Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Computers & Peripherals => Topic started by: Kirk_C on July 12, 2018, 02:06:12 pm
-
Apple has updated the MacBook Pros (https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/07/12/apple-refreshes-macbook-pro-with-six-core-processors-32gb-of-ram)
-
Finally a MacBook Pro with 32 GB RAM!!!!! :)
-
This all sounds good. 32gb ram. Faster 6 core processor for the top models. But I'm gonna wait. See what apple does with the mac pro in 2019. We're almost there. See what the mac mini and imac updates look like. This also gives time to read some real world reviews about the new 'puter.
In the meantime my 2015 macbook pro with only 16gb of ram is huffing and puffing along 8)
-
Ouch, top processor 2.9GHz 6 core with 32 GB of memory and 2TB storage comes in at $4700!!!!!!!!
-
Does anyone know if the RAM is user upgradable? If so, you could significantly lower the overall cost. Any reason for a large SSD as a boot drive? I would think that 500GB would be sufficient.
-
Does anyone know if the RAM is user upgradable?
Nope so get it with 32 GIGs when ordering.
-
Does anyone know if the RAM is user upgradable? If so, you could significantly lower the overall cost. Any reason for a large SSD as a boot drive? I would think that 500GB would be sufficient.
I use internal SSD to store all my images and use external drives only for backups (do not like to dangle an external drive while working and backing up is simpler with everything on one drive). Hence the need for large internal SSD. With 2Tb internal SSD, I was occasionally worried about space :-).
-
Got plenty of room on my boot, the 512GB SSD in the MacBook Pro 15 Touch Bar 2016 as I keep all the big stuff on multiple external drives. IF I were to upgrade to this new MacBook Pro, I'd still got 512GB SSD but with 64 GIGs of ram.
-
Got plenty of room on my boot, the 512GB SSD in the MacBook Pro 15 Touch Bar 2016 as I keep all the big stuff on multiple external drives. IF I were to upgrade to this new MacBook Pro, I'd still got 512GB SSD but with 64 GIGs of ram.
I don't believe 64GB is an option.
-
I don't believe 64GB is an option.
Sorry no. Should be 32GB which doubles last max BTO.
-
Am I the only one really annoyed by the lack of USB A/B ports on these macbook pros? I bought a Surface Pro 4 for the sole reason that it has a good old USB port!
Similarly I find the SD reader on my 2013 very convenient.
The focus of Apple on design over usability is really upsetting.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Am I the only one really annoyed by the lack of USB A/B ports on these macbook pros? I bought a Surface Pro 4 for the sole reason that it has a good old USB port!
Similarly I find the SD reader on my 2013 very convenient.
The focus of Apple on design over usability is really upsetting.
No, Bernard, you're not the only one. There have been many complaints about it. But Apple makes its own path when it comes to ports and devices. People screamed about the lack of 3.5" floppy drives, internal CD / DVD drives, the loss of a serial port, FireWire, ADB, whatever the bizarre video output they introduced 10 years ago, and so on. Sometimes they're right (who'd miss a floppy now, or an internal CD/DVD)? Sometimes not - FireWire was never widely adopted, useful though it was at the time, and has now died. But it's Apple.
I agree about the SD reader, though.
Jeremy
-
We are two years after the 2016 macbook pro.. USB 2 and 3 are still most common used.
But i can see the benefit of USB-C unlike the first thunderbolt ports without anything to connect to... for years after its introduction.
In 2016 i adviced a friend who writes a lot to buy the 2015 model because of the usb 3 ports, the cardreader, the magnetic power connector and the better keyboard.
Also there was not much better on the 2016 model , only slimmer and a bit lighter.
2018: the 2016 keyboard has been replaced by a new one - let us hope it is better.
The oled key strip is still there - costs a lot but is it useful?
Anyway there is 32 ram, a six-core processor and eGPU; a worthy but expensive upgrade.
-
Am I the only one really annoyed by the lack of USB A/B ports on these macbook pros? I bought a Surface Pro 4 for the sole reason that it has a good old USB port!
Similarly I find the SD reader on my 2013 very convenient.
