Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

jobinhosyntax

macrumors regular
Original poster
Aug 16, 2020
120
50
As someone who's looking to use After Effects, mainly 2D vector stuff, I'm debating these two GPU's.

If you were undecided between them at one point, what was it that clinched your final choice?
 
Can't say if the same is true on Mac. In Windows there's little difference between high end AMD GPU in After Affects. It nudges it a little overall. Some tests more than others. After Effects main performance limitation is the CPU. Even a dual Titan RTX won't help you much.


If you are already loading out the iMac. The 5700 XT is only $200 more. Less than 10% maybe even less than 5% of the cost if you are loading the iMac out. It may be of some use in other tasks or more use in the future. But I'd take the 10 core i9 as a priority for AE. If AE is your main work. It's hard to justify a Mac from a performance perspective. Still the more cores the merrier.

 
Can't say if the same is true on Mac. In Windows there's little difference between high end AMD GPU in After Affects. It nudges it a little overall. Some tests more than others. After Effects main performance limitation is the CPU. Even a dual Titan RTX won't help you much.


If you are already loading out the iMac. The 5700 XT is only $200 more. Less than 10% maybe even less than 5% of the cost if you are loading the iMac out. It may be of some use in other tasks or more use in the future. But I'd take the 10 core i9 as a priority for AE. If AE is your main work. It's hard to justify a Mac from a performance perspective. Still the more cores the merrier.


Okay thanks, yeah I didn't think the XT would make much difference, maybe I could get away with the 5500 even.

I'm also pretty sold on the i7 due to the higher sustained clock speed...
 
The 5700xt gpu upgrade provides more of a boost in after effects benchmarks than the i9 10 core upgrade. But depending on what youre doing in AE, the 5500xt is more than adequate. Take a look at the Pugentbench scores (filter for after effects):

Either way, the i7 and i9 imacs appear to be faster than the new mac pro and three year old imac pro. Much better value.
 
Last edited:
The new imacs perform as fast as more expensive pcs purpose built for AE from puget systems that dont include a 5k monitor, keyboard, or mouse. So I wouldnt say its hard to justify at all.
 
The new imacs perform as fast as more expensive pcs purpose built for AE from puget systems that dont include a 5k monitor, keyboard, or mouse. So I wouldnt say its hard to justify at all.

That's if you buy from Pugetsystems. I'm looking at how a Ryzen 3900x beats every Mac out there and the cost of a DIY PC with high quality parts. With 5K display you may hit iMac prices with performance superior to a decked out Mac Pro.

Maybe the new iMac will do better. They haven't tested it yet. So far it doesn't look as though AE is as well optimized for macOS as Windows. Based on their tests of the Mac Pro.
 
Did you check out the user published benchmarks I linked to? The new iMacs are definitely holding their own better than the pro macs.
 
That's if you buy from Pugetsystems. I'm looking at how a Ryzen 3900x beats every Mac out there and the cost of a DIY PC with high quality parts.

My opinion:

If you want to play games, this is definitively the way to go. Yes, AMD is way more powerful now than anything Intel can offer as consumer chips. 16 cores (or 12) vs 10 cores, the count is there. Intel is still not in the game for a long, long time.

I do have a custom PC. A 9 years old workstation with quality hardware. Still run (almost) perfectly fine (some instability during prolonged 100% use CPU/GPUs, don't know where it's coming). And it was a freaking good investment.

If you want to work, the iMac will be definitively better. Thanks to macOS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2Stepfan
Would be great to know more of the differences between these and if the XT is worth the additional £200?

Thanks!
[automerge]1599034613[/automerge]
My opinion:

If you want to play games, this is definitively the way to go. Yes, AMD is way more powerful now than anything Intel can offer as consumer chips. 16 cores (or 12) vs 10 cores, the count is there. Intel is still not in the game for a long, long time.

I do have a custom PC. A 9 years old workstation with quality hardware. Still run (almost) perfectly fine (some instability during prolonged 100% use CPU/GPUs, don't know where it's coming). And it was a freaking good investment.

If you want to work, the iMac will be definitively better. Thanks to macOS.

I noticed you picked the 5700. What what your reasoning, if you don't mind me asking?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.