Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7   Go Down

Author Topic: iMac Pro  (Read 16644 times)

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1492
  • me
    • working
Re: iMac Pro: what macOS software can use 8 to 18 cores?
« Reply #40 on: December 14, 2017, 07:22:59 PM »

I was looking forward to the new Imac pro “until” you see the price.  8 grand for medium specs 11 grand topped out.

I’m not saying it’s not good, who knows, but new Apple computers always worry me a little.

I wasn’t that wild about the 2013 macpro, though now fully spec, you can buy them refurbished for $5,900 then add monitors and the specs aren’t that different than the Imac pro and I know with my latest Imacs, heat becomes an issue.

They don't shut down, but they slow down, especially working 4k.

Same with the Imac monitors, they get that smoky look in the corner and though at first I returned them, now I just live with it.

I usually buy all my computers from a video speciality company and they really test a machine out, with different operating systems (if possible) and all the software I use.

Then I get a real world idea of how well it will work in what I do.   

The good thing about the 2013 macpro is since I constantly travel, it’s small enough to fit within a much smaller case, since I have monitors in all of our studios and regions.

I hope the imac pro is a great machine, though I do think an all in one at this price is a little too high.

We’ll see.

IMO

BC

JayWPage

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206
    • http://jaywpage.zenfolio.com
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #41 on: December 14, 2017, 07:44:48 PM »

So now that the cat is out of the bag [the iMac pro that is  ??? ], does this make the MacPro (2013) look more attractive , since it is still available...
Logged

Farmer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2851
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #42 on: December 14, 2017, 07:59:14 PM »

Good news indeed. My experience with RAM and video is that the old 'you can never have too much' idea is getting a little worn. The Apple 'Pro' apps seem remarkably efficient in their RAM usage. I have never run into a bottleneck with just 32GB - except when my SSD boot drive lacks headroom (<20% or so)

Chris - could you clarify that?  If you are saying you run out of RAM when your SSD is full(ish), that implies that it doesn't have space to deal effectively manage the memory by moving some of it out of RAM. That means, you could use more RAM and avoid the need to swap (potentially).  Am I understand the situation correctly?  Whilst effective memory management generally won't result in bottlenecks, it's clearly a potential for one which might not exist if you had more RAM.
Logged
Phil Brown

opgr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2266
Re: iMac Pro: what macOS software can use 8 to 18 cores?
« Reply #43 on: December 15, 2017, 12:09:55 AM »

A related question: what about support for 8 to 18 cores in video editing apps, which I suspect are more of a focus these days for high-end Macs than processing of "boring old-fashioned motionless images".
If I am reading correctly, Final Cut Pro X supports as many cores as the hardware offers, via Grand Central Dispatch: is that correct?
Also: to what extend is Grand Central Dispatch a useful, lazy way for software to support multiple cores?

(For my scientific computing work, this is often fairly easy: break the task down to a big collection of basic linear algebra tasks, and use suitable parallel libraries for them.)

P. S. Thanks to Dan Wells for all the details and analysis.

GCD is very useful. Any loop that can run parallel can be dispatched to GCD which automagically distributes over available cores.
So instead of "loop 100 times" you can use "dispatch 100 times" which will happen concurrently/parallel if desired. The dispatch only returns after it's done, so there is no need for the sw to manage concurrency beyond the basic context precautions. 

For displaying image data there is also stuff like Tiled Layers that utilise parallel processing for its tiles.

For processing image data (and for some computational stuff) there is an Accelerate module which will break down computations internally into multiple threads. The benefit is relative of course, if you already broke stuff down in tiles, then additional concurrency may do more harm than good.


Logged
Regards,
~ O ~

Dan Wells

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 636
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #44 on: December 15, 2017, 01:20:17 AM »

Final Cut Pro loves cores (it has always been designed for the Mac Pros, which have had huge core counts). Other video apps tend to scale pretty well (better than photo stuff).

Interestingly, PC manufacturer Puget Systems (who do a great job benchmarking pro apps) is getting results from the 2017 versions of Photoshop and Lightroom that suggest they're getting better at using cores. I know that is Windows, and the code may not be the same, but it's the best we have (nobody seems to have done Photoshop and Lightroom 2017 tests on a Mac Pro or a Hackintosh with a ton of cores, and nobody has HAD an iMac Pro long enough to try it)...

If RobART Morgan from BareFeats is on here (he's a photographer, and I believe he's been on Luminous in the past) - it's worth a try...
Logged

Manoli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1488
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #45 on: December 15, 2017, 02:35:22 AM »

If RobART Morgan from BareFeats is on ...

Thanks for the link, Dan
Checked it out, and one thing that immediately hit me was how negligible a performance difference there was between a 16G RAM equipped 2017 Mac and a 64G one.

http://barefeats.com/imac5K_vs_pros.html

.. That means, you could use more RAM and avoid the need to swap (potentially).  Am I understand the situation correctly?  Whilst effective memory management generally won't result in bottlenecks, it's clearly a potential for one which might not exist if you had more RAM.

