Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
PREMIERE PRO DOESN'T USE GPU ON EXPORT

All of these 'reviews' using Premiere Pro are complete bollocks.
[doublepost=1542853292][/doublepost]
Again, PP doesn't use GPU to export. THAT is why it's not mentioned on Apple website.


Not true.

From the Adobe website:

"This blog post explains what a GPU can and cannot assist (speed up) in the overall exporting process (scaling, GPU accelerated effects, etc.). In some cases in an exporting job, the GPU is used minimally, as there might not be many processes available for the GPU to handle. Real-time GPU accelerated effects may not have been added to the sequence, for example.

That said, a system with a well-performing GPU (or even dual GPUs or more) can be a boon to improving encoding times, as indicated in this article. Some editors create sequences with a great deal of GPU-accelerated effects, for example, others commonly scale 4K footage to HD frame sizes. The GPU offloads processing for items it can handle, like these effects and scaling, giving the CPUs the opportunity to focus on the encoding (rather than effects processing) which can speed up the entire process greatly."


Guess what effect is GPU-accelerated? LUMETRI. That means ALL color correction is accelerated upon export with a faster GPU.

As a professional editor, I can tell you that every single clip in my timeline has color correction on it. Quite often clips have two or more Lumetri effects on them.

This GPU will DRASTICALLY improve my export times from Premiere.

(Which isn't even the important thing. The important thing is REALTIME PLAYBACK with effects on it. That's what you spend 95% of your editing time doing, playing things back. Export improvements are just a cherry on top.)
 
Last edited:
Yes, as I edit with Premiere mostly everyday as part of my work as well, I can attest tot he fact that the GPU is indeed very much used in a variety of export scenarios.

Just having this added GPU power is needed for general playback and GPU-accelerated effects alone!
 
PREMIERE PRO DOESN'T USE GPU ON EXPORT

All of these 'reviews' using Premiere Pro are complete bollocks.
[doublepost=1542853292][/doublepost]
Again, PP doesn't use GPU to export. THAT is why it's not mentioned on Apple website.

Then his temperature reading is totally useless. He's checking the chassis temp (??? not even the exhaust vent???); not showing CPU/GPU utilisation graphs; not showing CPU/GPU temps; and making the false assumption that the GPU is pinned during the test.

4/10 review. Highly misleading.

Then why are the results significantly faster than the 2018,1 MBP with 560X? The rest of the hardware is exactly the same.
 
Hi, I used a Sonnet eGPU box, any thunderbolt 3 eGPU box works fine.

With OSX the best GPU's to use are AMD 500 series or AMD Vega because there is no need for any additional drivers.

With Windows there is some additional set up that needs to be done to make bootcamp work with eGPU in all cases, you can find guides on egpu.io.

Thunderbolt 3 does not have as much bandwidth as PCI-EX 16 so there is a performance hit vs a traditional desktop, usually between 5%-20% depending on which graphics card you are using, however the convenience of a plug + play graphics card for a small notebook vs a desktop makes this worthwhile for some...

I have attached a picture of my set up, 2 x 1080p 144hz monitors and Vega 64 for your viewing pleasure.

View attachment 805556


Thanks! I'm in the process of upgrading, and this is super helpful. That's a pretty rad set up you got there, I might just get the Vega 64 as well. :D
 
Listen, it’s ok to be jealous ;)
I've got more compute resources lying around than you do, so I don't see any need. As the other guy said, if you were in with the PC builders crowd, the GPU is low-end, and the CPU is mid-range. I recommend a visit to overclock.net.
[doublepost=1542906646][/doublepost]
Interesting. That sounds like either the test is flawed or the <32GB RAM ones have some bottleneck.
[doublepost=1542907153][/doublepost]
Its the first time Moore‘s Law applies to the price rather than transistor count... (paraphrasing a german forum post)
It also applies to the CPU and RAM needed to run consumer software. :D :(
 
Last edited:
Again, they can update regularly and get gripes at for leaving customers with legacy products. Or, they can not make changes and get griped at for not updating.

I swear these are Windows/PC fanbois who just complain about anything Apple does.

It’s a nice update. I want one.
This site is full of Mac and iPhone users who are regularly annoyed with Apple, not Windows fanboys. Except maybe that "iSheep" guy or that "Kniferunner" person?
 
Or they ran the test with a bunch of other crap already open.
[doublepost=1542907606][/doublepost]This guy put out another video....and he's also hilarious.


