![]() Thus my updated advice is to buy ONLY a 16-core (or 24/28 core if warranted).This can cause problems with movement in some PS1 games(e.g. An 8-core or 12-core Mac Pro is marginal in terms of CPU performance relative to the 2019 iMac 5K. My testing shows that for single-threaded stuff, a CPU core in the 16-core 2019 Mac Pro is up to 30% slower per core than the 2019 iMac 5K. I’m an app developer/designer and recently got a new mac pro for my business and wanted to see how it stacked up with my other machines. The results are interesting the Mac Pro does not do so hot when making clean compiles, but does deliver consistently faster incremental builds. It seems the best bang for your buck right now when it comes to compiling projects is the Mac mini. I’m certainly disappointed in the Mac Pro results, especially since it seems that Xcode completely pegs all the 16 cores during a compile, but even at 3.2GHz fails to outperform a 3.0 GHZ i5 with 6 cores. Note that these tests were performed with Xcode 10.3 rather than Xcode 11.įor folks considering the Apple Pro XDR monitor as a reference screen. Here is it, side by side with a couple of actual reference monitors. Like the 310K the XDR uses local dimming zones. Now there’s a lot of factors to how effectively they zone. Swift Compiler Not Optimized for Lots of CoresĪt the XDR display introduction event, Apple did go out of their way to compare it to reference monitors that cost $30-50K, so this is a fair comparison.Īpple’s 1:1,000,000 contrast ratio on the new Pro Display XDR.But 576 is not very many zones and the result is that you can clearly see the haloing. ![]() It’s just a white line on a black canvas. Also see the glow around the perimeter of the canvas. I’ve only been using the ProDisplay XDR for a day, but I’m getting pretty extreme color and light roll-off in all four corners of the display. When I readjust my head it’s fine, but viewing angles on this monitor are not very good which is disappointing. ![]() I will say however that even though I didn’t opt for the +$1,000 matte option, this “glossy” option is very much not glossy. The glare is unbelievably low and makes my iMac Pro look like a mirror. I hope Apple brings this across the entire Mac lineup. I, for one, am glad that Apple doesn’t include the Pro Stand in the price of the ProDisplay XDR (as many have said Apple should have done) because I don’t think it’s actually a very great stand and anybody buying the monitor should VESA mount it instead. Tilt doesn’t lock to perfect 180 deg and the tilt radius is not even. Tilts way more to the left than to the right. No height adjustability in vertical position sucks. Source is the XDR is exhibiting some serious early signs of. Viewing angles are so bad that you get corner vignetting looking head on. It messes with the light roll off and color even! That’s the most disappointing part to me. PCMag this week published its full review of the Pro Display XDR, doing a deep dive into its color accuracy and HDR capabilities. ![]() In a nutshell, PCMag believes that the Pro Display XDR successfully does what it was meant to do, offer up “reference-quality production capabilities” to those who work on Macs. “The Pro Display XDR is a beautifully made, well-designed, hyper-accurate content creation monitor that-say it with me now-‘just works,’” reads the review. Teoh has a great YouTube channel where he reviews displays and TVs, with technical analysis married with more subjective reporting. ![]() So when he turned his attention to Pro Display XDR I knew things could get interesting. Pro Display XDR might be costly at $4,999, but it’s a fraction of the cost of Sony’s own reference monitor.Īnd that’s exactly what happened when Teoh compared the display with Sony’s $43,000 monitor.Īt first, you might think that’s unfair. But this is the same monitor Apple called out at WWDC when it first announced Pro Display XDR. And it made a big song and dance about the new screen being “the world’s best pro display”. So, is it?Īpple was kind enough to lend me a 28-core Mac Pro, decked out with a 2.5GHz Intel Xeon W (turbo boost to 4.4GHz) having a single 38.5MB 元 cache, 1MB L2 cache per core, 384GB of 2933MHz DDR4 ECC memory, a 4TB SSD, and two AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo 2x32GB graphics cards (each with two GPUs, for a total of four GPUs). Priced out on Apple’s website, this configuration goes for an eye-popping $31,199 ($10,800 of that is for the GPUs alone). Whereas the iMac Pro tops out at 970 gigaflops with all 18 cores, the Mac Pro surpasses that level with just 13 cores and goes on to top out at 1.5 teraflops on 28 cores. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |