Hypereality

About

Username
Hypereality
Joined
Visits
32
Last Active
Roles
unconfirmed, member
Points
192
Badges
1
Posts
44
  • Compared: 2018 i9 MacBook Pro versus iMac 5K performance

    My i7 2.6Ghz 32Gb MacBook Pro also slightly improves on my 2017 iMac with the same specs as here. 

    On Handbrake video conversion its faster, more or less in keeping with what would be predicted by the Geekbench multiprocessing tests. 

    Now that the initial problems have been sorted out regarding throttling, the 2018 MacBook Pros appear to do what one might expect.  Nice machines. 

    I even like the much maligned touch bar! 
    chasmwatto_cobra
  • Apple's T2 chip may be behind small number of crashes in iMac Pro, new MacBook Pro


    Apple support staff suggests iMac Pro users wipe and reinstall MacOS, disable FileVault, and disable Power Nap. For those not willing to perform those, other forum posts suggested crashes could be reduced by not daisy-chaining devices, not using a Thunderbolt 3-to-Thunderbolt 2 adapter, disable Secure Boot, turn off power management options, remove third-party kernel extensions, avoid leaving it to idle overnight, and to not unlock it with an Apple Watch
    Or in other words avoid using functions of the T2 chip as much as possible? 


    aylkdysamoriamuthuk_vanalingam
  • Test suggests 2018 MacBook Pro can't keep up with Intel Core i9 chip's thermal demands

    Varmoes said:
    I started to question Dave2D approach when he tested multiple laptops. Sure it does thermal throttle but hell. Macs are optimized for Mac applications. This is simply stupid from him. Try to benchtest Final cut Pro from a PC. Even though this is impossible, I'm sure it would perform badly.
    This video shows FCPX comparisons. 2018 performed slower than 2017 while rendering in Final Cut 
    It’s odd that he runs the render test a second time but does not say what the actual test results are. Perhaps the actual time difference was lower than first time and he didn’t want people asking why the 2018 model was faster the second time when it was hotter.
    Alex1N
  • Maxed out 2018 15-inch MacBook Pro at $6699 isn't Apple's most expensive laptop ever

    If you buy the 512Gb model with 32Gb ram it's not that expensive. That's what I'll order. 

    My Macbooks have lasted at least twice as long as any Wintel laptop I ever owned,  so its lifetime cost of ownership that matters to me.  They are definitely worse than they used to be,  I wore off my S and A key after 4 years on the last macBook Pro and its limped a bit for the last year, but I bought it in 2013 and it has not been compelling to buy another till now.  So my $5000 laptop cost me $1000 a year, as I earn my living on it, that seems not particularly expensive. 

    If people just want a laptop and don't need Apple specific software, and lets face it, not many of us do, then there are lots of cheap alternatives.  If I didn't want to write Apple software I would happily buy another brand and put Ubuntu on it. 
      
    But if you want a fast SSD then Apples have high performance, its your choice, but with USB-C and the latest external SSD's for most uses a big SSD isn't required anyway.



     
    watto_cobra
  • Apple's new 'Behind the Mac' ad campaign puts spotlight back on creatives

    steveh said:
    cropr said:
    Of course a Mac lasts long, but that is not the point.
    I have a white macbook from 2012 that I want to replace by a recent machine.  Why would I have to accept to buy a new macbook with an CPU of 3 years old? 
    Because it's miles better than the ancient piece you've got now?

    You're letting the perfect paralyze you.
    There was an article referring to a recent Geekbench record suggesting a MacPro with the 8750H coffee lake hexacore processor is being tested. You can check this https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?q=8750H+mac

    The point I take from this is that the single core score of the 8750H is 4902,  slower for the 13" Macbook pro on 4500.   Now the 2015 MacBook Pro also has a single core score of about 4500, and my 2013 has a score of 3900.  I can see a point in upgrading my laptop as its long in the tooth, but still for a 25% speedup its not going to be earth shaking.  Obviously there are greater advantages for multi-core workflows but going from 4-6 is not going to be that important in many cases.  

    Intel is the problem here, not Apple. Though I wish they would put a decent keyboard in their laptops and compromise a little on the thinness. 

    For faster coding I bought an iMac which has the fastest single core score for the money.  The laptops don't really cut it, so might as just keep one that is a good workhorse to travel around with and put my money on the desktop. 

    Alex1Nwatto_cobra