The focus of Apple on design over usability is really upsetting.
Cheers,
Bernard
No, you’re not the only one. When my 17” died last year, i had to buy $300 worth of adapters to be able to work with the things I need to connect to. And of course, I have to carry those adapters around with the MBP.
Apple’s design wizards have blinders that keep them from seeing anything but the machine itself. How sleek is your MBP if it has to trail a lumpy bag of adapters with it inorder to get any work done?
And another thing—what’s with the AC adapter?? That thing is the same size it’s been for a decade: massive. And why the heavy grounded cable and plug when clearly the adapter is not grounded, as the wall-wart plug adapter isn’t grounded? It’s like some weird, narcissistic design fantasy.
-
Most of my photo buddies and I all have small docks for our MBPs. It obviates the needs you guys talk about. I use UHS-II SD cards so I want faster transfer speeds than the old USB connections anyway.
Yeah, now start whining about how you don't want to have a small dock to carry around in your bag and how you don't like external drives, etc. ;) ;)
-
I use UHS-II SD cards so I want faster transfer speeds than the old USB connections anyway.
You realise you can get USB3 with "old" style connectors, right?
-
Most of my photo buddies and I all have small docks for our MBPs. It obviates the needs you guys talk about. I use UHS-II SD cards so I want faster transfer speeds than the old USB connections anyway.
Yeah, now start whining about how you don't want to have a small dock to carry around in your bag and how you don't like external drives, etc. ;) ;)
Sorry if you think I’m whining. If I could do everything I need to with a small dock, I’d be happy as a clam.
To offload the Red cards, I need to go from eSATA to two thunderbolt or usb3 drives.
To tether the P65+ I need to go from FireWire to usbc.
To offload cards from the still cameras I need to go from usb3 to usbc, then out to a thunderbolt or usb3 drive..
To get out to my biggest agency client’s monitors, I need hdmi from a dongle that’s not Apple’s because Apple’s hdmi dongle isn’t compatible with their system, but Kensington’s is.
So your tidy little dock would work for some of what I need, but force all of it through one usbc port, so the transfer speeds would slow to a crawl.
And when I went into my local Apple store to research what I needed to connect to all my stuff before buying the MacBook (semi) Pro, the associate I talked to told me I should “just get rid of all that old stuff”.
-
If I could do everything I need to with a small dock, I’d be happy as a clam.
I haven't read the whole thread , but this won't cut it ..?
(http://www.belkin.com/resources/img/overview/F4U095/belkin-F4U095-thunderbolt-3-express-dock-hd-bridge-the-gap-v01-r01-291x291-us.jpg)
http://www.belkin.com/us/p/P-F4U085/
http://www.belkin.com/us/p/P-F4U095/
-
I haven't read the whole thread , but this won't cut it ..?
(http://www.belkin.com/resources/img/overview/F4U095/belkin-F4U095-thunderbolt-3-express-dock-hd-bridge-the-gap-v01-r01-291x291-us.jpg)
http://www.belkin.com/us/p/P-F4U085/
http://www.belkin.com/us/p/P-F4U095/
Nope.
It forces all IO through one port. If you only do one thing at a time, it gives you plent6 of options. But if you want to play 4K video from an external drive to an HDMI monitor, that’s not going to do the job.
-
2018: the 2016 keyboard has been replaced by a new one - let us hope it is better.
As minimum they putter a dust cover: https://youtu.be/2tbVDV1xdQI , so it does not have the same issues as the previous ones where small amount of dust breaks it.
Anyway... being a lover of mechanical keyboards still don’t like the small amount of key travel of this keyboards...
Anyway there is 32 ram, a six-core processor and eGPU; a worthy but expensive upgrade.
eGPU was already available since the thunderbolt 3 MacBook Pros we’re out in 2016... officially supported with the release of high sierra. The only difference is that now you have a complete box and you don’t need to buy enclosure + GPU... less upgradable in the future but more user friendly... the eGPU is not really made by Apple, it is from backmagic.
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
http://www.caldigit.com/thunderbolt-3-dock/thunderbolt-station-3-plus/
-
http://www.caldigit.com/thunderbolt-3-dock/thunderbolt-station-3-plus/
Neat, but you need power to use these.
It helps when your devices need to be connected at home, not really on the road.
And even at home, use my current 2013 macbook pro in various locations when I upload SD card content or when I skype with my jabra speaker.
These docks are IMHO great for desktops and a poor attempt to compensate for the shortcomings of Apple for laptops that are supposed to be mobile devices.
Never thought I would say this, but Microsoft looks like a better option for people who actually do something with their computer.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
http://www.caldigit.com/thunderbolt-3-dock/thunderbolt-station-3-plus/
Caldigit is a fine company, and I’m sure this is a fine device. It won’t (by itself) meet my needs, but will for the majority of people here, so it’s a great recommendation.
But here’s the thing, Ron, should someone really have to pay $340 to get their $4,000 laptop to talk to devices they use every day that connected with no problem to its predecessor? I just find that hard to swallow.
-
Not hard to swallow when you can easily take the MacBook Pro solo or have a full desktop system with a big display etc for $350 to do so. I have one of these, it works flawlessly and it too is easy and small to pack, the one time I needed to do a presentation.
https://smile.amazon.com/OWC-Port-Thunderbolt-Dock-Space/dp/B01N51P3BB/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1531844712&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=owc+USB+hub (https://smile.amazon.com/OWC-Port-Thunderbolt-Dock-Space/dp/B01N51P3BB/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1531844712&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=owc+USB+hub)
As an owner of the first Gen 2016 Macbook Pro Touch-bar, how much faster would Lightroom fun on a new, 2018 unit with 32 Gigs of RAM?
I feel like I need to wait another year.
-
I have the 2017 3.1 ghz MacBook Pro. I”ve been debating on replacing my MacPro with a iMac Pro, but every time I figure out which one I want it ends up in the 7-8k range, and I really don’t need the display. My main LR library and images reside on a partition on the laptop and I use it in target disk mode on the desktop to back it up and then work on images, so I only work with a single copy of the library.
So, I have the new MacBook Pro with 2.9ghz 6 core, 560 graphics card and t2b SSD arriving on Friday. I believe it will rival the Mac Pro as a desktop (maybe even beat it in a few things) so I can sell the Mac Pro and only have to work with one machine. Hook up the OWC dock Andrew linked and I can continue to use my twin NEC 30” displays, 5 raid storage devices etc. and I”m up and running faster when I get to my main workstation because I don’t have to constantly reboot into target disk mode.
My only concern is whether 6 cores at 2.9ghz is as fast as 4 cores at 3.1ghz, although I’m assuming the core i9 tech vs the older core i7 has an impact.
Eventually I’ll move my hard drives in my 5 external raids from Thunderbolt 2 cabinets to the new Thunderbolt 3 cabinets, but for now I’ll use the TB3->TB2 adaptor.
Even though the new laptop was a little pricey, I think I can sell the current Laptop and current Mac Pro to cover some of the cost. Main advantage of the Mac Pro is 64gigs of ram, so it will be interesting to see if LR and PS run as efficiently.
Should be fun testing it all out over the weekend, I’ll see if talking myself into it actually works out. :-\
-
I have the 2017 3.1 ghz MacBook Pro. I”ve been debating on replacing my MacPro with a iMac Pro, but every time I figure out which one I want it ends up in the 7-8k range, and I really don’t need the display. My main LR library and images reside on a partition on the laptop and I use it in target disk mode on the desktop to back it up and then work on images, so I only work with a single copy of the library.
So, I have the new MacBook Pro with 2.9ghz 6 core, 560 graphics card and t2b SSD arriving on Friday. I believe it will rival the Mac Pro as a desktop (maybe even beat it in a few things) so I can sell the Mac Pro and only have to work with one machine. Hook up the OWC dock Andrew linked and I can continue to use my twin NEC 30” displays, 5 raid storage devices etc. and I”m up and running faster when I get to my main workstation because I don’t have to constantly reboot into target disk mode.
My only concern is whether 6 cores at 2.9ghz is as fast as 4 cores at 3.1ghz, although I’m assuming the core i9 tech vs the older core i7 has an impact.
