Macs are more expensive than a. We always recommend building your own PC. If you’re buying a computer purely for playing games, a Mac isn’t the best choice. Until we get more Radeon Pro 560 benchmarks I would just look at the Radeon Pro 460 benches and add 10.PC Gamer's guide to gaming on a Mac. I havent seen any benchmarks of the mbps 560 yet, but if it is anything like the desktop 460 vs desktop 560, it will be about 10-12 better than the 460 in the 2016 mbp.
Is Pro 2013 Good For Gaming Upgrade It WheneverIt has a discrete GPU, meaning that you can upgrade it whenever you want without affecting the CPU, and has brilliant screen resolution. However, the price can be a little daunting. The new Mac Pro is no exception as it is the first Mac in Apple history to ship with two GPUs by default.If you are looking for the absolute best gaming experience on a Mac, the 16-inch Macbook Pro is a great option. This is true regardless of whether we’re talking about phones, tablets, notebooks or, more recently, desktops.If you want to game on a macbook you're gonna need to get the 15' retina, or play games in a lower quality to. These are 28nm Graphics Core Next 1.0 based GPUs, so not the absolute latest tech from AMD but the latest of what you’d find carrying a FirePro name.The macbook pro retina 15' has the latest 650m 1Gb graphics card built in which will play games like left4dead/battlefield 3/call of duty on a high setting with a decent fps :) the Intel HD4000 is really only for standard everyday use. The new Mac Pro comes outfitted with a pair of identical Pitcairn, Tahiti LE or Tahiti XT derived FirePro branded GPUs. IOS as an operating system isnt meant for gaming and macs dont have the hardware ment for it despite their price.AMD won the contract this time around. Even the high end desktop macs are terrible for gaming compared to a windows machine half the price. No mac is good for gaming especially not a laptop.I’ve tossed the specs into the table below:Answer (1 of 2): Technically, it is decent for most games. The D300 is Pitcairn based, D500 appears to use a Tahiti LE with a wider 384-bit memory bus while D700 is a full blown Tahiti XT. FirePro D300, D500 and D700 are the only three options available on the new Mac Pro. I believe Apple also integrated CrossFire X bridge support over this cable.With two GPUs standard in every Mac Pro configuration, there’s obviously OS support for the configuration. Similarly, CrossFire X isn’t supported by FirePro (instead you get CrossFire Pro) but in the case of the Dx00 cards you do get CrossFire X support under Windows.Each GPU gets a full PCIe 3.0 x16 interface to the Xeon CPU via a custom high density connector and flex cable on the bottom of each GPU card in the Mac Pro. FirePro GPUs ship with ECC memory, however in the case of the FirePro D300/D500/D700, ECC isn’t enabled on the GPU memories. Aside from the fact that not many ga.Despite the FirePro brand, these GPUs have at least some features in common with their desktop Radeon counterparts. However, if your primary focus is gaming, the 16 MacBook Pro is NOT worth it. There is no system-wide CrossFire X equivalent that will automatically split up rendering tasks across both GPUs. Disabling CFX would drop power consumption, but I didn't always see a corresponding decrease in performance.Under OS X the situation is a bit more complicated. I did the latter and found that despite the option being there I couldn’t actually disable CrossFire X under Windows. Apple’s Boot Camp drivers ship with CFX support, and you can download the latest Catalyst drivers directly from AMD and enable CFX under Windows as well. There are substantial differences in performance between all of the options. The latest update to Final Cut Pro (10.1) is one example of an app that has been specifically written to take advantage of both GPUs in compute tasks.The question of which GPU to choose is a difficult one. Just like the gaming example however, applications may be written to spread compute workloads out across both GPUs if they need the horsepower. By default you will see only one GPU used for compute workloads. I ran Unigine Heaven and Valley benchmarks in parallel, unfortunately both were scheduled on the display GPU leaving the compute GPU completely idle.The same is true for professional applications. The D700 is the only configuration Apple offers with more than 3GB of video memory. I measured over 3GB of video memory usage while on a 1080p display, editing 4K content. In many professional apps, the bigger driver for the higher end GPU options will likely be the larger VRAM configurations.I was particularly surprised by how much video memory Final Cut Pro appeared to take up on the primary (non-compute) GPU. All of the GPUs have the same number of render backends however, so all of them should be equally capable of driving a 4K display. I still believe the 8-core version may be a slightly better choice if you're concerned about cost, but that's a guess on my part since I don't have a ton of 4K FCP 10.1 projects to profile. With 4K content and the right effects I see 20 - 21 threads in use, maxing out nearly all available cores and threads. Basic rendering still happens on the CPU. Under a GPU compute load (effects rendering in FCP), I saw around 2GB of memory usage on the compute GPU.Since Final Cut Pro 10.1 appears to be a flagship app for the Mac Pro’s CPU + GPU configuration, I did some poking around to see how the three separate processors are used in the application. OS X reported ~8GB of usage when idle, which I can only assume is a bug and a backwards way of saying that none of the memory was in use. The compute GPU’s memory usage is very limited (obviously) until the GPU is actually in use. Video rendering/transcoding, as I mentioned earlier, is still a CPU bound affair but all effects rendering takes place on the GPUs. Even if you apply video effects to the project, prior to rendering this ends up being a predominantly CPU workload with the non-compute (display) GPU spending some cycles.It’s when you actually go to render visual effects that the compute GPU kicks in. Scrubbing through and playing back non-rendered content seems to use between 1 - 3 CPU cores. I don’t see substantial GPU compute use here, and the same is actually true for the CPU. Leveraging AVX hardware in the CPU cores), but for the most part this heterogeneous approach is what needs to happen. There are some exceptions (e.g. If you’re not bound by storage performance and want more than double digit increases in performance, your applications will have to take advantage of GPU computing to get significant speedups. Effects rendering appears to be spread over both GPUs, with the compute GPU taking the brunt of the workload in some cases and in others the two appear more balanced.GPU load while running my 4K CPU+GPU FCP 10.1 workloadFinal Cut Pro’s division of labor between CPU and GPUs exemplifies what you’ll need to see happen across the board if you want big performance gains going forward. Wd 1tb black my passport for mac portable external hard drive speedThe Apple community just doesn't need that ilk with their inherent 'tudes.What I've learned over the years about Windows users, is they love Microsoft due to a sort of Munchhausen by Proxy disorder. But, hey, from experience in that Windows environment, Apple users do NOT want a mass exodus of Windows grunge to the Apple community. DRailroad - Friday, Novemlink A belated (much belated) ABSOLUTELY! Having come from a Windows (I've always abhorred the "PC" reference, most desktops ARE "Personal Computers!") environment, we switched (more like escaped, RAN!) from that execrable platform over 14 years ago to Mac Pros and have never been more productive. You need the best of both to build good, high performance systems going forward. A huge portion of my workflow in Final Cut Pro is still CPU bound, the GPU is used to accelerate certain components within the application. IanCutress: Both should be data rate really. IanCutress: The point was more that $3b is nothing without the other $7B+ needed to get a fab up and running andreif7: This is some mega hilarious stuff, I don't remember ever seeing an assembly guide, much less it leaking before the… IanCutress: But do they have the tools that are able to be used externally with traditional EDA, or is most of it in… andreif7: I already wrote that in the piece.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorSheila ArchivesCategories |