    edited January 17 macplusplusjasenj1watto_cobraDeelron
  • Reply 10 of 45
    Curious if a device like this could be used to enable 10-bit per channel video output to a 4K or 5k display. I've been using an Eizo 4K DCI display with a 2015 MacBook Pro and have been unable to get the 10-bit per channel going. I'd resigned myself to waiting for a new Mac to get this capability, but I'd love to stretch this MacBook Pro for another year or so if possible. 
  • Reply 11 of 45
    adrayven said:
    As Thunderbolt 3 is adopted by more and more companies primarily driven by the MacBook Pro, the external GPU marketplace looks like it will grow -- as practically demonstrated by the Devil Box. 
    I highly doubt that. 

    Other companies are way out ahead of this kind of solution. LiquidSky, which will be launching soon, really destroys the idea of an external GPU. Granted this is mostly (but not exclusively) for gaming, but that is the single largest use case for external GPU shoppers.

    The idea of Free-to-Cheap access to a cloud computer with specs far beyond your own, allowing you to use virtually any device but still take advantage of the power of a massive PC will be the go-to option for the majority of people who would potentially be in the market for an external GPU.

    The truth about external GPU's is that they simply took too long to get here. Other, better alternatives to complete a user experience have sprung up in their absence.
    We'll see. There were no less than five TB3 eGPU enclosures at CES. I'm bullish on LiquidSky and similar, but they can be hamstrung by poor Internet and LAN conditions.
    True, but no more so than gaming in general. In fact, far less so. You only need decent 10 Mbps DL with average latency...thats not asking much.

    And for Mac users, the eGPU isn't the full solution. That's just step one. If a Mac user wants to play PC games, there is much more involved, like Boot Camp, and some of the nightmarish incompatibilities that come with that. Its the lowest common denominator when it comes to hardware device support. Plus...you have to live in Windows. On your Mac.

    I'd stay bullish on LiquidSky and whatever else comes next in a similar fashion. The potential for leveraging the cloud in this way is staggering. A true breakthrough.
    I disagree with you for several reasons and agree with Mike.

    First, as he pointed out, T3 Docks, like OWC are already running at around $300.. With us seeing only a $80-$100 premium to get a spot for a GPU, thats a no brainer for most who would get an eGPU because I can virtually guarantee you they were likely ALREADY looking for a good Dock anyway.

    Anyone looking for eGPU expandability was highly likely to be looking already for port expandability anyway. /shrug As for Living in Windows; not me.. I game in macOS most of the time.. (Guild Wars 2, WoW, and yes, some PC Games (DAoC) with PlayOnMac service) Yes I give up some performance vs convenience of not having to switch OS's. but I prefer it stay in macOS and I use the GPU for more than gaming.. Many pro's would snap this up simply for Adobe and Final Cut alone. I love portability when I need it; but horsepower when at the office. I hate having to maintain multiple systems, so this is the perfect solution for me.

    Lastly, you're assumption is strictly based on gammers.. when a vast majority of users with a Mac are Pro's doing transcoding and Editing. This solution OPENS UP gaming for Mac, but would largely tailor to professionals looking to eek out more GPU for projects and work.

    My interest, in Mac gaming exclusively, is because my 'hope' is this will vastly even the playing field when it comes to hardware excuses for not creating Mac based games. I know, not likely, but I hold onto this hope with Apple backing Metal in both iOS and macOS.
    I hear what you're saying. A few observations:

    1. Undoubtedly there are some users that would be interested in a product like this for Adobe/Final Cut/3D software...but to me its questionable why they are buying a MBP to begin with, if they really need the power of an eGPU. Unlike gaming, where there really is no choice in the matter (you need the GPU power, or you simply can't play)... creative software is still very much usable with a MBP GPU...rendering is just slower.

    2. I'm not sure I understand your middle paragraph which mentions performance-reduced ways of playing games on macOS. Anything performance reduced runs counter to the entire objective of adding on an eGPU.

    3. Mac gaming is not going to improve. It has been at the exact same standstill for as long as I've been on a Mac. 25 years.

    4. LiquidSky is the future. If this service takes off, it basically ends the need for gaming users to buy spec'd out computers. And again I reiterate, while this service is focused on gaming, it is not limited to it. You can install and run other professional software that you own. There may indeed be further optimizations for other use cases over time, and other similar services that launch offering even more optimized experiences.

    One day Creative Pros will be doing most of their work from whatever device they want to use, with cloud computers doing all the processing for their CPU, GPU, and memory intensive tasks.
    edited January 17
  • Reply 12 of 45
    misamisa Posts: 800member
    it wasn't until Thunderbolt 3 that the bandwidth of the protocol fully caught up with the idea. 
    And still hasn't. I'm sorry, but WHY would you buy another desktop to run off your laptop? That is what this is. You are using the CPU and RAM of your laptop to drive what is essentially another desktop-sized unit that contains just the Expansion bus.

    Like OK, I'll bite, Maybe if I had a MacBook Pro, or MacPro where the "Base" unit exports 32 PCIe 3.0 lanes, this might be a worthwhile investment so long as the MacBook Pro, MacMini or Mac Pro can be replaced every year or two like an iPhone. But that will never be the case. A PC/Mac is supposed to last 8 years, but the individual upgrades (eg RAM and GPU) are supposed to be switched out every 4 years due to performance creep in software/games. USB-C/ThunderBolt 3 however only exports 4 PCIe 3.0 lanes. So this means you are not going to be buying this thing at all, because there is no point sticking a GTX 1080 in there if it's only going to run at 1/4 performance. You may as well buy a Sager Notebook with a GTX 1080 in it and forgo this sillyness.