Looking at the test results above, seems that mem management is exceptional, in High Sierra, if there's such a small difference between the 16 and 64G versions. Surprised, but it supports Chris' comment that 'the old 'you can never have too much' idea is getting a little worn '

Also makes me wonder about 'why' there's such a pent-up call for the MacBook Pros to have more than the 'at-first-sight' measly 16G RAM
« Last Edit: December 15, 2017, 03:49:24 AM by Manoli »
Logged

Christopher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1324
    • http://www.hauser-photoart.com
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #46 on: December 15, 2017, 02:41:44 AM »

Sorry Apple, but the price is just insane here in Germany. Especially a nicely upgraded machine.

My current windows workstation as a Mac would cost around 12699EUR.... that is ridiculous.

When it comes why 10cores? There a few apps which use them very well. C1, Ptgui and im positive more and more will use them as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
Christopher Hauser
[[email protected]

Dan Wells

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 636
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #47 on: December 15, 2017, 06:12:37 AM »

The tests in that particular BareFeats setup all fit within 16 GB of RAM - longer videos don't, large Lightroom catalogs don't, big panorama stitches don't... Swapping is not nearly as annoying as it used to be, because most Macs now use super fast SSDs (when buying non-Pro iMacs, stay away from HDDs and even Fusion Drives), but it does still happen, and it slows you down. I have one large panorama that runs a 16 GB machine out of RAM when I print it (it prints, but Lightroom needs to be restarted afterwards).

Lloyd Chambers at macperformanceguide has some (somewhat artificial) Photoshop tests that cause even a 32 GB machine to swap incessantly. He says that he hasn't figured out how to run a 64 GB Mac out of RAM as a still photographer. A friend of mine has an extremely large Lightroom catalog (accumulated over 15 years) that won't open on anything with less than 32 GB of RAM, and really wants 64 GB - he's looking at the iMac Pro. I suspect we'll eventually see big catalogs that want 128 GB - similar catalogs to my friend's, but with more high-resolution images in them. His catalog has hundreds of thousands of images, but nothing over 20 MP - what about a long-term catalog that has A7r mk II and III images? D850 images? Medium format?

Dan
Logged

Chris Sanderson

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2658
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #48 on: December 15, 2017, 07:23:32 AM »

Chris - could you clarify that?  If you are saying you run out of RAM when your SSD is full(ish), that implies that it doesn't have space to deal effectively manage the memory by moving some of it out of RAM. That means, you could use more RAM and avoid the need to swap (potentially).  Am I understand the situation correctly?  Whilst effective memory management generally won't result in bottlenecks, it's clearly a potential for one which might not exist if you had more RAM.
Yup, I believe you are correct. But a little extra headroom on the SSD is a lot less expensive than replacing the RAM modules. I set a warning when my SSD is 70% full and my trashcan's 32 GB ram is more than adequate.

On a related issue, I also suspect that the worth of an increased number of cores flattens out considerably after eight/sixteen. Extra cores are definitely worthwhile for rendering and compression in video but otherwise the bottlenecks seem more often in the GPU and data busses.
Logged
Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape

Kevin Raber

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1318
  • Kevin Raber
    • Kevin Raber
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #49 on: December 15, 2017, 09:11:51 AM »

Mine is ordered.  I'll let you know details when it arrives.  After Christmas.
Logged
Kevin Raber
Publisher - luminous-landscape.com
[email protected]

HSakols

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 977
    • Hugh Sakols Photography
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #50 on: December 15, 2017, 01:28:50 PM »

Why can't they design this machine without the Imac Design - eg put it all in a mac mini.  If it were a real pro machine, one would be able to choose their monitor.  Apple could make it so much better - but they won't .  Same with the ipad expereince.  It could be so much better but because it is apple we all have bend over.   Still I will continue using apple because I have since the 1980's and like the operating system better than a PC. 
Logged

Farmer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2851
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #51 on: December 15, 2017, 03:17:46 PM »

Yup, I believe you are correct. But a little extra headroom on the SSD is a lot less expensive than replacing the RAM modules. I set a warning when my SSD is 70% full and my trashcan's 32 GB ram is more than adequate.

On a related issue, I also suspect that the worth of an increased number of cores flattens out considerably after eight/sixteen. Extra cores are definitely worthwhile for rendering and compression in video but otherwise the bottlenecks seem more often in the GPU and data busses.

You're absolutely right about the cost, of course.  If you're rarely hitting that limit then the ROI doesn't really justify the cost of doubling (since you don't have the choice of just adding a little bit more (I remember in my old Amiga 2000 being able to add RAM far more incrementally due to the physical design of the RAM expansion boards and the underlying architecture).