Eventually I’ll move my hard drives in my 5 external raids from Thunderbolt 2 cabinets to the new Thunderbolt 3 cabinets, but for now I’ll use the TB3->TB2 adaptor.
Even though the new laptop was a little pricey, I think I can sell the current Laptop and current Mac Pro to cover some of the cost. Main advantage of the Mac Pro is 64gigs of ram, so it will be interesting to see if LR and PS run as efficiently.
Should be fun testing it all out over the weekend, I’ll see if talking myself into it actually works out. :-\
I have the same 2017 MacBook Pro, plus a 12 core Mac Pro. Because my primary work is video, my library is a 32TB Thunderbolt 2 RAID. The 32 vs 64 GB RAM question is an important one, but perhaps more for After Effects and Resolve Studio than for Photoshop, Capture One, and Lightroom.
I’ll be interested 8n your impressions. A laptop that could truly fill in for a desktop would be great, and the eGPU options might make that possible.
-
Neat, but you need power to use these.
It helps when your devices need to be connected at home, not really on the road.
And even at home, use my current 2013 macbook pro in various locations when I upload SD card content or when I skype with my jabra speaker.
These docks are IMHO great for desktops and a poor attempt to compensate for the shortcomings of Apple for laptops that are supposed to be mobile devices.
Never thought I would say this, but Microsoft looks like a better option for people who actually do something with their computer.
Cheers,
Bernard
The good news is that everyone has options. If you don't like what Apple has to offer you're not required to buy it.
To the questions of would I take this with me when I travel? Yes, I would and I do but my use case is likely different from others. I go to a place and spend a week there with my MBP plus goodies. I just need space and power and I'm a happy camper.
For the record, the Caldigit devices have served me well for years. I have two of them and they are built extremely well.
-
The calDigit dock looks good as well. I'll have to compare with the OWC closely.
I'm curious with all of these devices is why only 2 TB3 ports. One port is needed to connect to the laptop, if you drive two displays you can use the DisplayPort for one, but then you have to connect the other display to another port on the laptop so you have all the hard drives connected to the other TB3 port on the dock. Or I guess you can connect your external drives to another port on the laptop and use the dock's port for the 2nd display. Maybe that's the only way to drive 2 displays anyway.
-
The calDigit dock looks good as well. I'll have to compare with the OWC closely.
I'm curious with all of these devices is why only 2 TB3 ports. One port is needed to connect to the laptop, if you drive two displays you can use the DisplayPort for one, but then you have to connect the other display to another port on the laptop so you have all the hard drives connected to the other TB3 port on the dock. Or I guess you can connect your external drives to another port on the laptop and use the dock's port for the 2nd display. Maybe that's the only way to drive 2 displays anyway.
I suspect the answer is bandwidth. Thunderbolt devices typically want a lot of it. If you connect two T3 drives to a dock to a T3 and a USC3, or a 4K monitor and a drive, performance isn’t going to be there.
-
For what it’s worth I have a OWC Thunderbolt 2 dock that used to work ok but things started to go wrong with a OSX upgrade and it has been useless since then. Very unmac experience.
One more reason why I dislike these devices.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
My only concern is whether 6 cores at 2.9ghz is as fast as 4 cores at 3.1ghz, although I’m assuming the core i9 tech vs the older core i7 has an
That it is the base clock... usually that happens when all cores are used and the processor is drawing the max amount of power and creating the max amount of heat. If less cores are used the processor is able to turbo boost to higher speeds... well, the used cores, while the rest are basically turn off.
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
The calDigit dock looks good as well. I'll have to compare with the OWC closely.
I'm curious with all of these devices is why only 2 TB3 ports. One port is needed to connect to the laptop, if you drive two displays you can use the DisplayPort for one, but then you have to connect the other display to another port on the laptop so you have all the hard drives connected to the other TB3 port on the dock. Or I guess you can connect your external drives to another port on the laptop and use the dock's port for the 2nd display. Maybe that's the only way to drive 2 displays anyway.
That has to do how the Intel Thunderbolt chips work in those devices, and probably even the protocol itself.