I just watched the video and he definitely does a great job showing and explaining everything. I personally think it is now a safe buy to upgrade from my 2012 rMBP which really has the 2011 GPU with the GT 650M lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FrostyF
I've got more compute resources lying around than you do, so I don't see any need. As the other guy said, if you were in with the PC builders crowd, the GPU is low-end, and the CPU is mid-range. I recommend a visit to overclock.net.
[doublepost=1542906646][/doublepost]
Interesting. That sounds like either the test is flawed or the <32GB RAM ones have some bottleneck.
[doublepost=1542907153][/doublepost]
It also applies to the CPU and RAM needed to run consumer software. :D :(

It means you can store the entire test sample in RAM and thus not wait on loading from disk to ram, etc. Having the RAM fill the GPGPU is faster than going from SSD->RAM->GPGPU.
[doublepost=1542919067][/doublepost]
Next year AMD will come out with the new Vega 20 built in 7nm technology, I will wait for it. Btw, this kind of updates are awesome in my opinion, they keep the computer fresh and not obsolete!

2019 Vega won't exist on 7nm and it will be NAVI it's already stamped out replacement for gaming. The Instinct Vega cards for deep learning will not have an OEM laptop variant.
[doublepost=1542919123][/doublepost]

It better get those scores at such a low resolution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fairuz
It means you can store the entire test sample in RAM and thus not wait on loading from disk to ram, etc. Having the RAM fill the GPGPU is faster than going from SSD->RAM->GPGPU.
Makes sense. I think it's a bad "OpenCL score" if the RAM size is becoming a factor even with 16GiB available.

Somewhat related, I dunno if the MBP has this, but some systems can go directly from SSD to GPU if the software is set up to use that feature, thus skipping the CPU and RAM. Ofc that's only useful if your dataset doesn't fit in RAM.
 
[doublepost=1542846749][/doublepost]
Everyone who buys the MacBook Pro does. And I can't think of a time I've needed (or wanted) to mess with the internals of my _laptop_.
[doublepost=1542846945][/doublepost]

I guess not many people are buying Macbook Pros since actually laptop sales have been down in the last 2 years. I wonder why...
I guess users are voting with their wallets.
I guess Apple's policy of making computer NOT upgradable is not being that effective.
I personally used to upgrade my laptops much often and I was waiting to upgrade when the 2016 came out.
Thank god I did NOT upgrade. Both Macbook pro 2016-18 are a complete joke and full of issues.
 
[doublepost=1542846749][/doublepost]
Everyone who buys the MacBook Pro does. And I can't think of a time I've needed (or wanted) to mess with the internals of my _laptop_.
[doublepost=1542846945][/doublepost]

I guess not many people are buying Macbook Pros since actually laptop sales have been down in the last 2 years. I wonder why...
I guess users are voting with their wallets.
I guess Apple's policy of making computer NOT upgradable is not being that effective.
I personally used to upgrade my laptops much often and I was waiting to upgrade when the 2016 came out.
Thank god I did NOT upgrade. Both Macbook pro 2016-18 are a complete joke and full of issues.

Most laptops are like this today. You can't upgrade them. Just because you can't afford one doesn't mean you need to trash talk the MBP 16-18. They honestly don't have that many issues to some laptops or machines like the Surface products.
 
Making your laptop upgradeable is not going to get people to buy more laptops. They'll just buy upgrades for their old one.
 
2019 Vega won't exist on 7nm and it will be NAVI it's already stamped out replacement for gaming. The Instinct Vega cards for deep learning will not have an OEM laptop variant.
[doublepost=1542919123][/doublepost]

I'm so sad now...
 
Making your laptop upgradeable is not going to get people to buy more laptops. They'll just buy upgrades for their old one.
In Apple's case: the non-upgradeability seems a vicious strategy: if RAM/SSDs are soldered on, you have no choice but buying atrociously overpriced RAM/SSD upgrades.
If current reports on declining sales (which I'm inclined to believe) prove to be true, I guess its safe to say: this strategy was a shot in the foot.
The better strategy would have been to make ALL devices upgradeable; making money actually selling increasing number computers to happy customers rather than selling less and less to people who still buy their products, however feel ripped off, are kind of angry and are more and more looking for alternatives.
This strategy is short lived and will very likely hurt Apple very seriously in the long term. What's more, the strong reliance on iPhone sales while at the same time widely ignoring the computer market now - that iPhone sales hit their peak - turns out to be pretty short sighted. Apple is basically standing on one foot at present, which is pretty dangerous.

I believe what we witness at present is Apple at its zenith. If they continue this way Apples revenue will (continue to?) decline.
Unfortunately, Apple's management seems to be convinced this is the way to go and instead of reversing their strategy. Seemingly they prescribe themselves more and more of the drug causing that caused the fever in the first place.
 
Last edited:



Apple last week introduced new upgrade options for the high-end 15-inch MacBook Pro, allowing customers to add Radeon Pro Vega 16 and 20 graphics cards to the device for superior graphics performance.

Benchmarks for the 15-inch MacBook Pro models equipped with the Radeon Pro Vega 20 option have been shared by a MacRumors reader, giving us an idea of the performance improvements over 15-inch MacBook Pro models with the standard Radeon Pro 560X graphics card that was previously the highest-end option available.

macbookproprovegaopenCLscore.jpg

The machine, which includes a 2.6GHz Core i7 Intel processor, a Radeon Pro Vega 20 graphics card, 16GB RAM, and a 1TB SSD, earned an OpenCL score of 72799. Additional benchmarks found on Geekbench with a similar machine using an upgraded Core i9 processor demonstrated OpenCL scores of 75817, 76017, and 80002.

In a separate benchmark uploaded to Geekbench, the new high-end MacBook Pro with Core i9 processor also earned a Metal score of 73953.

Comparatively, machines with similar specs and Radeon Pro 560X graphics cards on Geekbench earned maximum OpenCL scores of right around 65000 and Metal scores of approximately 57000, suggesting much higher graphics performance with the new Radeon Pro Vega 20 card.

At the current time, benchmarks are only available for the higher-end Radeon Pro Vega 20 card, with no data available for the Radeon Pro Vega 16 card. CPU benchmarks on Geekbench between machines using the new cards and the existing cards are similar because there have been no changes to the CPU.

The new Radeon Pro Vega graphics cards can only be added to the high-end 15-inch MacBook Pro model, which starts at $2,799. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 costs an additional $250, while the Radeon Pro Vega 20 costs an additional $350.

Article Link: First Benchmarks for MacBook Pro With New Radeon Pro Vega Graphics Surface

TBH, I rather have a MacBook Pro 13 inch and a Vega 64 as eGPU.
 
I watched this video on youtube and I have to say what impressed me the most were the reduced throttling and temps. Far more important than just an increase in performance.

<rant>

This post has it nailed. Play the video to the bit where intel power gadget is displayed and zoom in. The temperature graph is a U shape, vs. the V shape of the i9 in a mid-2018 model.

Some have said this is to do with the GPU running cooler - but this could not be the case. The benchmark being run has nothing to do with the GPU, which would just be sitting there idle. A 560X and Vega 20 are both going to be cool at this point. The video shows that i9 will now hold 3.3Ghz vs 2.9Ghz on the old design (at least the version being reviewed)

This means a few things.
1. Turbo will be available quicker for longer, so those day-to-day tasks like opening word will be snappier. The laptop will feel like it has an i9 in it.
2. The i9 might actually burst to close to the advertised 4.8Ghz
3. It looks like apple just threw in the new processor with the cooling design from the 2017 model because the GPU was the same
4. It looks like apple knew this cooling design was insufficient for the CPU, and so had a fix in the works, but could not be bothered including the updated cooling design with the old GPU. They seem to have forced it out the door half baked (see initial throttle issues).

To have not included the GPU is understandable, if it was not ready. But if a cooling solution was available, not including it is criminal.

They must have known the Vega was on the way, and didn't want to re-tool for an interim cooling solution for the i9 for a short 3 month production run.

THIS is the sort of thing that, if true, would demonstrate how little respect Apple has for its customers.

Can't wait for the teardown of this model - hopefully I'll be proven wrong and the unit being tested is just a 'good one'.

</rant>
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lahmy88 and Ploki
We are not Windows/PC fanbois. We are actually longtime Apple users that are tired of the Apple way overpriced non-innovation products.

WHo wants a machine that is disposable since everything is soldered into the Logic board and both RAM and internal SSD are NOT upgradable?

If you are a long time apple user, you should expect this. Apple II wasn't that upgrade friendly either.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.