Metal vs OpenCL/OpenGL

Why would you be considering a Linux Machine when the Mac Pro is such an obvious choice? What spec of Linux machine?

I have a studio full of Macs of every description etc. Do I qualify to have an opinion on the new Mac Pro or does the fact we’ve moved to PCs exclude me now?

I would not contradict anyone, but a certain category of “NASA” people … aspire to something else other than a Mac Pro … :joy:

Ha, ha, ha. I was soooooo sure, that such a comment would follow. :rofl:

without cuda you are automatically out of a certain category.
this is a fact.
all the rest is fashion…

Agree. You’re even out of the Blender-GPU-render-category!

But who the hell needs 1,5 TB RAM in fashion? :astonished:

Are you kidding me?
Are you taking it for granted that there are no mainboard beyond Apple to support large amounts of RAM or what?

for fascion it was intended that it is marketing junk.

not entirely…
blender works on jetson boards … and also cuda and cycles …

No my point was that you seem to keep moving the goalpost. “Now it doesn’t count because I don t like the apps they are selling”. Okay.

You made the claim that market share should determine what a developer does because majority rule. I gave two instances where this not true (Linux and the App Store) now you say well those are crappy apps and Apple user are dumb enough to pay for them. To which I answer “Exactly”. While not being the majority Apple users in general pay for their software and as a business it would really be dumb to ignore customers who readily open their wallet (which is why Linux barely gets any support in general) and are willing to pay more than the majority.

You’ve made the assertion that 3D DCC is declining on macOS without any real numbers or evidence to back that and in the same sentence point to an app that is thriving on the platform. So which is it?

Yet Dell has an even lower specced machine that is almost as expensive. Go figure.

Right with an older chip that doesn’t boost as as fast the one Apple uses. Please compare Apple to Apple (heh).

I guess you’ve never actually worked in a corporate environment or have dealt with Dell. They mark down everything even when new. That’s how they get you to buy the product by making you think you are getting. deal. In some instance (I worked in IT and we were Dell house) the savings are real. In general they inflate the price so they can charge corporate more money for the hardware (corporate customers usually get a discount depending on volume of purchases).

Beg your pardon, monsieur? I never mentioned that there are no other mainboards supporting that amount of RAM?! How did you get that idea??

My comment about fashion was a joke. That time I was kidding. :wink:

Hmmm…I start to get an idea, why discussions in this thread are…let’s say…‘not without difficulties’. :smirk:


But why do you apple users persist so much in fighting and mystifying the evidence?

Apple products are neither competitive nor convenient.
That’s all.

1 Like

How? Can you buy Threadripper workstation from the major OEMS? No. Threadrippers MOBO are all expensive and specifically marketed at users who value things that workstation customers don’t bother with like water cooling, LED lights, and overclocking. You are not going to find those things in most workstation setups, especially from OEMs. You can only buy Intel HEDT chips on gaming machines now from all the major OEMS. NONE sell them on their workstation products. They all use Xeon chips. Threadripper is a direct competitor to Intel’s HEDT chips, not Intel’s Xeon chips.

So how would you describe most professional users who buy workstation level hardware? Seems to me like you have no clue what you are talking about. You seem to be laying this all on Apple’s feet but every major OEM does the same thing. They all do it because that’s how Intel segmented the market in the first place. Blame Intel for the artificial segmentation.

If AMD marketed Threadripper as a workstation class chip that would probably make more sense on their part since right now there is overlap between the 3900 3950x and the current Threadripper. But if OEMs are going to support workstation level chips they most likely will go with EPYC instead because traditionally that’s how the markets are segmented. So until the major OEMs support Threadripper and current gen Ryzen chips you have no actual point.

No professional studio worth their salt is going to hand build machines and deal with all the component manufacturers for support. Time wasted on support is money wasted. Most consumer level component manufactures stop supporting their products when the new shiny comes out. Dell still regularly updates the BIOS/drivers on 5 year old systems. That’s the kind support I want.

Seems like the other way around to me. Every time there is “evidence” against the bullshit claims here against Apple someone moves the goalpost.

I don’t spend $ 6,000 on a Mac Pro even with a gun pointed at my head.
This is reality and this is the obvious,
And it’s because it’s not convenient or competitive for my needs.
There is no other reason.