I think of the main reasons you haven't seen the likes of Ps and Lr and C1 and so on pressing to change their architecture to use ever increasing number of cores is exactly as you say - they would mostly just be idling along anyway waiting for data or waiting to send data back through the bus and to other components.  It helps when you have more than one application and the others are not intensive - they can use their own cores and not interfere.  Actually, running multiple instances of games, particularly MMORPG games where it's common to "box" multiple accounts at once, the software that often supports doing this is designed to set each instance onto its own set of cores to help balance things out, but the individual games, with very high video requirements, don't try to use more than a couple of cores and really don't benefit even if you set things up to let them.

This is where very fast RAM and lots of it is really the solution to ultimate performance, but at a very high cost.  With 32GB of RAM in my current box, I use a RAM drive quite often when I know I need to process a lot of individual files or constantly access and update a file (high speed data logging, for example), and the speed differences compared to even a very fast M2 or NVMe drive is massive.
Logged
Phil Brown

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6176
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #52 on: December 15, 2017, 04:45:20 PM »

Why can't they design this machine without the Imac Design - eg put it all in a mac mini.
That is a valid suggestion, based on an actual proposal for how Apple might better serve the needs of some customers.  These days, so much can be added external through Thunderbolt 3 ("external PCIe") that the big box with lots of often empty bays can often be avoided.
A quibble though: I imagine that good heat dissipation without excessive fan noise favors a more vertical layout, as with the "cooling tower" Mac Pro design.

Same with the ipad expereince.  It could be so much better but because it is apple . . .
But this I do not get: can you say specifically what could be done differently and better with the iPad? (I pre-emptively reject "run macOS on it"!)
Logged

HSakols

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 977
    • Hugh Sakols Photography
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #53 on: December 15, 2017, 05:10:52 PM »

Quote
But this I do not get: can you say specifically what could be done differently and better with the iPad?

I'd like to see an easier way to share files other than using email or bluetooth.  There are so many restrictions!  The school district I work for spent thousands on IPads but could not provide us with any support.  Now these ipads lay around - we can no longer add apps.  I use them to teach my students about photography (9-12 year olds).  However, not all the machines will connect via blue tooth with my macbook pro and yes I've checked that the tablet is not in airplane mode.  I do have a Leef dongle that I used to transfer files - but why such a specialized gizmo?  Then how are you supposed to share video?  It plain sucks.
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6176
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #54 on: December 15, 2017, 07:16:54 PM »

I'd like to see an easier way to share files other than using email or bluetooth.
What about the new Files feature, and through easier access to iCloud Drive, Dropbox, Google Drive and Microsoft One Drive.
Logged

HSakols

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 977
    • Hugh Sakols Photography
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #55 on: December 15, 2017, 09:34:05 PM »

Quote
What about the new Files feature, and through easier access to iCloud Drive, Dropbox, Google Drive and Microsoft One Drive.

Because it is slower than manually taking the video off the tablet. 

Logged

mediumcool

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 768
Logged
FaceBook facebook.com/ian.goss.39   www.mlkshk.com/user/mediumcool

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14479
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #57 on: December 16, 2017, 12:09:42 PM »

Not true.


https://9to5mac.com/2017/06/05/imac-pro-ram-and-space-gray-accessories/
Additionally, Apple has confirmed to us that the RAM in the iMac Pro will not be user-replaceable. This shouldn’t come as too big of a surprise given Apple’s other recent products, but nevertheless it means users are stuck with however much RAM they purchase from Apple. Currently, the 27-inch iMac features user-upgradeable RAM, while the 21.5-inch model does not.[/size]
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6176
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #58 on: December 16, 2017, 02:59:53 PM »

https://9to5mac.com/2017/06/05/imac-pro-ram-and-space-gray-accessories/
Additionally, Apple has confirmed to us that the RAM in the iMac Pro will not be user-replaceable. This shouldn’t come as too big of a surprise given Apple’s other recent products, but nevertheless it means users are stuck with however much RAM they purchase from Apple. Currently, the 27-inch iMac features user-upgradeable RAM, while the 21.5-inch model does not.
From what I have read, the RAM is not "user replaceable" but might be "shop replaceable", perhaps involving some fiddly opening of the case.

Anyway, I have never understood this idea of initially buying less RAM than you will need during the lifetime of the computer and then adding more later (likely at a higher total cost, at least if the upgrade involves _replacing_ some RAM modules by larger-capacity ones rather than just _adding_ them to empty slots). The one upgrade I can see being of much real value is of the processor, if a new, substantially better model arrives during the computer's lifetime and is compatible with the motherboard and such. (Adding more mass storage might make sense, but external Thunderbolt 3 devices seem a good option for that.)
Logged

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2836
Re: iMac Pro
« Reply #59 on: December 16, 2017, 03:02:34 PM »

Yes, there are reports the RAM is not soldered in but is "not user upgradeable".  That likely means that once your warranty expires you could take it to a shop and have them upgrade the RAM for you.
Logged
Regards,
Ron
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7   Go Up