    But then you wouldn't have a Mac.

    Like geez Apple, get with the program, Go back to the Mac Pro 2012 cheese grater design, we will forgive you. You can't tell me you took all the tools for making those and dumped them in the ocean like Delorean. 

    I would be OK with Apple migrating the "trashcan" Mac Pro to the MacMini design and putting a more modest CPU/GPU in it, as that design is pretty much ideal for some of us who need better Monitor options (*cough*Cintiq*cough*) and the Intel iGPU is way too useless. But that compact design is terrible for the rest of us who need high end GPU's and several hard drives to do work.

    Meanwhile, still nobody is making DDR3 or DDR4 RAM drives.
    edited January 17 xzu
  • Reply 13 of 45
    polymnia said:
    Curious if a device like this could be used to enable 10-bit per channel video output to a 4K or 5k display. I've been using an Eizo 4K DCI display with a 2015 MacBook Pro and have been unable to get the 10-bit per channel going. I'd resigned myself to waiting for a new Mac to get this capability, but I'd love to stretch this MacBook Pro for another year or so if possible. 
    I don't really know for sure, and I don't have the hardware to test it out on hand. I think it would depend on the card and the drivers. 

    The AMD R9 280x does, and has decent driver support in macOS, AND can be installed using the linked script in the article. THat'd probably be your best bet.
    polymnia
  • Reply 14 of 45
    jkichlinejkichline Posts: 1,171member
    And still hasn't. I'm sorry, but WHY would you buy another desktop to run off your laptop? That is what this is. You are using the CPU and RAM of your laptop to drive what is essentially another desktop-sized unit that contains just the Expansion bus.
    I think that Apple would have some more statistics than I would, but most professional users these days want a laptop that performs great but is mobile. Despite this, many work at desks when they are doing tasks that are compute intensive. This would be the best of both worlds... compact, power efficient mobile devices that also have flexibility and power and it all plugs in with a single cable.

    Personally, I'd never buy a desktop, not even a MacPro... unless I could plug that device into a MacPro and access the CPU and GPU of that device when the power is needed for compilation, encoding, etc.
  • Reply 15 of 45
    misa said:

    Like OK, I'll bite, Maybe if I had a MacBook Pro, or MacPro where the "Base" unit exports 32 PCIe 3.0 lanes, this might be a worthwhile investment so long as the MacBook Pro, MacMini or Mac Pro can be replaced every year or two like an iPhone. But that will never be the case. A PC/Mac is supposed to last 8 years, but the individual upgrades (eg RAM and GPU) are supposed to be switched out every 4 years due to performance creep in software/games. USB-C/ThunderBolt 3 however only exports 4 PCIe 3.0 lanes. So this means you are not going to be buying this thing at all, because there is no point sticking a GTX 1080 in there if it's only going to run at 1/4 performance. You may as well buy a Sager Notebook with a GTX 1080 in it and forgo this sillyness.


    The 1080 we tested in Windows is running about the same speed that it is in a native installation in a PCI-E slot. PCI-E 3.0 with four lanes isn't choking the GPU at all. This isn't new -- the PC enthusiast crowd discovered that four lanes was fine last year.

    Ask again with the 1100 series :D.
  • Reply 16 of 45
    SO do we think this would work properly on the newest 13" MacBook. I got the high spec i7, but the graphic chip is still garbage - doing a lot of video and photos on the MacBook itself, with no additional monitor or anything. aside from how insanely hideous this box is, can this work for me do you think?
  • Reply 17 of 45
    also what is the single most incredible graphics card that money could buy and would be compatible for this :)

    edited January 17
  • Reply 18 of 45
    arrrrr said:
    SO do we think this would work properly on the newest 13" MacBook. I got the high spec i7, but the graphic chip is still garbage - doing a lot of video and photos on the MacBook itself, with no additional monitor or anything. aside from how insanely hideous this box is, can this work for me do you think?
    It'll work fine on the 13-inch. There's nothing special about the 15-inch that makes it possible. Your integrated graphics are about 0.75tflop in performance.

    The 980ti is the latest and greatest that will work with macOS, at least for now and is over 6tflop. The 980 is a bit more cost-effective, and about 4.8tflop. Realize, though, that frame rates don't increase 1:1 as tflop increases.
    arrrrrroundaboutnow
  • Reply 19 of 45
    rezwitsrezwits Posts: 529member
    This would be great for the office, and after hours gaming! Good read...thanks! Especially with a rMBP 2015, and then maybe a 2017 or 2018 in the future! Cool!
  • Reply 20 of 45
    MotionFXMotionFX Posts: 1unconfirmed, member
    polymnia said:
    Curious if a device like this could be used to enable 10-bit per channel video output to a 4K or 5k display. I've been using an Eizo 4K DCI display with a 2015 MacBook Pro and have been unable to get the 10-bit per channel going. I'd resigned myself to waiting for a new Mac to get this capability, but I'd love to stretch this MacBook Pro for another year or so if possible. 
    Have you tried SwitchResX? I can enable 10 bit in my Mac Pro with a Radeon 7950. In my case it´s useless because my screen (LG Ultrawide 34") is only 8 bit + FRC, but maybe it´s a solution for you.
Sign In or Register to comment.