Clarus

I ordered a base 14" and this does not bother me at all. For my use case I am not very concerned about fast charging to 50%, so I stayed with the 67 watt.
Which means I saved $20!

Also, I already have some  compact GaN multi-outlet USB-C PD chargers to simultaneously charge my current 13" MBP, iPad, and iPhone. Those multi-outlet USB-PD chargers are great on a trip, I only have to pack one to charge everything. Apple makes nothing like that. Because of that, I don't really need another wall charger. When my 14" M1 Max gets here, I am not sure I am even going to take the Apple charger out of the box.

Eric_WVGG said:

> includes a module to hold a Mac mini

Odd that anyone would be releasing hardware that only works with Intel Macs at this point. Unless Sonnet knows something the rest of us don't…  

I’d like to think that the Apple Silicon eGPU restriction is temporary, or maybe confined to the M1. What is more true is that the total market of Windows and existing Intel Macs is still quite large.

But the cost/benefit calculation of an eGPU has completely gone underwater since the pandemic-driven chip shortage causing GPU prices to skyrocket. I am currently still using an eGPU with my Intel 13” MacBook Pro (integrated graphics only of course) while I wait for the better-than-M1 Macs to come out, and I am sure glad I bought when I did (2018). The popular Radeon RX580, while outdated now, still meets my needs and cost me less than $200. You can’t find it that cheap today. But here’s the kicker…while the RX 6900 XT being pushed by Sonnet for use in the article benchmarks 3 to 4 times faster than my RX580, it’s retailing for ten times the price!

If the next gen Apple Silicon M1x or whatever comes with a GPU that perform in the range of 50-60% of the GPU performance of an RX 6900XT, most users will not find it worth it to get an eGPU. Because while the technology would exist to beat it in an eGPU, the total cost of the eGPU enclosure plus fast enough graphics card would be punitive. The Sonnet combo of the lower-end Breakaway Box plus 6900 XT is $2100 retail.

That is why, even though I use an eGPU today, I will not be heartbroken if Apple Silicon never supports it. I feel like future Apple Silicon will be capable of enough GPU performance that adding an eGPU will not add enough performance for the staggering additional price, especially considering the bandwidth limit of Thunderbolt 3/4. The only way an eGPU will be economical again is if conditions change enough that GPUs can flood the market and lower prices considerably.

I have other ElGato gear like the CamLink and the Key Lights, and they’re mostly good products. But I could not justify a Stream Deck. I don’t think the value is really there. I mean come on, all that money for just 12 buttons? With a USB-A cable that doesn’t plug directly into most current Macs? That the article says needs to be plugged directly into a Mac, when many Macs only have as few as 2 USB-C ports? (I run everything through the USB ports on my hub so I only have to plug 1 cable into my Mac) With no HomeKit integration whatsoever, a big complaint of mine with their wireless Key Lights?

For those who have an iPad or iPhone, there are many better solutions that cost much less. I use Touch Portal, an iOS app offering a fully configurable programmable grid of buttons to control everything from OBS to Photoshop. You can set up many more buttons, they don’t have to be square, and can be much bigger than on a Stream Deck. As an iPad app, it works wirelessly, not using up any USB ports. The article says the StreamDeck doesn’t travel well, but Touch Portal is not a bulky box, it travels as thin as the iPad it is on. Sure there is a Stream Deck app, but Touch Portal is a cheap no subscription price. The iPad is already on my desk, the StreamDeck would compete for the space on my desk. The ONLY thing Touch Portal gives up to Stream Deck is the tactile feel of the real buttons. In all other respects, if you have an iOS  device, an app like Touch Portal is a much better deal.

jbishop1039 said:

My Apple Newsroom notification made it pretty clear it was the 21st. 

That's because of exactly the reason in the story: All newsreaders get the article summary from the metadata, so the May 21 date that was still present in the summary metadata might not be in the actual article.