You can not have a hub like USB, at least not with the actual chips and I doubt that changes in the future. But the protocol allows you to daisy chain devices. Useful for example when you connecting several disks or a 10 Gigabit network card... if you are connecting an eGPU I will not daisy chain it... the GPU will take advantage of all the thunderbolt bandwidth.
With respect monitors, a thunderbolt 3 cable can transport two 4K 60p signals or one 5k 60p signal... usually this hubs will give you one HDMI option and one display port option as maximum. Those signals are driven directly by the GPU in your laptop... so, even if you have 4 tb3 ports in your laptop does not mean that you can have 8 4K displays... the two GPUs inside that MacBook Pro, I think, they will not be able to support them... for that scenario you will need to connect eGPUs...
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
In today's episode of super creepy Facebook hooks into everything you look at on the internet, right after reading the latest posts in this thread about MacBook Pro port expansion peripherals, this ad popped up immediately for such a device:
https://www.hypershop.com/products/hyperdrive-solo-hub-for-usb-c-macbook-pc-devices
-
Hi,
Careful with the i9 version... looks like Apple thermal design can not keep the temperatures down enough -
https://youtu.be/Dx8J125s4cg
https://youtu.be/oSvp9MjqnZE
Regards,
David
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
That has to do how the Intel Thunderbolt chips work in those devices, and probably even the protocol itself.
You can not have a hub like USB, at least not with the actual chips and I doubt that changes in the future. But the protocol allows you to daisy chain devices. Useful for example when you connecting several disks or a 10 Gigabit network card... if you are connecting an eGPU I will not daisy chain it... the GPU will take advantage of all the thunderbolt bandwidth.
More than 2 TB3 ports would require a full on PCIe switch. TB devices have always been either a bridging device (2 TB ports) or a termination device (1 TB port). It's cheaper to implement a terminating device, as it doesn't have to include the pass thru functionality. A switch device would be really bad in that it's upstream would be limited by the 4 PCIe Gen3 lanes each TB3 port has.
What I really want to see is more of the docks doing independent 85w power injection, as that's where I lose a port otherwise.
Just snagged a Vava https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B079GSMZ7G/ microdock as it does pass thru of power, plus HDMI, USB3, SD/MicroSD and RJ45 networking all in one. It's not perfect, but fits in my bag.
-
Hi,
Careful with the i9 version... looks like Apple thermal design can not keep the temperatures down enough -
https://youtu.be/Dx8J125s4cg
https://youtu.be/oSvp9MjqnZE
Regards,
David
http://dgpfotografia.com
Interesting. Although the tests appear to be taxing the processor more than typical LR and PS tasks, I don't do much video work. I'll check it out while I test it out over the weekend.
-
Interesting. Although the tests appear to be taxing the processor more than typical LR and PS tasks, I don't do much video work. I'll check it out while I test it out over the weekend.
Yes, continuous tasks like video enconding are more prone to show this behaviour. I suppose that in future updates, Apple will make the fans more aggressive, so the temps are not as high. More noise though...
-
Yes, continuous tasks like video enconding are more prone to show this behaviour. I suppose that in future updates, Apple will make the fans more aggressive, so the temps are not as high. More noise though...
They will remove fans. If you want them, you will be able to use external ones ;-)
-
Yes, continuous tasks like video enconding are more prone to show this behaviour. I suppose that in future updates, Apple will make the fans more aggressive, so the temps are not as high. More noise though...
Yeah, if it's a big problem a software update will change the fan behavior. there are already ways to run the fans more aggressively, so I'll watch things and if needed try out some of those ideas.
-
Well if I owned a 2016 or 2017 mbp I wouldn’t upgrade for many reasons but the most important one are
Thermal throttling is daunting and cripples the MBP when running PS filters on larger images..panos and 400mb -1.5gb files. Unless your running the MBP in your freezer.
The current 2018 MBP won’t max out ever even with the most expensive configuration. Apple admits it.
The video card is really not much of an upgrade but it’s better.
The keyboard is still a potential problem Apple laid some plastic film under the keys maybe it works.
1-4 TB drives prices are falling weekly so unless your old MBP has crapped out I will wait for the Nov-Dec MBP release. My thoughts are a better case, different keyboard, better cooling system, cheaper storage and if not well then I’ll bite the bullet once all the user reviews shake out.
As for the iMac you can buy a stripped one or use your older one buying new boards and drives, thermal coupler, ram and all parts needed to build your own to apples most expensive iMac and highest specs building it will save you 2k or more and only take one hour to build.
So for me I stay with my mid 2014MBP for 4-5 more months.
-
1-4 TB drives prices are falling weekly so unless your old MBP has crapped out I will wait for the Nov-Dec MBP release. My thoughts are a better case, different keyboard, better cooling system, cheaper storage and if not well then I’ll bite the bullet once all the user reviews shake out.
As much you will see a price drop for the MPB in November... but I will be really surprised if Apple updated the MBP in short period. Apple usually takes 9 months to 1 year cycles to update the MBP, even if new GPUs or processors are available. For example, this 6 core laptop processors have been available since March by Intel (if memory does not fail me)... Apple took its 6 months to update it.
-
This all sounds good. 32gb ram. Faster 6 core processor for the top models. But I'm gonna wait. See what apple does with the mac pro in 2019. We're almost there. See what the mac mini and imac updates look like.
Whatever they come out with, be prepared to spend way more than the components are really worth. Like $5K for an iMac Pro. From what I’ve read, not a lot of significant updates coming along. Very small steps for which you will pay dearly.
The cost of the Macs available is so ridiculous, I just updated all the components of my wife’s mid-2010. With a 1TB SSD, added USB 3.0 ports, newer Radeon video card and a CPU replacement, it’ll be twice as fast as the old. The older Mac desktops were nice in that respect. You can update things more easily than newer Macs. Maybe that the reason they went to the trash can and closed systems like the iMac?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Ok, looks like Apple is going to release a firmware update to fix the throttling problems: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/we-tested-throttling-on-the-macbook-pro-now-apple-says-it-has-a-firmware-fix
-
Some preliminary info on the new MacBook Pro. I have had some challenges because when at home I want to start it up from my external 4x1TB Raid 0 SSD, but it requires a special version of 10.13.6 which isn’t on the normal apple update servers yet so it’s been a little challenge. It also can only be installed on hard drives formatted with Apples new AFPS, so I have to wipe and format to AFPS an external 4TB single drive, clone the raid over, then wipe it and reformat to AFPS, setup the raid, then clone everything back to it. Not the fastest process around. (also by default you cannot boot the laptop from an external drive, you have to startup in recovery mode and change some security settings to allow it).
According to some preliminary tests, it’s a pretty big step up from the 2017. I ran DigiLoyds Huge photoshop test, and it times in at 75 seconds, the 3.1 ghz 2017 MacBook Pro runs the same test 172 seconds (according to DigiLloyd).
It seems to manage the 2 30” NEC displays, and everything seems to be running similar to the Mac Pro, no real laginess in LR or Photoshop that I’ve noticed. Lots more testing to do, once I get the external startup disk ready to go I can run all of DigiLloyds test as well as geek bench and a couple of others to see how much I lose if I move to it as my only Mac.
Also was running Intel Power Gadget, and the CPU averaged above 3.0 ghz, peaking at 4.1 frequently, dipping to about 2.5 somtimes. Temp’s peaked at 100, during a 20 second stretch which also saw sustained speeds between 3.5 and 4.0 ghz. Seemed the update has reducing the throttling (at least on the CPU). need to get some other software so I can see what’s happening with the GPU. When not stressed the temp stays between 70-80 C.
-
For those interested, a few more tests and updates.
I’ve added an external GPU with a Radeon RX Vega 56 8176 MB card. I also ran the tests on my own 2017 MacBook Pro which was basically formatted identically.
2017 MacBook Pro, 3.1 ghz i7 4 core, 16gb 2133mhz DDR3 RAM, 2 TB SSD, internal Radeon Pro 560 4mb
Digilloyd Photoshop huge, avg 149 /Seconds
SSD test (Black Magic) Write >1900 MB/s, read >2100 MB/s
2018 MacBook Pro, 2.9 ghz i9 6 core, 32 gb 2400 MHz DDR4 ram, 2 TB SSD, external Radeon RX Vega 56 8MB GPU
Digilloyd Photoshop Huge, avg 54 Seconds
SSD test (Black Magic) Write >2500 MB/s, read >2700 MB/s
I ran 10 iterations, and the variance was less than a second. After the supplemental update there is no thermal throttling, I used a manual fan control to run the fans at 100% which runs the CPU cooler, with no difference in speed.
I’ve been using this extensively in place of my 2013 MacPro, and really am not sensing any difference between the two. It’s been a long time coming but I think I finally have a laptop that is fast enough so I can eliminate using two computers.
-
Thanks, Wayne. So, maybe it is time for the update. Now the questions is the extra 3 grand for the 4TB ssd worth it?
-
For those interested, a few more tests and updates.
I’ve added an external GPU with a Radeon RX Vega 56 8176 MB card. I also ran the tests on my own 2017 MacBook Pro which was basically formatted identically.
2017 MacBook Pro, 3.1 ghz i7 4 core, 16gb 2133mhz DDR3 RAM, 2 TB SSD, internal Radeon Pro 560 4mb
Digilloyd Photoshop huge, avg 149 /Seconds
SSD test (Black Magic) Write >1900 MB/s, read >2100 MB/s
2018 MacBook Pro, 2.9 ghz i9 6 core, 32 gb 2400 MHz DDR4 ram, external Radeon RX Vega 56 8MB GPU
Digilloyd Photoshop Huge, avg 54 Seconds
SSD test (Black Magic) Write >2500 MB/s, read >2700 MB/s
I ran 10 iterations, and the variance was less than a second. After the supplemental update there is no thermal throttling, I used a manual fan control to run the fans at 100% which runs the CPU cooler, with no difference in speed.
I’ve been using this extensively in place of my 2013 MacPro, and really am not sensing any difference between the two. It’s been a long time coming but I think I finally have a laptop that is fast enough so I can eliminate using two computers.
Hi Wayne,
Did you check if the external GPU was used a lot in Photoshop? Just curious how much Photoshop makes usage of a GPU.
P.D.: Also I was thinking that if the internal GPU was not used, since it shared the same heat dissipation system as the CPU, it allowed the CPU to run faster since it was not generating too much heat the internal GPU that make the CPU starting to throttle because of it.
Regards,
David
-
Thanks, Wayne. So, maybe it is time for the update. Now the questions is the extra 3 grand for the 4TB ssd worth it?
sry, forgot to mention that. I didn’t think so, so I stayed with the 2TB SSD. That is one of my challenges, to manage what I have on my local drive vs. what I’ve kept on my MacPro 4TB ssd. Still working on a strategy.
-
Hi Wayne,
Did you check if the external GPU was used a lot in Photoshop? Just curious how much Photoshop makes usage of a GPU.
P.D.: Also I was thinking that if the internal GPU was not used, since it shared the same heat dissipation system as the CPU, it allowed the CPU to run faster since it was not generating too much heat the internal GPU that make the CPU starting to throttle because of it.
Regards,
David
I’m planning on doing some more testing over the weekend. I’m not sure the eGPU does much for that particular photoshop test, I don’t believe PS is utilizing the GPU for most functions yet. I’ll run the test without the eGPU later today and compare. Maybe I can figure out a way to see if it helps LR classic.
I mainly added the eGPU for working with Final Cut and Screenflow, video seems to be where the eGPU can make a big difference.
-
I’m planning on doing some more testing over the weekend. I’m not sure the eGPU does much for that particular photoshop test, I don’t believe PS is utilizing the GPU for most functions yet. I’ll run the test without the eGPU later today and compare. Maybe I can figure out a way to see if it helps LR classic.
I mainly added the eGPU for working with Final Cut and Screenflow, video seems to be where the eGPU can make a big difference.
Yes... for Final Cut I saw some tests were there is a big difference with eGPU
http://dgpfotografia.com