Apple is an existential threat to the PC

[Albuquerque]

I appreciate you trying to help, but I was very careful with my words. There's a reason why I snorted at his dual 3090 claim: because a professional who needs the VRAM of a 3090 cannot settle for a 3080 Ti. Worst still, if you need even more RAM, then you may even need the A6000 at about $5,000 per card.

If your argument FOR the 3090 was VRAM, then why did you need to pick the most expensive Quadro card they make? Spec the box I configured with a P-series Quadro card. Amazon.com: Dell NVIDIA Quadro P6000 24GB (4 DP, DL-DVI-D), Kit [PN: 490-BDNO] : Electronics = There's 24GB of VRAM for less than the pair of 3080Ti's, which nets the 24GB of VRAM you seem to think we need from a 3090. Now the box is below $5000, problem solved.

Unless you want to move the goalposts again?

 

[Wesker]

In a prior post of mine, I went digging and I felt like the available data we had on M1 Ultra GPU performance placed it mostly alongside a 3060. Insofar as I can tell, we still don't have great numbers on the CPU throughput at full-tilt either. For any of this to really be comparable, we need someone to load up one of those Mac Studio devices with a bunch of transcode work, and then do the same on a functionally equipvalent PC, and then plug them both into a proper power metering device.

Anandtech were the only people with the knowledge and equipment to do this.

Now we have clueless Apple and PCMR clowns on youtube.

 

[Wesker]

If your argument FOR the 3090 was VRAM, then why did you need to pick the most expensive Quadro card they make? Spec the box I configured with a P-series Quadro card. Amazon.com: Dell NVIDIA Quadro P6000 24GB (4 DP, DL-DVI-D), Kit [PN: 490-BDNO] : Electronics = There's 24GB of VRAM for less than the pair of 3080Ti's, which nets the 24GB of VRAM you seem to think we need from a 3090. Now the box is below $5000, problem solved.

That's based on Pascal (in which case you take a huge step back in terms of encoder/decoder performance and compatibility). But sure, load two of them over SLI for 48GB of VRAM. That's $5558 in just GPUs alone. You're still well behind M1 Ultra which has 128GB of RAM (for both CPU and GPU).

Unless you want to move the goalposts again?

Go back and read the thread. I've been consistent this entire time.

 

[PSman1700]

they aren't what anyone would buy for a competitor to the Mac Studio.

Yea, a RTX gpu makes little sense in a workstation, ive rarely seen gaming gpu's put for that kind of use, it does happen but its not the usual workstation choice. Prices ramp up when going for more pro-gpu's, and then were getting into Apple prices, but also lowered wattage (quite much lower) with a heavier focus on what it is intended for, workstation applications.

Again, these machines arent really competing with eachother anyway, different ecosystems, different performance targets for different workloads.

This is pulled out of thin air. You do not lose 2GB/s going from 4TB to 1TB.

My point is that a professional using the Mac Studio (or Windows PC) is not going to store their stuff locally. Hence why they would use Thunderbolt attached storage or a NAS.

It was in one of the YT mac studio reviews where i saw the 5000mb/s number when you dont opt for anything more than 1TB. I am, or was, under the impression that you loose nvme performance when going for a 1tb model.
I get that, but you made the point that you could shave off 400 dollars, but your also shaving off performance and total storage. Both the windows and mac device probably have external storage in such use-cases, but when you shave off 400 dollars you also shave off that extra internal storage (and subsequent performance). That extra internal storage could be good for something, right?

So now you're back on the Geekbench bandwagon? Interesting.

I dont care for geekbench, it doesnt really tell me how fast my device will behave in the real world, mostly.

Are we still talking about workstations? SPR is currently going to be offered to servers and supercomputers.

Well, what price range would the Mac Pro (with extreme m1) cost? When we know that, we can start evaluating things abit more precisely. If not Sapphire Rapids, Intel and AMD probably have other solutions aswell by the time we see the mac pro. Its probably the same story all over again, just in different price ranges (much higher then a 3090 and mac studio setup we talk about now).

I'm still waiting for you to link me a 5K monitor with factory colour calibration and good build quality for less than $999.

Well, you can either agree or disagree with mkbhd's findings. He came to the conclusing its a bad deal due to better alternatives he has given. And he's considered an Apple fan.

You cough up the money, of course.

In Mac-land, of course.

That's based on Pascal. But sure, load two of them over SLI for 48GB of VRAM. That's $5558 in just GPUs alone. You're still well behind M1 Ultra which has 128GB of RAM (for both CPU and GPU).

The mac studio currently enjoys the ram advantage indeed (APU/shared memory design), but that doesnt equal M1 ultra>everything else in every workload.

 

[Wesker]

Your mask is falling off again.

Well, what price range would the Mac Pro (with extreme m1) cost? When we know that, we can start evaluating things abit more precisely. If not Sapphire Rapids, Intel and AMD probably have other solutions aswell by the time we see the mac pro. Its probably the same story all over again, just in different price ranges (much higher then a 3090 and mac studio setup we talk about now).

SPR is in a completely different segment. How do you not understand this. It's like you're waiting for a POWER9 or IBM z15 desktop PC.

Well, you can either agree or disagree with mkbhd's findings. He came to the conclusing its a bad deal due to better alternatives he has given. And he's considered an Apple fan.

OK, so you have no product to link me.

You also didn't answer my question: is the 3080 Ti or 3090 a bad deal?

In Mac-land, of course.

Right. Only Apple segments consumer and pro products.
Xeon, EPYC, Quadro, Radeon Pro are all just made for Apple Mac platforms. Colour grading and reference monitors are only for Apple products.

You're not a serious person, clearly.

EDIT:

The mac studio currently enjoys the ram advantage indeed (APU/shared memory design), but that doesnt equal M1 ultra>everything else in every workload.

Actually, I would bet that M1 Ultra > 2 * Pascal for all professional workloads (except gaming, of course).

EDIT 2: And of course I think the Studio Display is a bad deal. But the problem is that there's no competition for it. Much like how I think the 3080 Ti, 3090, and 6900 XT is a bad deal, but they have a monopoly in terms of what they offer.

 

[Albuquerque]

That's based on Pascal (in which case you take a huge step back in terms of encoder/decoder performance and compatibility).

So wait, now we need 48GB of VRAM?

Go back and read the thread. I've been consistent this entire time.

So wait, now we need 48GB of VRAM? I repeated myself on purpose to drive the point: no, you haven't been consistent this entire time. Instead, your definition of "success" continually shifts until you feel like the case is now proper to demonstrate the Mac is superior to the PC hardware. We never talked about a requirement for 48GB of ram; your post refuting the 3080Ti's was completely about needing the 3090 to avoid the VRAM issues. So let me ask this: every time we talk about VRAM, will the memory requirement double until your position will become the winning one?

And so what if it's Pascal? The peformance of the Ampere line is radically out of the Mac's ability to compete; it's not ever been a fair comparison. That Pascal card will do absolutely fine competing with the Mac Studio in GPU compute. Want to solve the missing HDR10/AV1 encoding? Then add the cheapest 3050 you can find and the encoding problem is 100% solved and you've still paid less than the Mac. Done.

Want to keep moving goalposts?

 

[PSman1700]

Your mask is falling off again.

Calling for these kind of things, a sign of weakness.

SPR is in a completely different segment. How do you not understand this. It's like you're waiting for a POWER9 or IBM z15 desktop PC.

We dont really know where and what the Mac Pro will cost or perform like. Intel Sapphire Rapids is to my knowledge succeeding the Gulf Town series? Unsure about its price as thats not announced yet, but it might very well be in Mac pro range.

OK, so you have no product to link me.

If you watched the video you would have had your answer. He's giving some alternatives.

You also didn't answer my question: is the 3080 Ti or 3090 a bad deal?

It depends, just like for any other product. Like MKBHD mentioned, is a rolls a bad deal? Is the Mac Studio? They are all good deals if you have use for it or if you simply want it.

Right. Only Apple segments consumer and pro products.
Xeon, EPYC, Quadro, Radeon Pro are all just made for Apple Mac platforms. Colour grading and reference monitors are only for Apple products.

You're not a serious person, clearly.

Look, there are corporations who have use for x86 workstations, there are corporations who have better use for Mac products. They are not better than eachother, they have different target groups. You have the desire to have Apple win? Why?
Their equally good architectures/systems for different things.

Actually, I would bet that M1 Ultra > 2 * Pascal for all professional workloads (except gaming, of course).

And Pascal would be better for all workloads than a 2008 Apple mac (pascal is a 2016 arch right?).

Edit: You clearly want the Apple product to come out as the 'winner' or something, while i clearly state neither is better than the other. I see what you are going for, it is not going to happen in the real world.

 

[Wesker]

So wait, now we need 48GB of VRAM?

So wait, now we need 48GB of VRAM? I repeated myself on purpose to drive the point: no, you haven't been consistent this entire time.

*facepalm*
Then why the hell have we been arguing for the 128GB M1 Ultra SKU for the Mac Studio this entire time!?

If we're throwing out VRAM requirements -- great! I'm more than happy to go to the M1 Max or 64GB M1 Ultra SKU, since the 128GB SKU has a fat mark up on it.

Instead, your definition of "success" continually shifts until you feel like the case is now proper to demonstrate the Mac is superior to the PC hardware. We never talked about a requirement for 48GB of ram; your post refuting the 3080Ti's was completely about needing the 3090 to avoid the VRAM issues. So let me ask this: every time we talk about VRAM, will the memory requirement double until your position will become the winning one?

Let me give you a quick refresher of the thread:
PSman1700: you can build a PC with two 3090s for cheaper than a Studio.
Me: Lol, no you can't.
You: Here is a dual 3080 Ti rig. It's cheaper.
Me: Yes it is cheaper. But I was laughing at dual 3090s being cheaper.
You: You're shifting goal posts.

And so what if it's Pascal? The peformance of the Ampere line is radically out of the Mac's ability to compete; it's not ever been a fair comparison. That Pascal card will do absolutely fine competing with the Mac Studio in GPU compute. Want to solve the missing HDR10/AV1 encoding? Then add the cheapest 3050 you can find and the encoding problem is 100% solved and you've still paid less than the Mac. Done.

Depends on the use-case, which is what started this whole discussion in the first place.

Can one even run two Quadros and a GeForce card side-by-side and not lose features on either set of cards? I mean if it works, then sure, go for it.

 

[Wesker]

We dont really know where and what the Mac Pro will cost or perform like. Intel Sapphire Rapids is to my knowledge succeeding the Gulf Town series? Unsure about its price as thats not announced yet, but it might very well be in Mac pro range.

SPR is not a workstation chip. So I have no idea why you said "SPR says hello" when we were talking about workstation PCs.

If you watched the video you would have had your answer. He's giving some alternatives.

No, he specifically said that there are no alternatives, hence why it's a unique product that is badly priced. The closest product to the Studio Display is the LG UltraFine 5K which is $1299 but has a crap webcam, crappy speakers, and a crappy plastic build.

And Pascal would be better for all workloads than a 2008 Apple mac (pascal is a 2016 arch right?).

No idea what point you're trying to make here

EDIT: So you withdraw your previous statement of professional class segmentation and markups being exclusive to the Mac platform? Good. Glad you're learning something.

 

[PSman1700]

Then why the hell have we been arguing for the 128GB M1 Ultra SKU for the Mac Studio this entire time!?

Not all workloads require 128gb vram, most probably do not.

SPR is not a workstation chip. So I have no idea why you said "SPR says hello" when we were talking about workstation PCs.

It doesnt matter what kind of chip it is, if its in the same price range as a mac pro that doesnt even exist yet, it might be a good fit in a workstation, and will probably compete very well against the mac pro.

LG UltraFine 5K which is $1299 but has a crap webcam, crappy speakers, and a crappy plastic build.

The webcam in the Apple display is supposedly crap aswell? As for speakers, do people really care for that when going for a display? Crappy build i wouldnt really say so going by the reviews. Your defenitely getting more for your money with the LG. You can remove the display cable yourself aswell.

So you withdraw your previous statement of professional class segmentation and markups being exclusive to the Mac platform?

Nope.

 

[Wesker]

Not all workloads require 128gb vram, most probably do not.

Something we can agree on.

The webcam in the Apple display is supposedly crap aswell? As for speakers, do people really care for that when going for a display? Crappy build i wouldnt really say so going by the reviews. Your defenitely getting more for your money with the LG. You can remove the display cable yourself aswell.

The camera is getting a software fix. Even now in its broken state it’s better than the LG’s 720p turd.
I used the LG UltraFine; the build quality sucked. It’s all plastic, it creaked, and earlier models would flicker when exposed to Wi-Fi antennas and routers. In terms of build quality, it’s a Hyundai to the Studio Display’s Porsche.

Nope.

So, just to be clear: you think segmentation and markups do not exist in the PC space. Nice to know.

 

[iroboto]

Bit of a non-sequitor, right? In a sense, it literally doesn't matter how the newest thing performs if it's your only option. No shop who adhered to a strictly "Mac only" policy would even entertain the conversation about moving to a cheaper, faster alternative platform .... right? Other than the part where it might make a whole lot of business sense to get more done in a shorter time with a smaller capital expenditure. Or said another way, I think this statement too is a bit hand-wavey for my taste. But hey, this particular statement is 100% opinion and there will be no empirical data to support or refute it.

I'm not going to suggest that those things wouldn't be considered. But if a companies workflow is built on Mac, it may be more costly to switch to PC aside from looking at hardware costs. Ultimately when it comes to business usually the largest expenditure is labour (at least in the segment that Studio is involved in). The workstations themselves are just tools really. If the capital cost to go from PC to Mac Studio is < 5000, then it's reasonable to handwave those cost away in the face of re-doing your work pipeline to another set of programs etc.

To me, it doesn't seem like a big decision to pay more money for hardware, as long as it's a marginal increase as it's a one time cost. As long as your work isn't impacted by the change over, who cares, they'll make up the cost by delivering better or faster. But to ask your team to switch software, can set you back on delivery significantly. So if you're a business that has labour on Mac, has software on mac, has their pipeline on mac, will you really consider switching to a professional PC setup suddenly? I'd rather eat the hardware cost. At least that cost is fixed.

I'd go so far to say, if my business was content creation and my employees were creating content that the world wanted. If they wanted Mac for tools, even though they costed more and could be done better on PC, I'd still give them a Mac Studio. I think what's important, and perhaps lost in the conversation for me, is that ultimately Mac Studio is a competent high end machine in the professional segment. It doesn't need to be the #1 best machine in the world to be purchased (and it is most certainly crazy expensive). But ultimately for someone to pull the trigger, It just needs to be the machine your employees demand that they use or otherwise they move to another company.

As long as it's operating comparable to the competition, than that should be enough in theory.

 

[Ailuros]

I thought you meant the old triangle rasterizers would start to bottleneck them. The easiest way to remove the bottleneck is obviously to just stop using FF hardware for it altogether.

Sterile marketing will need some funky number to be able to at least equal those 16k+ SPs on Hopper for their next phat (sic) project.

 

[Pressure]

Are we just fanning the flames now?

It usually boils down to this sentence: I can build my own PC for cheaper and therefore Apple is a bad value proposition or not good enough for me.

It's only about CPU, GPU and RAM. The product isn't for you, that's fine. We all can't be the target audience for every Apple product. I know I aren't and so I don't stick my head in the bees nest if the product isn't something I personally would buy or consider.

It just feels disingenuous to ignore form factor, I/O, power usage and so forth when this is something that is always brought up in all other comparisons. Whether it's a choice between an AMD or Intel CPU or an AMD or nVIDIA GPU.

The Mac Studio has four or six TB4 / USB4 ports (depending on SoC), 802.11ax (WiFi6), 10Gb ethernet and the ability to drive four 6K@60Hz displays and one 4K@60Hz display over HDMI.

It's pretty amazing what they have done in an 3.5 liter enclosure that sips power. No one else offers anything alike and yes, that miniaturisation does come at a premium.
I would also argue that TB4 / USB4 has become very useful for video and photography professionals as well as the inclusion of 10Gb ethernet and 802.11ax (WiFi6).

I installed the java version of Minecraft yesterday (native Aarch64 build) on my Mac Studio and my son had a blast. The game was running at 4K@60Hz with Sildur's Vibrant Shaders. We usually game on the Nintendo Switch.
I tried Topaz Labs various AI upscaling, denoising, sharpen software for both images and video. Brushes in Photoshop is also the smoothest I have tried. My only point of reference are older Macs though. It's so incredible power efficient that the fans never spin up from their default RPM no matter what I throw at it. That's part of the package and why it is named Mac Studio.
All the other Apple "Pro" models I've had through the years would sound like a jet under similar tasks for their time. I especially remember the G4 "Wind tunnel" edition with it's super noisy PSU fan. Good times.

