markaceto

About

Username
markaceto
Joined
Visits
4
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
32
Badges
0
Posts
15

Reactions

7Like0Dislike5Informative

  • Mystery Apple chip discovered in iMac Pro teardown not A10 Fusion coprocessor [u]

    markacetomarkaceto
    nhughes said:
    racerhomie3 said:
    Guys.
    What is wrong with a MBP with an external GPU?
    Is there a reason I don’t know to why they aren’t so popular.
    For me, the biggest rub is you can't drive the eGPU horsepower to the MBP's internal Retina display. And because the only Retina-caliber monitors out there are LG UltraFine models that connect via USB-C and TB3, you can't use those with any eGPU rigs at the moment either, because graphics cards use legacy inputs like HDMI. So eGPU+MBP is fine for a dual-monitor setup, or with a VR headset, but I think dual monitors diminish the appeal of the Touch Bar.

    Apple is getting back into the display market, so I imagine we'll see some Retina-caliber displays that connect over TB3, and maybe even have their own integrated eGPUs. Toss in an external Magic Keyboard with Touch Bar, and I'm in -- but I might be asking for too much in 2018.
    There are lots of wonderful 4k 32"+ antiglare monitors available now for under $1,000, and they don't require a dongle to use them. The budget GPU in the MBP is fine for driving the internal display. That's what's nice about the eGPU's: they're scalable. You can buy what you need when you need it, and totally upgradable.
    racerhomie3

  • Mystery Apple chip discovered in iMac Pro teardown not A10 Fusion coprocessor [u]

    markacetomarkaceto
    Guys.
    What is wrong with a MBP with an external GPU?
    Is there a reason I don’t know to why they aren’t so popular.
    Only one thing: 16GB RAM.

    I just bought an iMac Pro to stop the gap between my 4-year old MBP and... the first MBP that has 32GB RAM? The way things are going in my industry, more and more of the workload is getting pulled off the processor (especially multicore rendering), and dumped on the GPU. Plus it would be really nice to own and maintain one machine, disconnect it from the office, and take it onsite or wherever... 
    racerhomie3watto_cobra

  • Review: Apple's powerhouse iMac Pro wows with stellar performance and design

    markacetomarkaceto
    I'm lucky.  I just got my iMac Pro.  I opted for the 10-core version with the Vega 64, 64 GB of RAM and the 1TB SSD.  

    The iMac Pro is understated and deceptive.  Except for its beautiful space gray color and black accessories, the iMac Pro looks and feels like any other iMac I've owned.  In this way it almost disappoints.  But, put on your seatbelts this thing is a rocket.   The iMac Pro simply obliterates tasks that would challenge my late 2015 iMac 5K.  See my Geekbench 4 results below.

    And, it can game.  I am partial to War Thunder ground forces.  My late 2015 iMac Pro struggled to maintain 40-60 frames at modest settings.   The iMac Pro thumps.  It's pushing 70-80+ frames at 4K on high settings and 110-120 frames at 1440.   And, this is in macOS.  I can't wait to see how it performs in Windows 10.  

    I'm glad I waited for the iMac Pro.  But please Apple, let me enjoy it for a bit.  Do NOT release the new modular iMac in February!!!!!!



    Thanks for this! Would you mind posting OpenCL and Metal scores? Curious how that Vega 64 stacks up against a 1080 Ti (in a Mac Pro 5,1).
    watto_cobra

  • First look: Benchmarks put Apple's entry-level $4999 iMac Pro to the test

    markacetomarkaceto
    macplusplus said:
    VRing said:
    macplusplus said:
    VRing said:
    macplusplus said:

    No one would notice that minus 0.3 GHz in real life usage. The stock throttles more than that 0.3 GHz by the way...

    “the clock speed to drop from 3.9GHz to about 3.6GHz for a second or two. This allowed the CPU to drop below 92 degrees, and the clock speed to rise back to the maximum 3.9GHz”
    The stock Xeon W-2145 is supposed to turbo to 4.5 GHz and will not throttle. Most desktop cooling solutions can likely sustain even higher frequencies without throttling.

    Apple's solution is downclocked and still throttles.
    Turbo is for single core, dude...

    So your (mis)understanding "how may it throttle at 3.9 while it can Turbo at 4.5" doesn't make sense, you compare apples to oranges. 
    The W-2145 has a boost speed of 4.5 GHz, the W-2140B has a boost speed of 4.2 GHz. <-- The downclock.

    The W-2140B is seen throttling down to 3.6 GHz at sustained load. <-- The throttling.
    Stop flooding the forum with meaningless numbers. You said “turbo must be sustained” above and that’s enough. You have transcended even Intel and I wish you a good Turbo life. I’m done with your posts.
    Calm down, dude. VRing is articulating very useful points that benefit anyone in this forum trying to decide which model to buy. I for one would have purchased the base model CPU if:
    1. Apple hadn't downclocked it from 4.5 to "4.2"
    2. AppleInsider didn't report that the "4.2" is actually more like 3.9
    3. AppleInsider didn't report that the fans would shut off to prevent the overheating problem (in an alumi-knee-um George Forman grill)
    Most of us could anticipate all three issues from past Apple performance/decisions. iMac's and MacBook Pro's will never see the Intel turbo boost speeds because of thermal issues.

    Therefore, by crippling/throttline the single core performance of the coolest running CPU from 4.5 to "4.2" (3.9), Apple has created an incentive for me to spend a very round $800 on the more expensive 10-core machine. That said, I would like to see some real world tests on on the 10-core because my money on is on that sucker choking at 3.9 too.

    The unbiased analysis of Apple is this: Apple will always use marketing to defend their design decisions that cripple performance. As critical thinkers, it's on us to see through their BS. There are a bunch of us that prefer to use Mac OS (and iOS) but are sick of getting crippled, throttled, and dongled options.
    VRingwilliamlondonmuthuk_vanalingam

  • First look: Benchmarks put Apple's entry-level $4999 iMac Pro to the test

    markacetomarkaceto
    welshdog said:
    wizard69 said:
    Personally I think somebody at Apple got a bug up their ass with respect to the desktop and decided to ignore the whole area for years.   
    That would have been Steve Jobs.
    Jobs died in 2011, two years before Apple replaced the fully upgradable, very ventilated, sufficiently fan-cooled, dongle-free, and never under-clocked Mac Pro (the last truly Pro workstation they built). That was also the last year that they upgraded notebook RAM to 16GB, which has not increased since then. Adding insult to injury, listening to Phil Schiller tell us that the same amount of RAM is faster when we're all running out of RAM is like someone telling me I need a faster motorcyle to drive 3 of my friends to the beach. This is 100% Tim, Phil and Jony. Craig is the hero we need.
    VRingwilliamlondon