talkingheadguy
About
- Username
- talkingheadguy
- Joined
- Visits
- 16
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 127
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 21
Reactions
-
Compared: M1 Max 16-inch MacBook Pro versus Mac Pro
sflocal said:emig647 said:I bought a 2019 Mac Pro - dual x5700, 64gb, afterburner, and 8 core (with intents to upgrade it to 24 core later). I also bought a XDR display. I knew the event was coming and bought within 12 days of the event. I honestly didn’t anticipate the new MBP being able to keep pace on 8k editing in Davinci Resolve and rendering in Cinema4d. I took it back and kept the XDR. The machine was a powerhouse, was sexy and honestly the coolest Apple product I owned in 25 years. But also comparing a $13k machine to a $3.5k machine that does about 98% of the performance, I couldn’t justify the price difference for my case. I can’t wait for the Apple Silicon Mac Pro.The Intel-based Mac Pro is essentially dead imho. I don't see how the math could be made to work to justify a Mac Pro knowing how AS is performing. It's not necessarily a function of evolution in technology per-se, but Intel's inability to step up and perform. It's embarrassing really how bad Intel looks right now. Intel is the Titanic that is continuing on without knowing they crashed into the ASi Iceberg.Even though I'm years away from buying a new desktop Mac, after seeing what the new MBP's are doing on the performance bench, I'm super-excited to see what Apple does with the iMac and Mac Pro using ASi. With larger footprints for better cooling and larger chips, I'm expecting them to be serious Intel-killers.
It's not just that the Intel Mac Pro that's dead. The entire X86 platform is about to enter assisted living. The platform is decades beyond its expiration date and that company has done nothing, really, to keep their platform modern. And AMD Ryzen also. Soon, all the PC chip makers will be switching over to ARM, and will pretend that they're the innovators. In five or seven years, you'll be hard pressed to find an X86 PC at Best Buy.
-
Why you shouldn't worry about radiation from your Wi-Fi router or iPhone
dws-2 said:I think this article misunderstands science, which is a way of investigating the world, rather than a producer of facts. Science tells us that wireless signals won't likely harm us from ionizing radiation. However, that's not the same thing as wireless signals being harmless. Science can only tell us about things that we've investigated. That's why it's so interesting — because we're always learning new things. That said, you have to pick what you're going to worry about, and wireless signals is pretty low on my list.
-
Review: Apple's new Kaby Lake 13" MacBook Pro without Touch Bar unexpectedly speedy vs. 20...
AppleInsider said:
But, Apple cut a big corner in the device's on-board storage to reduce the price to $1,299 -- and we feel that it shouldn't have. If you own the 2016, you have at least 256GB of storage. We feel that the 128GB is a big step backwards for those considering the 2017 who already own a 2016.
-
iMac Pro cost blows away similar Lenovo workstation, DIY builders struggle to meet price w...
johnbear said:back in december I built a hackintosh that was 30% faster in FCPX then the best they had at BestBuy which I tested, and considerably cheaper. The downside of a hackintosh is that it takes a little more time in maintenance and requires a little more research to build and understand how it works.
-
iMac Pro cost blows away similar Lenovo workstation, DIY builders struggle to meet price w...
yonis said:Here's my attempt:
https://pcpartpicker.com/list/CcC3QV
Couple of tradeoffs I needed to make:- Workstation graphics inflate cost tremendously, so I replaced with 2 1080 Tis in SLI. They're good at different things, but I figure doubling up on the 1080 Tis would more or less make up the difference.
- Thunderbolt 3 isn't necessary if you have PCI Express.
- No speakers? The iMac Pro will have a nice set built in. What would you recommend for your build?
- With those two 1080s, do you have enough cooling?
- The Hyper 212 EVO is a nice CPU cooler generally, but is it enough for the Xeon? Wouldn't you be better off with liquid cooling?