Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Problem is there's clearly a cost involved around low production quantity and because the GPU is sealed in they would have to replace the product every 3 years. For it to remain a competitive product in the third year the GPU would have to be of a high spec to start with. It's a bit of a risk to lower the price on this to try and gain more sales.

I noted that they put the usual USB ports etc on it which is nice.

What could have been even more interesting would have been some internal drive bays and a SATA bridge to bring in people who might have added inexpensive storage - and maybe a second Thunderbolt controller to look after all that because a GPU should keep a Thunderbolt 3 link busy by itself.

re: GPU sealed - I suppose if they could component-ize some kind of module they could swap, people could send it back and have it upgraded or something like that. But, most likely, people would just pass them to another computer when they get the next version.

I'm not the typical company, but for example, if I need more GPU power, I'll just buy the 'pro' or wait until they (hopefully) update it. Then I'll sell my current one or pass it on to my son for his laptop, etc. I could see the same happening within a production studio, where some people need the most power, but others could still use a boost over the base GPU. I mean, it's going to be like car (or computer for that matter) in that when you sell it it wouldn't be worth anywhere new, but you've gotten the productivity out of if all that time, so that's kind of moot/expected.

re: internal storage - some eGPUs do that, I think. I guess that is nice in terms of keeping a neat desk, but yeah, you're better off putting storage on a different TB3 controller, as the GPU (when pushed) takes up most of one. (BTW, in case people don't know, that's the advantage of an iMac Pro or Mac Pro in that they have more TB3 controllers. For example, my mini has 4 ports, but 2 controllers. So, pairs of ports use the same controller... you have to keep that in mind when deciding how to plug in your stuff. An iMac Pro, I think, has 4 ports with one controller for each port.)

I think it actually has a TB3 controller (in fact, the best kind with capability to run an XDR, which most can't), but that doesn't help you much if the channel is saturated. I didn't buy a high-end solution to expand my storage (just a Samsung T5), but I wouldn't hang that off my Blackmagic. I put that on the other TB3 controller, and then I hang most other peripheral stuff off the Blackmagic.

re: pricing - I guess my point is that they are priced like pro equipment. That's OK to an extent, as it is a pro product. But, I wonder if they might help themselves by trying to bring it down a bit more into prosumer pricing to up their quantities. That's a call every company has to make I guess, but if there is a problem (we're assuming), then that could be a fix.
[automerge]1587488907[/automerge]
Indeed, and that's why these connections aren't more common sadly. They'd be stealing bandwidth from a GPU.

It is interesting to look into that. Barefeats did a bunch of testing a few years ago (and some other site). When you're REALLY pushing the highest-end GPUs, you can actually saturate TB3 and in that case, you lose just a bit of performance over having the GPU internally in a machine.

But, on the other hand, in a lot of more real-world use, there isn't much difference between internal/external. And, I'd imagine even if you did put your storage, peripherals, and eGPU on a single controller, most of the time, most people wouldn't even know. It's more about theoretical maximums and conditions that do actually push things 100%... that just doesn't happen most of the time.

I wonder if some version of TB will get out ahead of this? If they doubled TB3, I think that would solve the current situation pretty much. But, the internal stuff keeps speeding up too, I guess. That said, TB2 clearly wasn't enough, but now TB3 (real-world) is quite a usable solution.
 
Last edited:
Indeed, and that's why these connections aren't more common sadly. They'd be stealing bandwidth from a GPU.

Id probably actually buy a box if it had a mid to low range gpu and say 2x 2.5” slots for SATA ssd’s (USB wouldn’t hurt, a card reader is useless to me), because I don’t imagine I’d ever push the gpu anywhere close to its limit (I just need to drive 2x 4K displays a little smoother than the 630UHD)

but the “mid to low” cards like the 560/570 are the ones that have (apparently) terrible support in Catalina. 5500 seems not dissimilar in price point, so maybe that would work.

if the Akitio Node Duo had a regular ac power input with an internal psu I’d probably try that + a pci adapter or drive, but it doesn’t and weird random external dc transformers are the bane of my existence so that ones a no go.
 
Id probably actually buy a box if it had a mid to low range gpu and say 2x 2.5” slots for SATA ssd’s (USB wouldn’t hurt, a card reader is useless to me), because I don’t imagine I’d ever push the gpu anywhere close to its limit (I just need to drive 2x 4K displays a little smoother than the 630UHD)

but the “mid to low” cards like the 560/570 are the ones that have (apparently) terrible support in Catalina. 5500 seems not dissimilar in price point, so maybe that would work.

if the Akitio Node Duo had a regular ac power input with an internal psu I’d probably try that + a pci adapter or drive, but it doesn’t and weird random external dc transformers are the bane of my existence so that ones a no go.

See, there is a need for a whole variety of setups for eGPUs and such kinds of expansion. :)

re: external power supplies - I don't think they are all necessarily bad. It's just that there are a lot of low-quality ones coupled with typical consumer electronic. But, higher end devices I've owned with them over decades haven't had issues. The trick if figuring out of the product you're buying comes with a good one or not, I suppose.
 
Thanks for all this discussion, interesting to consider where Blackmagic might go with the Pro version. I wasn't aware of the RDNA change so I'm curious if that is what's destined for a new Pro model.

I have the Blackmagic standard, the 580. I read all of the concerns about non-upgradability and being overpriced and still bought it for $699 early January 2019 to pair with the 2018 Macbook Air.

It has turned out to be great, letting that machine easily run a scaled, UHD 4k and the only game I care about in max settings. I changed over to a mini later for more CPU and its even better with the Blackmagic.

Something people have neglected to mention is that even though the card in the Blackmagic standard is not upgradeable, the card itself is still a good performer in the scheme of things three years after its introduction. The overclocked version, the 590, is still considered a great budget-minded gamer card.

The silence has been noted, but it also has a capable set of ports you can drive USB speakers and other peripherals from that make using an MBA in clamshell then walking away easy and accessible.

Another neglected item is that part of the point with Apple products is you don't need to open the product up and service it. I've added Ram to my mini, but largely I'm happy not messing with hardware after many years of doing so on PCs before switching over.

There are compromises, such as cost, but I believe choosing a well-built computing product like the Blackmagic eGPU is in the same vein as why people choose Apple products. It just works. (or is supposed to!) The Blackmagic has been the most stable eGPU you could pair with a mac since MacOS began supporting the concept, in part because its the closest to an Apple-supported eGPU you could buy. DIY eGPUs are regularly described with the caveat they sometimes lack stability.

Finally, I'd add that the Blackmagic has decent resell. You can sell the standard Blackmagic for $500 on ebay today. I absolutely think I've gotten $200 of use out of it in the past 14 months.

I definitely understand why people are less enthused about the Blackmagic Pro. I think the pro market looks at things much differently and the price / performance is a much bigger deal.

That said, Apple has struggled to offer solid graphics in so many of its machines, and the Blackmagic eGPU is a really good turnkey solution to this issue.
 
...
Something people have neglected to mention is that even though the card in the Blackmagic standard is not upgradeable, the card itself is still a good performer in the scheme of things three years after its introduction. The overclocked version, the 590, is still considered a great budget-minded gamer card.
...

Finally, I'd add that the Blackmagic has decent resell. You can sell the standard Blackmagic for $500 on ebay today. I absolutely think I've gotten $200 of use out of it in the past 14 months.
...

Great points! While the 580 isn't the latest and greatest, and wouldn't be good enough for some high-end applications, it is a perfectly adequate GPU for most tasks and a HUGE improvement over the iGPU.

You just have to decide whether that additional X% of GPU power of the latest/greatest is worth the extra $. But, that doesn't make the 580 a bad option (like many seem to assert).

I hadn't realized that about the resale, but that is good news too. If I need more GPU power down the road, I'll look for a used 'Pro' model or hopefully they will have released a new version. I'd then either sell my current one, or pass it on to my son (for his iGPU MBP), etc. It isn't like it becomes useless, and like you say, I'm getting quite a bit of value out of using it.
 
Did Blackmagic ever announce a replacement eGPU?

There may not be a new one. I sent an email to Blackmagic asking if there will be a new one and this was their response:

"The product development team has not indicated to us that this is something they are working on. It is not common for that team to inform us of new products until shortly before it is announced."

I discovered the Blackmagic eGPU Pro in the MacOS graphics driver about 1 month before it was announced: link. I haven't found a new one in the latest drivers, so if there will be a new one it's definitely more than a month out. It's a shame because they only sold this one for a little over a year. The best alternative solution I think would be a Radeon Pro W5700 in an Akitio Node Titan eGPU enclosure. That will be able to drive an XDR or LG Ultrafine display with the USB-C output. Of course the W5700 doesn't work with Mojave.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveW928
There may not be a new one. I sent an email to Blackmagic asking if there will be a new one and this was their response:

"The product development team has not indicated to us that this is something they are working on. It is not common for that team to inform us of new products until shortly before it is announced."

I discovered the Blackmagic eGPU Pro in the MacOS graphics driver about 1 month before it was announced: link. I haven't found a new one in the latest drivers, so if there will be a new one it's definitely more than a month out. It's a shame because they only sold this one for a little over a year. The best alternative solution I think would be a Radeon Pro W5700 in an Akitio Node Titan eGPU enclosure. That will be able to drive an XDR or LG Ultrafine display with the USB-C output. Of course the W5700 doesn't work with Mojave.

Hmm, that doesn't sound good. I sure hope the whole eGPU thing wasn't just a something Apple toyed with for a bit. Assuming they are serious about it, maybe the Blackmagic was an experiment Apple outsourced when they were too busy to focus on such things (as they clearly were until recently).

If that's the case, could it be because Apple will be making them? Or, maybe Blackmagic just decided it wasn't worth it to them? Or, maybe it's just lost among the massive line of products Blackmagic makes, and they'll eventually get around to it (and updating their website... heck, it would be hard to know they even make such a thing if one goes to their site).

If neither Apple or Blackmagic makes one, that's a good opportunity for a product. But, it's also a lot of work, so would take someone with some resources. But, the general design concept is certainly a winner. What might be even better, is using that basic kind of design, but modularizing a GPU card that could go in it.

I don't think that kind of design is very feasible with a card slot, but maybe some some clever work, such a unit could be designed that isn't much bigger, but where a card (you'd get from the maker) could be swapped without too much complex service work? THAT would be a killer product... best of both worlds.
 
The eGPUs does look like something they were trying out and not taking seriously anymore. It’s not necessary for production now that there’s the new Mac Pro that takes PCIe cards. I think the demand is still there though. It’s the only way to add graphics to other Macs.

I think the Blackmagic design could be adapted to work with standard PCIe cards. It would be really cool if they made an enclosure that accepted the Mac Pro’s MPX modules.
 
The eGPUs does look like something they were trying out and not taking seriously anymore. It’s not necessary for production now that there’s the new Mac Pro that takes PCIe cards. I think the demand is still there though. It’s the only way to add graphics to other Macs.

I think the Blackmagic design could be adapted to work with standard PCIe cards. It would be really cool if they made an enclosure that accepted the Mac Pro’s MPX modules.

I suppose, but unless Apple fills the gap between the other Macs and the Mac Pro, there is a LOT of need for eGPUs. And, even then, being able to add them to laptops is a compelling reason to keep going down that path.

re: design with PCIe or MPX modules - Yeah, that would be good in terms of upgradability, but that thing would be enormous. I would imagine it wouldn't be too hard to do (ie. use the cooling setup of a the BM eGPU, or '13 Mac Pro, etc. and apply it to a card-based enclosure), so long as you don't care about the size. The horizontal eGPUs are pretty darn huge, too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MisterAndrew
I bought a used Razer Core X for $225, and a used Vega 56 for $200, last year. Still serving me really well in both Mac and Windows 10 (via Boot Camp). I flashed the BIOS on that Vega 56 to a Vega 64, which provided a nice little boost as well, and is easily reversible using command line tools.
Hey hey - If you don't mind my asking, what are you using your eGPU for? I'm a doc film editor running 2 x 2K monitors off my 2018 15" MBP wondering if an eGPU would be a nice intermediary upgrade with Premiere Pro but it seems hard to lockdown exactly how it might benefit me in particular - any sense? Very much appreciated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NickName99
Hey hey - If you don't mind my asking, what are you using your eGPU for? I'm a doc film editor running 2 x 2K monitors off my 2018 15" MBP wondering if an eGPU would be a nice intermediary upgrade with Premiere Pro but it seems hard to lockdown exactly how it might benefit me in particular - any sense? Very much appreciated.

That’s a great question, it totally depends on how well Adobe Premiere is programmed to make use of available GPUs. I do know that if you bring up the “get info” window for an app, there’s a checkbox you can check to “prefer eGPU”, which may be necessary for an application to use the eGPU rather than the internal one.

Edit: I looked around a bit and found someone had done some casual benchmarks using an eGPU and Adobe CC 2019:
 
The best alternative solution I think would be a Radeon Pro W5700 in an Akitio Node Titan eGPU enclosure. That will be able to drive an XDR or LG Ultrafine display with the USB-C output. Of course the W5700 doesn't work with Mojave.

Don't those monitors require Thunderbolt 3? So the enclosure would need two Thunderbolt 3 ports. One to connect to your computer and one to connect to the monitor.
 
Don't those monitors require Thunderbolt 3? So the enclosure would need two Thunderbolt 3 ports. One to connect to your computer and one to connect to the monitor.

Apparently they can work via USB-C. Perhaps not at full resolution though. Here are some threads about it. I can't really tell from reading. Maybe you can figure it out. Probably best to stay with a Blackmagic eGPU if the goal is driving one of those displays.


