How is this an accusation? How is an apple designed and producted my apple any worse than BM? My friends and some people on other forums told me that their pocket camera is delivering quite slowly, and this is my speculation.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's $1,199 Blackmagic eGPU Pro Now Available for Purchase, Delivers Mid-January
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And because you don’t care for either of those features no one else does either. Got it.
I'm not angry but this product is still a blatant rip off since it is aimed solely at Apple users and really just one small niche of Apple users. LG Ultrafine 5k/4k Monitors with only Thunderbolt ports. The lifespan of this product will be very short lived as hopefully so too are the Ultrafines. Who would every buy an overpriced monitor that does not offer HDMI or Displayport and then be left with only one option for adding an eGPU to that monitor. The overpriced Blackmagic. You can use this eGPU for gaming. Nothing about it is stopping you. There are better options unless of course you are stuck with an Ultrafine monitor.
Apple is all about bloated pricing. Another reason why I am happy with my 2012 MacBook pro. I don't need USBC.
It's like buying the half of the computer Apple forgot to include in the original machine.
I don't understand why so many people are protesting against the price. The same price would be right if Apple wouldn't be pushing iOS at the cost of watering down the Mac. The price is not the problem (the Mac has never been cheap, although it has tended to be more affordable than other options in the long term because of its quality and lifetime --and that's one aspect the modern Apple doesn't like: they want frequent purchases as opposed to the long time support that used to be standard in the Mac ecosystem).
Seriously, it's not the price. It's dropping the MagSafe. It's the annoying autoboot in new MBPs that make you feel you are using a cheapo iPad instead of a MBP. It's the negative to bring official NVIDIA support back. It's dropping standards (OpenGL/OpenCL/Vulkan) in favor of proprietary APIs. It's bloating and bloating MacOS so much that updates take more than half an hour to download and install. It's dropping support in the kernel for 32bit Intel code, which is something you want when doing any serious QC in your source code. It's the "update, update, update!!" (as boring as annoying) nagging dialogs. It's introducing the Touch Bar and then not supporting pro-like customisation for it. It's promising a new modular Mac Pro while in the mean time offering their much loved AiOs in the form of the iMac Pro hoping pros will buy a new Mac every year like if they were teens having their parents buy a new iPhone for them every September.
It's such a long list of things, that really puts the price out of the question. It's not about the price. It's about Apple wanting you to work in an iOS-like, frequent-purchase, cloud-based, service-based, ecosystem. And that ecosystem has nothing to do with the true spirit of the Mac.
I'm about half-way of having all my source code freed from Apple dependencies. If everything goes as planned, I'll have all my tools moved to a partially tuned ElementaryOS build a year from now. It's very sad to see the Mac die to iOS, but I cannot afford to see my code and work infected by "the new Apple virus" (their golden dream of getting rich in their much desired and pushed "data-driven world"), so removing all Apple dependencies from my work is a top priority for me these years.
[doublepost=1545477875][/doublepost]
Seriously, it's not the price. It's dropping the MagSafe. It's the annoying autoboot in new MBPs that make you feel you are using a cheapo iPad instead of a MBP. It's the negative to bring official NVIDIA support back. It's dropping standards (OpenGL/OpenCL/Vulkan) in favor of proprietary APIs. It's bloating and bloating MacOS so much that updates take more than half an hour to download and install. It's dropping support in the kernel for 32bit Intel code, which is something you want when doing any serious QC in your source code. It's the "update, update, update!!" (as boring as annoying) nagging dialogs. It's introducing the Touch Bar and then not supporting pro-like customisation for it. It's promising a new modular Mac Pro while in the mean time offering their much loved AiOs in the form of the iMac Pro hoping pros will buy a new Mac every year like if they were teens having their parents buy a new iPhone for them every September.
It's such a long list of things, that really puts the price out of the question. It's not about the price. It's about Apple wanting you to work in an iOS-like, frequent-purchase, cloud-based, service-based, ecosystem. And that ecosystem has nothing to do with the true spirit of the Mac.