Well, I consider a Linux machine, cause I’d like to render on a GPU (Cycles). Simple as that. Oh, and ok, I admit, I’m not a fan of windows.
Not sure about the configuration yet. But I might need a Titan, since I do have scenes bigger than 11GB now and then.

I never said the new MacPro is an obvious choice. I just dared to mention, that it might not be a ridiculous choice to everybody. For some people, who have built their business on a Mac eco-system, it can be very welcome. Especially since Apple finally dropped their design over function mentality for once.

Of course you have the right to have your opinion, Guido. And anyway, I would definitely not be the one to judge. I do think, though, it matters how you state your opinion.
Look, every now and then I have a look at this thread, since I got the faint hope, that maybe, maybe I might discover some silver lining on the Blender-horizon for Mac users. But all I usually find is the same boring rant - some people bashing, others defending Apple. I’m not sure if that’s helpful to anybody. It might be some sort of a valve to let off steam for some people, I don’t know. But I really wonder, why people are so aggressive here and often misinterpret other’s messages and accuse them of comments, they never made. Must be a sensitive subject. :smirk:
In the end we are all Blender users here and should be united by the passion to create cool stuff. Why all these petty fights?
Oh well, maybe I’m just too old for this kind of discussion. :sweat_smile:

I am of the opinion that if you see aggressivity, it is all your perception, on the contrary at best I find it fun … :grin:
Personally I see myself as the most calm person in this world.
i just tend to be precise with facts.

I thought, there must be another motivation than the actual subject! :laughing:
I surely don’t wanna be the party killer, my friend. If you guys wanna have fun…go on… :man_dancing::dancer:

Culturally I tend to distinguish the subject that discusses from the object under discussion.
So, I think you get it wrong if you feel the passion about discussing the object as a personal assault.
I hope is more clear now. :slight_smile:

You claimed that the App Store made some developers rich. I pointed out that sales on the Mac App Store are actually awful. You point to iOS App Store having more revenue than Android. That’s a fact, but that revenue is mostly games and mostly in-app-purchases (virtual coins and such). Even the non-game revenue is mostly services like Tinder or Netflix. You’d be hard pressed to find any productivity apps there.

Sure, all that’s real revenue, but what the hell does that have to do applications on Mac OS, let alone DCC applications? Am I supposed to care about the Mac platform because TV and dating apps are profitable on iOS? What’s the point here?

I never said that, everyone is free to waste opportunity/money on whatever they want. Obviously, market share has an influence there.

Again, the 10% figure isn’t market share, it’s the share of Blender users on Mac, estimated through download figures.

I don’t actually think Blender should cater to the majority of its users, it should cater to whoever pays for development. If Apple or Apple users pay for developing and maintaining a Metal backend, more power to them.

Both chips have the same architecture and were launched at the same time. The server CPUs that boost high have a big premium, especially for multi-socket, because software license are often priced per-CPU or per-core.

Somehow, you found the one machine that has a ridiculous dual-socket quadcore chip that costs over 1200$. Meanwhile,the eight-core that goes into the Mac Pro base model costs 750$ and it only works in one socket.

Indeed, you’ll want to compare Apples to Apple, but
it’s not that simple.

I’m aware of that, like I said, no sane person actually pays these sticker prices. I’m not aware of Apple offering discounts of that magnitude, however.

This may still be true in people’s heads, but I think it’s actually become a terrible argument. Consumer hardware is extremely reliable these days. 95% of your problems are going to be software related. Apple software these days is no more reliable than Windows software.

For the price of a single base-level Mac Pro, you could buy four spares with the same level of performance. You don’t even have to build them yourself. If there’s a fault, just swap out the boot drive. Your data is on the network. You have IT staff that has to be able to fix things. If your Mac Pro fails, are you going to teleport in the Apple geniuses?

CG/VFX is a cut-throat industry, how much money can you afford to spend on bullshit that doesn’t matter?

Seeing as how this thread is only marginally related to its original topic and it’s basically become a bicker battle, I’m going to go ahead and close it.

No one can tell the future. The only thing that we know for certain is that this move is a potential problem for Blender users on Apple’s platform.

There’s a lot of research and analysis in this thread. Unfortunately, that effort is done with the goal of “being right”. Imagine if that amount of energy and intelligence was focused on implementing a solution.