 
I wonder if the regular Blackmagic eGPU is being discontinued as well. It's not available from the Apple store in Europe. Still 10-12 weeks in North America. 3-4 weeks in Australia, but it's in stock for immediate shipping in Hong Kong and Japan.
 
The eGPU market right now needs two things to get mainstream acceptance

- Cheaper enclosures. Enclosures shouldn't cost the same as some mid level cards.
- Better bandwidth to fully use the GPU

Unfortunately, I don't think these problems will be solved anytime soon.
 
The eGPU market right now needs two things to get mainstream acceptance

- Cheaper enclosures. Enclosures shouldn't cost the same as some mid level cards.
- Better bandwidth to fully use the GPU

Unfortunately, I don't think these problems will be solved anytime soon.

Yeah, the overall costs need to come down. I'm not sure how Intel's opening up of the license will impact this. My understanding is that TB3 costs are dropping, which was one big aspect of the cost.

(Though, keep in mind that many eGPU enclosures have the ports you'd be buying a 'hub' type device for, which often cost $100-$200.)

As far as bandwidth, yes that is an issue in complex setups, but otherwise fairly irrelevant. For most people (with 1 GPU) and another channel to attach storage to, etc. you're only losing a few percent of the GPU performance.

And, if you have a higher end machine (with say, 4 TB controller channels), you could hook storage to one, and then 3 GPUs to the others, and still hardly be lower performance than if you had them internally.

I'm not sure when the next generation of TB will released, but assuming they again double the bandwidth, that would pretty much eliminate the issue (well, until the next generation of internal bus).

The main problem, is that if you don't plan out your setup, you can easily be hooking too many devices (especially GPU/storage) to one channel and saturate it and drop performance. Since most computers have multiple physical ports on one channel, you actually have to know what to plug what into, physically.

IMO, the bigger problem is awareness. I doubt the average computer owner even knows about these things (or that, for example, they could add an eGPU vs buying a new computer with better GPU). It is just us geeks and pros so far buying them.
 
With them discontinuing one model, do you really want to take a chance on buying a product that the vendor may very well abandon?

Well hopefully they'll support it. The Blackmagic eGPUs have the best compatibility with the macOS drivers. The only other GPU (that can be used as an eGPU) that's supported with a specific framebuffer personality is the Sapphire Pulse RX 580, but only 2 specific variations that were used in the Apple eGPU Dev Kits (the vbios of other variations can be modified to match though).
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveW928
These are the framebuffers for Mac eGPUs. Others use the generic RadeonFramebuffer, which have crippled performance as discussed in this thread. Of course a much more powerful GPU will overcome the difference. The performance just isn't as high as it could be if Apple put effort into making framebuffers for them (Apple only makes framebuffers for GPUs that they sell). The framebuffer dictates many aspects of the GPU including performance, supported features, behaviors (sleep, power management, etc), and compatibility (e.g. the system recognizing it properly).

Blackmagic eGPU: Yelcho
Blackmagic eGPU Pro: Sleipnir
Sapphire Pulse RX 580 Apple eGPU Dev Kit version: Orinoco

Also, here's an interesting tidbit: The prototype Blackmagic eGPU Pro had an RX Vega 64 GPU instead of an RX Vega 56. Perhaps they weren't able to meet thermal and noise goals with the beefier chip. The Vega 64 prototype was model number 113-D05001A1XTOD. The production Vega 56 version is 113-D05016A1XLHOD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveW928
Hopefully these get updated or the base model keeps stock coming in. Mac mini users who also have LG Ultrafine 5K monitors don't really have many options when it comes to connecting to an EGPU to the Mini and then to the Monitor.

Also seems like weird timing considering the XDR display just came out and the Mini is useable with that display but you need a black magic for it to work at 6k...
 
Also seems like weird timing considering the XDR display just came out and the Mini is useable with that display but you need a black magic for it to work at 6k...

Last I heard, it was the only way to drive an XDR on any machine but the Mac Pro, but I wonder how many XDRs they sell that wouldn't be sold with a Mac Pro?
 
I think quite a few people buy XDR displays without a Mac Pro. The Macs that can drive the XDR are listed on Apple's website. It's only a few from 2018 up. It looks like the Blackmagic eGPU Pro would be the better choice for the XDR. I was looking over the whitepaper for AMD Polaris (the regular Blackmagic eGPU) and it cannot display HDR content higher than 4K resolution. The Vega whitepaper says it can display HDR content at 5K. It doesn't say anything about 6K though. Of course the regular Blackmagic eGPU should have the same capabilities as the Mac Pro's 580X GPU.

Edit: That's for a single connection. The 580 GPU utilizes two DP 1.4 connections over TB3 to drive the 6K display so perhaps it does support HDR.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.