 

[PSman1700]

It usually boils down to this sentence: I can build my own PC for cheaper and therefore Apple is a bad value proposition or not good enough for me.

Apple hardware isnt a bad value at all, neither is a x86 build. They cater to different markets and users. Depending on workload, one might be a better fit than the other (regarding performance).
For someone in the photo/video production, the mac studio, even if more pricey is the better solution (faster, less wattage etc).

I installed the java version of Minecraft yesterday (native Aarch64 build) on my Mac Studio and my son had a blast. The game was running at 4K@60Hz with Sildur's Vibrant Shaders. We usually game on the Nintendo Switch.

Quite the upgrade. The switch version (bedrock) is both limited in content but also visuals. Did you try try without vsync or higher fps aswell? I think the java version supports a slider up to 120fps in the options menu.

Edit: Cant find anyone uploading MC on the mac studio on YT.

 

[Flappy Pannus]

Are we just fanning the flames now?
It usually boils down to this sentence: I can build my own PC for cheaper and therefore Apple is a bad value proposition or not good enough for me.

Indeed. I can't imagine a more nightmarish tech support scenario than trying to remedy an issue with a production system on a deadline that's a collection of parts cobbled together from various manufacturers so you can identify the offending component and get an RMA in hopefully a few weeks, vs calling up a single source (on in the case of a Studio, just plopping it in a tote bag and walking over to the nearest Apple store).

I mean sure, this is a 3D enthusiast forum so I get it's going to be populated predominantly by gamers, but it really is indicative of such a ridiculously myopic vision with respect to the actual cost of production when you're putting together a system intended for a creative workflow based on the cheapest parts you could find. Just imagining someone doing their sales pitch to a studio, trying to show them that they could save $1000 by listing all the parts on Newegg is funny.

 

[Wesker]

Indeed. I can't imagine a more nightmarish tech support scenario than trying to remedy an issue with a production system on a deadline that's a collection of parts cobbled together from various manufacturers so you can identify the offending component and get an RMA in hopefully a few weeks, vs calling up a single source (on in the case of a Studio, just plopping it in a tote bag and walking over to the nearest Apple store).

I mean sure, this is a 3D enthusiast forum so I get it's going to be populated predominantly by gamers, but it really is indicative of such a ridiculously myopic vision with respect to the actual cost of production when you're putting together a system intended for a creative workflow based on the cheapest parts you could find. Just imagining someone doing their sales pitch to a studio, trying to show them that they could save $1000 by listing all the parts on Newegg is funny.

We've wasted a good 20 messages arguing semantics. In the end, professionals will vote with their feet.
Ever since the 2013 Mac Pro, Apple has done well in winning professional users back to their side. I'm pretty sure Mac Studio will be a commercial success, as will the AS Mac Pro.

 

[JasonLD]

Apple Studio Display is the monitor Apple could have sold 5 years ago at the exact same price point, since it is basically the same display they have been sold on iMac 5k since late 2015. I think it should have come with at least VRR(ProMotion for Apple).

 

[Gubbi]

Ever since the 2013 Mac Pro, Apple has done well in winning professional users back to their side. I'm pretty sure Mac Studio will be a commercial success, as will the AS Mac Pro.

Apple have a fair chunk of business leasing iMacs to tech companies' software development teams. The big 12 and 18 core xeon ones. The compact form factor makes the Studio a viable replacement for these.

At least until they annonce M1 ultra based iMacs.

Cheers

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Apple Studio Display is the monitor Apple could have sold 5 years ago at the exact same price point, since it is basically the same display they have been sold on iMac 5k since late 2015. I think it should have come with at least VRR(ProMotion for Apple).

The lack of 120Hz is baffling. Particularly for this price-point. For me, it's the lack of inputs that rule it out. I'm using a 4K 27" LG for my monitor, because it lets me keep my MacMini (DisplayPort), eGPU (HDMI), ASUS Zephyrus G14 (HDMI) and personal and for laptops connected (USB-C).

I cannot even entertain buying a monitor without a good host of inputs, nor do I want to keep reconnecting devices. This damn thing was designed during a period where people were working from home and wanting/needing to connect their work device to their personal monitor so one input is even more baffling.