Please can anyone with good tech knowledge help a stills photographer with only basic knowledge of graphics cards?
If upgrading from a (darned annoying, constantly overheating) 15" Apple MacBook Pro, with Radeon Pro 555X 4GB, to a 16" MBP with AMD Radeon 5300M 4GB, I see what looks to my untrained eye like a decent difference in graphics performance(?), but no significant difference between Radeon Pro 5300M and 5500M, both with 4GB. My question is whether it's worth spending an extra £200 to go to a 5500M with 8GB.
I don't do video or gaming, but I do use memory-hungry imaging apps (Caprure One, Adobe Lightroom, Photoshop and InDesign) and I have a recent 4K monitor, which I understand will perform better with a powerful graphics card. The question is HOW powerful do I need to go? I don't want to waste ££ on unnecessary upgrades, but given nothing can be upgraded in these machines later on, I don't want to risk under-speccing it either.
Assessing which is going to work the best for you from a cost to performance basis is complicated by the fact that it won't be universal -- some of your apps and filters will use the GPU, and some will not.
That said, if you're trying to stretch it out for a few years, go for the 5500M, or get an eGPU to connect your Mac to your external monitor. This has an added benefit of taking heat off the machine, and into the PCI-E AMD card in the external enclosure. You won't be able to do this for £200, though, and looking quickly at UK prices, it looks closer to £500.
Thanks very much for your response Mike. A 5500M with 4 or 8GB? Any idea where I can find more detailed performed comparisons between the two (that a non-tech might understand)?
When you say 'taking heat off the machine' do you mean this metaphorically or literally? I'd never heard of an eGPU before, and although I probably don't feel like shelling out an extra £500 on it right now, I'll def do some research; where would you suggest I start looking?
Please can anyone with good tech knowledge help a stills photographer with only basic knowledge of graphics cards?
If upgrading from a (darned annoying, constantly overheating) 15" Apple MacBook Pro, with Radeon Pro 555X 4GB, to a 16" MBP with AMD Radeon 5300M 4GB, I see what looks to my untrained eye like a decent difference in graphics performance(?), but no significant difference between Radeon Pro 5300M and 5500M, both with 4GB. My question is whether it's worth spending an extra £200 to go to a 5500M with 8GB.
I don't do video or gaming, but I do use memory-hungry imaging apps (Caprure One, Adobe Lightroom, Photoshop and InDesign) and I have a recent 4K monitor, which I understand will perform better with a powerful graphics card. The question is HOW powerful do I need to go? I don't want to waste ££ on unnecessary upgrades, but given nothing can be upgraded in these machines later on, I don't want to risk under-speccing it either.
Assessing which is going to work the best for you from a cost to performance basis is complicated by the fact that it won't be universal -- some of your apps and filters will use the GPU, and some will not.
That said, if you're trying to stretch it out for a few years, go for the 5500M, or get an eGPU to connect your Mac to your external monitor. This has an added benefit of taking heat off the machine, and into the PCI-E AMD card in the external enclosure. You won't be able to do this for £200, though, and looking quickly at UK prices, it looks closer to £500.
Thanks very much for your response Mike. A 5500M with 4 or 8GB? Any idea where I can find more detailed performed comparisons between the two (that a non-tech might understand)?
When you say 'taking heat off the machine' do you mean this metaphorically or literally? I'd never heard of an eGPU before, and although I probably don't feel like shelling out an extra £500 on it right now, I'll def do some research; where would you suggest I start looking?
I don't know enough about your own specific workflow to assist you with that particular 4GB or 8GB decision. Barefeats.com might have info for you in that regard.
And in regards to "taking heat off the machine" I mean literally. If your Mac isn't doing graphical heavy lifting, and it's on the external GPU, then that's heat that isn't being generated inside the MacBook Pro and in the eGPU case instead. As a quick primer, an eGPU is an external enclosure that fits a PCI-E graphics card. On the Mac, that PCI-E card has to be an AMD card.
With the recent update to the 13" does anyone think that Apple may do a spec bump on the 16" before WWDC to include the new 10th Gen chip and faster RAM that is in 13"?
With the recent update to the 13" does anyone think that Apple may do a spec bump on the 16" before WWDC to include the new 10th Gen chip and faster RAM that is in 13"?
My bet is no. The 10th gen Comet Lake chips offer very little performance increase over the 9th gen Coffee Lake chips and AMD is currently midcycle on their mobile GPUs.
The only features that can maybe move the needle for an x86 MBP are an AMD CPU, an Nvidia GPU or a "T3" coprocessor. For reasons discussed many times before, they aren't moving to AMD, Nvidia and Apple won't do business with each until management changes, and the most possible, a T3 co-processor may be overcome by events with the ARM transition.
A T3 co-processor could have say an Apple GPU, an FPGA, 2x the current SSD performance, more security, etc, that can provide a nice price per performance per Watt set of features, but maybe they are just waiting to transition to ARM first.
But do we really think they will go with ARM in the Pro machines? My feeling is that it will be in the Air or possibly the entry level 13" Pro that was left with the 8th gen chip.
But do we really think they will go with ARM in the Pro machines? My feeling is that it will be in the Air or possibly the entry level 13" Pro that was left with the 8th gen chip.
I definitely think the entire lineup including the Mac Pro will be replaced by ARM versions within 2 years of the first ARM machine shipping. The Pro machines have the most to gain in terms of performance with ARM+TSMC. They probably have the hardest software transition to do as many of these buyers are using a lot of old, probably un-maintained apps, but the transition won't happen if there isn't any pressure for those apps to be replaced or transitioned.
Comments
And in regards to "taking heat off the machine" I mean literally. If your Mac isn't doing graphical heavy lifting, and it's on the external GPU, then that's heat that isn't being generated inside the MacBook Pro and in the eGPU case instead. As a quick primer, an eGPU is an external enclosure that fits a PCI-E graphics card. On the Mac, that PCI-E card has to be an AMD card.
https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/04/19/best-thunderbolt-3-egpu-enclosures-for-macos
The only features that can maybe move the needle for an x86 MBP are an AMD CPU, an Nvidia GPU or a "T3" coprocessor. For reasons discussed many times before, they aren't moving to AMD, Nvidia and Apple won't do business with each until management changes, and the most possible, a T3 co-processor may be overcome by events with the ARM transition.
A T3 co-processor could have say an Apple GPU, an FPGA, 2x the current SSD performance, more security, etc, that can provide a nice price per performance per Watt set of features, but maybe they are just waiting to transition to ARM first.