I'm about half-way of having all my source code freed from Apple dependencies. If everything goes as planned, I'll have all my tools moved to a partially tuned ElementaryOS build a year from now. It's very sad to see the Mac die to iOS, but I cannot afford to see my code and work infected by "the new Apple virus" (their golden dream of getting rich in their much desired and pushed "data-driven world"), so removing all Apple dependencies from my work is a top priority for me these years.
[doublepost=1545477875][/doublepost]
Not surprising Apple didn't fight for it. This move by Adobe hurts the Mac, which is what the new Apple management is after (they didn't drop the Mac yet not because they don't want to, but because they still didn't find the way to do it).
Last edited:
I think you might be misinformed about what revision PCIe was included -
- 2008 has two PCIe 2.0 x16 slots and 2 PCIe 1.1 x4 slots EDIT: Consistency
- 2009 has two PCIe 2.0 x16 slots and 2 PCIe 2.0 x4 slots
- 2010 has two PCIe 2.0 x16 slots and 2 PCIe 2.0 x slots
- 2012 has two PCIe 2.0 x16 slots and 2 PCIe 2.0 x slots
None of them ever had PCIe 3.0 slots, but they did have all have PCIe 2.0 for the x16 slots even if they did not for the x4 slots until the 2009 model.
EDIT: The 2006 and 2007 revisions of the Mac Pro are based on PCIe 1.0/1.1 and are user configurable in terms of lanes per slot. Intel does not list the number of PCIe lanes on the CPUs in these Macs, nor have I been able to find any information on Intel's ARK about how many lanes they had.
Source: https://support.apple.com/en_US/specs/macpro
Last edited:
The price delta between the two versions of the Blackmagic eGPUs will most likely not have any impact on the pricing of either for the foreseeable future. They are both Apple Store exclusives, as well, so that affects pricing.
The Radeon Pro 580 version is barely 5 months old at this point and I do not think you are going to see a lot of them for sale anytime soon.
if you are in the market for an eGPU, you can find cheaper, more powerful alternatives easily, unless you have an LG UltraFine 5K monitor you want to hook up.
Really? You think that's a $400 ASUS $399+tax on Newegg card? It's a custom ASIC designed model, which means lower production numbers equating to higher costs per unit, not to mention the entire cooling system is custom.
I see you ignore the case which the cheapest case with those constraints would be around $700.
While I don't disagree with all your complaints, I'll just point out that Metal (which, like Vulkan, is intended to replace both OpenGL and OpenCL) was announced, publicly beta-tested, and then finally released six months before Vulkan was even announced.
Which make of VEGA 64 did you go with? I got a VEGA 56 from MSI for my Razer Pro X and my MBPr - it doesn't play too nicely at all...
[doublepost=1545516641][/doublepost]
A good question Brian - the host will upload the same amount of data to be processed, whether to a VEGA 56/64 or an RX580, and that should take the same amount of time being transferred - ditto with the results of the processing.
But the VEGA should get the processing done in roughly half the time. So overall processing wise, it will be faster, irrespective of the TB3 cap - or the cap of any link, no matter the speed. The benefits will be greater the longer the final video is that you're producing.
For us we're only doing short videos, so I suspect a solid RX580 is fine, and for an extra $100 or so, I would consider something with more oomph, but it's not a show stopper.
I have VEGA 56 and an RX580 - the RX580 is fine so far for our needs in day to day editing. Final render is still the issue, and that's more about CPU cores than GPU performance in many editors.
[doublepost=1545516720][/doublepost]
Thanks DeepIn2U - good spot! Thanks for making me aware!
I honestly don’t mind the subscription model, but I still have memories of spending $2,000+ to buy and $600 to upgrade every 18 months. I also do publishing, so Typekit (Adobe Fonts) is almost worth the monthly fee alone. Some of the (now free) fonts in my books have licenses that are over $2,000.
But Adobe’s pricing before and now is seriously limiting them from the casual market. I can’t see how anyone could ever justify it if they didn’t make money off of it / have it as a tax write off. Heck, I’m probably only indifferent to it because I am a working filmmaker AND working food photographer AND working Cookbook designer.
The subscription has also come in handy for me twice this past year as I worked with two people who don’t usually work in film. They rented Premiere for only a month to work on the project.
For casual use, Blackmagic Resolve is the best value in editing because it is essentially free.
I think Apple will axe Final Cut in the next few years. They’ll trickle some more of the features down to iMovie and end of life Final Cut the same way they killed off Aperture. When I started in indie film, 90% of the filmmakers I met were using Final Cut. Now, I have not seen any filmmaker using it in several years. Everybody knows that Apple fixed most of the shortcomings of X too, but the whole pipeline has already moved on to Premiere. It’s now the indie standard that Final Cut once was.
I’d say Apple only keeps Final Cut around as an easy way to generate benchmark numbers when they release new Macs.
Well, if Adobe keeps making mistake, the pipeline can change again... why not?
I like FCPX. I think it's neatly programmed and works well.
Would be sad to see it go.
DaVinci looks a little like a Premiere clone on the surface... I hate working in premiere. Clunky.
I think it’s easier to trust a software company at this point. They will change if something hurts the bottom line. But I do imagine Adobe must bring in casual consumers to grow and that this can/will have an impact on their pro offerings in the future.
Resolve is an incredible piece of software. It’s more powerful than Final Cut or Premiere, but the editing features are rather recent and haven’t matured. I can see this stealing a huge share of the market eventually, as Resolve is already a major part of the pipeline for a large portion of films. It is used for color correction and absolutely smokes the color science of any editing program. It used to only be available as a $30,000 workstation. Now it is pretty much free / in line with Final Cut pricing for higher resolutions.
The biggest issue with Resolve is that it is a GPU hog, which is probably the only reason the eGPU in this article exists, as BlackMagic makes the software and so many of Apple’s computers can no longer run Resolve as they should. I wouldn’t say it’s bad coding, as much as the color correction is just that good / it needs the power.
Did I say Apple made this? Please, read before trying to go on a crazed defense first, maybe?
I went with a Sapphire Radeon RX 580 and an ASUS XG Station Pro for $640 after taxes, so far I think it is working better than the default GPU in the 2018 mac mini, but I have not fully tested the setup either. My current load is historical Total War games (mostly Empire), brief STO (not impressed*,***), and set as the preferred gpu for most software.
PROs: Fans only run when required, when they do it is not loud. Beautiful enclosure, works well with the new mini. Cheap for the overall enclosure, again, it is beautiful! 1.5M TB3 cable. Power button.
CONs: Not 100% sure it is helping, but that is another story*. Has lights that can only be controlled by Windows software, lame as well as I do not like the lights (excessive). Still skeptical on the performance of eGPUs as a whole**.
* Up until now I have been using nvidia cards, most recently a 660 GTX in a custom PC with Windows+Steam/Linux+Steam+SteamPlay. Star Trek Online was golden in the Windows setup (Win7). Not so great in Linux, but the game was installed on a 7200RPM spinner (not ideal). STO has some major graphical anomalies*** with the RX 580, but have not played around with the settings enough to write it off.
** I hope this technology is as good as they say (since I have given up my PC for my minis), but time will tell. I do not believe the support for eGPUs have matured enough in macOS, but I am hoping it gets better.
*** Using Play On Mac, hoping it is utilizing the Radeon fully?!?
Regardless, I want to admit I thought about purchasing the BM eGPU (both models), but my setup is at least $120 cheaper than the base model with the option to upgrade later. This I do not regret!! The Vega version, if I choose, will still be at least $300 cheaper than the BM high end model.
Unless you just want it (which I get), buy something better with more options.
