Pylons

About

Username
Pylons
Joined
Visits
32
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
95
Badges
0
Posts
32

Reactions

35Like0Dislike12Informative

  • SanDisk debuts new USB-C Extreme & Extreme Pro SSDs with twice the performance

    PylonsPylons
    As far as I know no Macs support 20 Gbps USB 3.x 2x2, so the Pro model will be limited to about the same 1000 MBps as the non-pro.

    Also the article states that the non-pro version is faster because of the upgrade “from USB 3.1 Gen 2 to USB 3.2 Gen 2”. This is not true. USB 3.1 and 3.2 are the same. (Thanks USB IF!) Speed is determined by the Gen 1 (5Gbps), Gen 2 (10 Gbps) or Gen 2 2x2 (20 Gbps).
    Yes this is super-confusing, and adds to the need for journalists to explain more to readers (and complain about stupid naming).

    (Yes the upgrade from SATA to NVMe reason for speed upgrade is correct, but the USB bus is now the limiting factor.)
    macwiz44rob53SpamSandwichmuthuk_vanalingampulseimagesCloudTalkinfastasleepBeatsivanhspheric

  • Seven new MacBook & MacBook Pro models on the way

    PylonsPylons
    Looking forward! Crossing fingers for models with more key travel and without Touch Bar, but I'm not holding my breath.
    Has anyone kept track in the past of how long time has elapsed from these database listings to actual product launches? (Yes, the article states "in the coming months, or even sooner", but I was thinking of a table or statistical analysis.)
    williamlondonThe Owl

  • Apple's new Mac Pro internal components - answers and lingering questions [u]

    PylonsPylons
    I think I just found the reason for the confusion about the CPU models and cache numbers. It seems to be that Apple are using standard Intel models and not any special ones. It is just that Apple adds the amounts of L2 and L3 caches together (!). Intel ARK lists L3 cache, while there is 1 MB of L2 cache per core. Then the numbers add up to the following Intel models with their corresponding recommended prices:
    28-core: Xeon W-3275M, $7453 (compared to $4449 for the non-M version with max 1 TB RAM)
    24-core: Xeon W-3265M, $6353 (for $3349 non-M version)
    16-core: Xeon W-3245, $1999
    12-core: Xeon W-3235, $1398
    8-core: Xeon W-3223, $749
    I repeat the following from my earlier post in another article:
    with the choices of 24 and 28-core models, Apple is assuming people who need the higher CPU performance also need more than 1 TB of RAM. There are extremely few use cases that need more than 128 GB of RAM, so I think there should be options for non-M versions too, in order to save those $3000.
    netmagetenthousandthings

  • Apple debuts new $5999 Mac Pro with up to 28-core Xeon processors

    PylonsPylons
    Wonderful! I like the design, but that is not important. To me this announcement is important mainly for two reasons:
    1. It shows that Apple care about people who want a traditional tower design with PCIe slots.
    2. It will make it much easier to revise the design with a new motherboard once Intel releases a new series of CPUs.
    That does however not mean that the CPU on these machines can be upgraded to a newer generation. Intel has a terrible history of not making any socket forward-compatible. But it means that new Mac Pro releases should be a lot more frequent from now on. (Though beating every 6 years isn’t hard.)

    Then there are some interesting things to note (with my estimates in parentheses):
    - T2 chip encrypts boot drive. (Additional NVMe SSDs should be possible to use via regular PCIe adaptors.)
    - The MPX solution for passing power and Thunderbolt 3 through the GPU, while also making the cards run cooler and quieter. (Hopefully Navi-based cards should be available in the late autumn/early winter.)
    - There are aux PCIe power cables available (can possibly be used for off-the-shelf GPUs if MPX cards turn out expensive or not the GPU model you want).
    - The Afterburner accelerator card for ProRes.
    - The Intel CPU options are most likely the following (from Intel ARK, with Intel recommended prices below):
    28-core: Xeon W-3275M, Intel recommended price $7453 (compared to $4449 for the non-M version with max 1 TB RAM)
    24-core: Xeon W-3265M, $6353 (for $3349 non-M version)
    16-core: Xeon W-3245, $1999
    12-core: Xeon W-3235, $1398
    8-core: Xeon W-3223, $749
    Apple will naturally charge a premium on top of these prices.
    With the choices of 24 and 28-core models, Apple is assuming people who need the higher CPU performance also need more than 1 TB of RAM (models ending in M support 2 TB). This is a bit strange. There are extremely few use cases that need more than 128 GB of RAM, so I think there should be options for non-M versions too, in order to save those $3000.

    (And I also agree with numerous posts above that 8-core for $4999/$5999 is way too expensive, but at least part of that is the $749 CPU. There is still space for a Mac without built-in screen, but with more expandability than the Mac mini. All in all, for many users this makes it less and less justifiable to have a workflow that depends on macOS. I love this OS but it’s harder and harder to defend it.)
    fastasleepdysamoria

  • New 'professional' Mac mini, low-cost MacBook refresh coming soon says report

    PylonsPylons
    Oh please please Apple, give us a Pro-focused Mac mini with standard user-replaceable m.2 SSD and SO-DIMM DDR4. Having integrated non-upgradable SSD and RAM is ridiculous in anything but the thinnest ultrabook form factor.
    Ryzen CPU + Vega GPU would be great, or the Intel i7-8809G (Vega graphics).
    Or perhaps an Apple take on the Shuttle XPC slim DH310?
    But since Apple hasn't showed any care at all for users wanting a machine without screen since 2014 I'm not holding my breath. =(
    The fastest Mac mini is still the 2012 model (quad core, while the 2014 model is dual core only as you all know).
    MDChops