PROs: Fans only run when required, when they do it is not loud. Beautiful enclosure, works well with the new mini. Cheap for the overall enclosure, again, it is beautiful! 1.5M TB3 cable. Power button.
CONs: Not 100% sure it is helping, but that is another story*. Has lights that can only be controlled by Windows software, lame as well as I do not like the lights (excessive). Still skeptical on the performance of eGPUs as a whole**.
* Up until now I have been using nvidia cards, most recently a 660 GTX in a custom PC with Windows+Steam/Linux+Steam+SteamPlay. Star Trek Online was golden in the Windows setup (Win7). Not so great in Linux, but the game was installed on a 7200RPM spinner (not ideal). STO has some major graphical anomalies*** with the RX 580, but have not played around with the settings enough to write it off.
** I hope this technology is as good as they say (since I have given up my PC for my minis), but time will tell. I do not believe the support for eGPUs have matured enough in macOS, but I am hoping it gets better.
*** Using Play On Mac, hoping it is utilizing the Radeon fully?!?
Regardless, I want to admit I thought about purchasing the BM eGPU (both models), but my setup is at least $120 cheaper than the base model with the option to upgrade later. This I do not regret!! The Vega version, if I choose, will still be at least $300 cheaper than the BM high end model.
Unless you just want it (which I get), buy something better with more options.
Last edited:
The fans are loud in that thing. Might need to look at replacing them or place it in a machine room if possible (though long (active or optical) TB3 cables are like unicorns at the moment).
Last edited:
Waste of time dealing with Apple now, arrogance and greed has destroyed the Mac, resulting in the consumer garbage it produces today...
Q-6
I really don't do much with video, but you sold me Resolve
I never seen it pop up in editing contexts yet, I do remember that every colorist i know uses it.
I guess that also eliminates the export/import workflow? That's huge really.
These noobs don't know how much we used to pay for software years ago. Literally thousands of dollars a year just for the latest features on top of paying for the OS too. Here's an example how much we paid annually.
$130 for Mac OS (free now) or $180 for Windows (still now)
$8500 for Maya with annual upgrades around $2000.
$12000 for Softimage 3D
Adobe apps around $1500 each with annual upgrades around $700-800.
MS Office $400 with upgrades around $150.
They have it so easy today they complain about everything but then they go drink $6 cup of coffee.
Some of these people making noises on forums are just pirates who got angry about subscription models that prevent them from updating.
last time i checked adobe was easily crackable.
I think the "subscription" is not something we are programmed to accept. Feels like a lease on software while people used to feel "if i buy it at least its mine".
For me the bigger cancer is license dongles that so many app developers use.
They're finicky, when they fail its a nuisance to replace, they wont work properly with hubs, they introduce overhead on the cpu. it's just blah.
Once you buy the subscription, you're locked in for life whether you like it or not. For my needs CS6 was the end of the line and I was quite happy to pay for my full release when it first dropped 7 years ago. If the cloud had dropped in 2011, I'd have paid more for features I don't care or use and would have tons of Adobe spyware installed on my computer for no reason.
You're not. You can cancel and resub anytime after first year.
In the future we will even have subscription hardware from some companies. We already have that if you get your phone or tablet for with a service contract.
[doublepost=1545588101][/doublepost]
Buying software doesn't make it yours, people have to realize that. They need to get their 'ownership' idea out of their head. It's like when people thought it was OK to rip movies and share it. They don't own the movies just because they bought a disc. So now we have streaming, which has created incredible value. We used to pay more than $50 for a VHS movie. Then $20 for a DVD. Now for $10-15 you can watch a massive library.
Cracks are extremely dangerous. Nowadays they can easily contain key loggers and ransomware to capture banking data from computers. Only a fool would install these things.
Be glad most physical dongles no longer exist. Autocad, Maya and Softimage needed a physical dongle attached to the parallel port. You had to switch the dongle and reboot the computer just to switch apps.
Last edited: