Reply to this topicStart new topic
> 18 Core Imac Pro?
Todd Simpson
post Jul 2 2017, 05:20 AM
Post #1


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 14.876
Joined: 23-December 09
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Member No.: 8.794



Looks like Apple is going a slightly new direction and the current top of their line, the "Mac Pro", (which tops out at 8 cores) is about to be crushed to death, in terms of performance, by an iMac. Which used to be the slowboat back in the day, better recently. But now, get ready. The new iMac "pro" is going to have a 5k screen, (yup, 5k, even more high res than 4k, so you can actually edit 4k video, in 4k, instead of using some smaller res screen and guessing) and 18 CORES.

That's not a Typo. 18 CORES. Yes 18 CPU CORES. In one machine the size of a computer monitor.

Needless to say I'm curious about price. Also, they just made their "high end" machine sorta pointless with this so cannibalizing sales a bit. But hey, it's apple, so here we go. I do wanna try one. That kind of performance just does not exist currently as far as I'm aware. It's the first really big thing that they have done since 2012 when they started soldering ram on to the motherboards and made their machines non upgradeable. At this looks to be a move in the right direction. We shall see smile.gif SO WHATS THE CATCH? The starter version with 8 CORES (top of the line on on the mac pro) is set to price @ $5000.00!!!!!!
And that's just 8 cores, how much will the 18 core machine be? GOD KNOWS but maybe 10k? 15K? EGAD!!!! At this point, the prices are just NUTS. NUTS NUTS NUTS. 5k for an imac. Wow. Won't be ordering one.
Attached Image


For those working in 4k, and it's not very many, knock yourselves out. Most folks that can shoot in 4k, can't actually see 4k since they dont' have a monitor that can display 4k, making the entire thing sorta pointless. Also, youtube autoselects resolution based on bandwidth, so typically somewhere 720p to 1080p, roughly HD. Most folks don't have the bandwidth to even allow 4k streams, but it wouldn't matter as most folks don't have 4k displays! So we may be getting a bit ahead of ourselves in general. Especially now that they are trying to push imacs that cost 5 grand to edit video that barely anybody can actually see.



--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fzalfa
post Jul 2 2017, 05:21 PM
Post #2


Learning Roadie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.711
Joined: 10-March 15
From: France, provence, vaucluse, carpentras
Member No.: 20.796



woaw !!

my 10 cores xeon with HT (20 threads) look like a toy now smile.gif

Cheers

Laurent


--------------------

Yes, i love badges.....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Todd Simpson
post Jul 2 2017, 05:55 PM
Post #3


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 14.876
Joined: 23-December 09
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Member No.: 8.794



18 Cores!! In an imac!! Who can believe it. Then again it will probably cost $15,000 which is just nuts. Even the base unit at $5,000 is pretty nuts. I just can't see paying that for an iMac. Ever.

QUOTE (fzalfa @ Jul 2 2017, 12:21 PM) *
woaw !!

my 10 cores xeon with HT (20 threads) look like a toy now smile.gif

Cheers

Laurent



--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GeneT95
post Jul 2 2017, 08:17 PM
Post #4


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 164
Joined: 26-March 08
Member No.: 4.701



Program developers have yet to efficiently utilize the number of cores available now for most. The number of cores have well outpaced actual function.

But what a world it will be when 18 cores is the 'low' norm and computing processes actually require such threading. I can't imagine what process/creation/program that will tax such a system for the average every day jack or jill.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Todd Simpson
post Jul 2 2017, 09:08 PM
Post #5


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 14.876
Joined: 23-December 09
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Member No.: 8.794



For the every day user, a rig like this is sorta pointless IMHO. They can get by on a macbook Air or surface. This is built for folks doing 4k video workflows. Huge data, requiring huge throughput. Folks doing color correction in 4k, FX in 4k, 3D in 4K, they can finally see their work in native resolution with a little extra screen for tool bars and such.

The starter unit is the same power roughly as the current top of the line Mac Pro (small plastic thing, looks like a waste basket)but they are promising a new "Pro" tower that is modular that folks can actually add ram and such too. Recently Apple started soldering ram and chips, etc. to the motherboard so what you bought was what you got. Like an apple cell phone, no upgrades.

This really torqued a bunch of pro users who still use the 2012 series macbook pros (like me) as they are the last series with thunderbolt that you can upgrade and change to your liking. No doubt, Apple will make them obsolete soon by decree so folks have to buy new gear.

The Apple software is the only reason to buy an Apple computer IMHO, and thankfully, it is multi threaded. Apps like Final Cut Pro, Motion, Logic, etc. work great with multi threading. Thankfully, the Adobe Suite does as well. I have a 4 core hyperthreaded to 8 and it gets all 8 roofed during Premiere 6 renders. smile.gif

Todd



QUOTE (GeneT95 @ Jul 2 2017, 03:17 PM) *
m
Program developers have yet to efficiently utilize the number of cores available now for most. The number of cores have well outpaced actual function.

But what a world it will be when 18 cores is the 'low' norm and computing processes actually require such threading. I can't imagine what process/creation/program that will tax such a system for the average every day jack or jill.



--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rammikin
post Jul 2 2017, 09:51 PM
Post #6


Experienced Rock Star
*

Group: Members
Posts: 875
Joined: 4-November 10
Member No.: 11.529



QUOTE (GeneT95 @ Jul 2 2017, 07:17 PM) *
Program developers have yet to efficiently utilize the number of cores available now for most. The number of cores have well outpaced actual function.

But what a world it will be when 18 cores is the 'low' norm and computing processes actually require such threading. I can't imagine what process/creation/program that will tax such a system for the average every day jack or jill.


Do you know who could immediately take advantage of 18 cores? Musicians like us.

Want to record a song with multiple guitars? Want to use a software amp modeler like GuitarRig or Amplitube on each of those guitar tracks? And add effects like convolution reverb to each one? Then add more tracks for other virtual instruments like drums, bass, and synthesizers? And use a high sample rate with a low audio buffer size? A project like that can be a challenge for today's computers, even with modest track counts. Recording guitarists are often forced to freeze tracks or share effects on aux tracks to workaround these limitations. However, if you've got an 18-core computer, each track in an 18 track song is processed on its own core. Suddenly the song you have in your head that is cumbersome to record on a 4 core computer becomes easy to record on an 18 core computer.

I'm not saying the 18-core iMac will make economic sense for everybody (or even anybody?), but can the typical recording guitarist make use of an 18 core computer? Absolutely!

There's a famous (maybe apocryphal) quote attributed to Bill Gates years ago: he claimed nobody would ever need more than 640K of RAM in a computer smile.gif.

This post has been edited by Rammikin: Jul 3 2017, 05:12 PM


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Todd Simpson
post Jul 4 2017, 11:01 PM
Post #7


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 14.876
Joined: 23-December 09
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Member No.: 8.794



I agree wink.gif I have two Quad Core i7 machines with 16gb of ram and SSD drives and yet still, sometimes, especially in LOGIC, running wads of VSTs and Guitar Sims, not to mention OZONE or bits of it on nearly every track, I sometimes get the dreaded error reporting that my system won't support real time playback. It's rare but it happens and it's annoying.

My hope is that as 18 core machines become common, maybe 8 core machines will become very very common and cheap!! An 8 Core i7 laptop would be nice smile.gif But the prices have got to come down a bit. $5,0000 for the starter 8 core is just crazy IMHO. Gonna have to wait a bit til things get cheaper smile.gif


Todd




QUOTE (Rammikin @ Jul 2 2017, 04:51 PM) *
Do you know who could immediately take advantage of 18 cores? Musicians like us.

Want to record a song with multiple guitars? Want to use a software amp modeler like GuitarRig or Amplitube on each of those guitar tracks? And add effects like convolution reverb to each one? Then add more tracks for other virtual instruments like drums, bass, and synthesizers? And use a high sample rate with a low audio buffer size? A project like that can be a challenge for today's computers, even with modest track counts. Recording guitarists are often forced to freeze tracks or share effects on aux tracks to workaround these limitations. However, if you've got an 18-core computer, each track in an 18 track song is processed on its own core. Suddenly the song you have in your head that is cumbersome to record on a 4 core computer becomes easy to record on an 18 core computer.

I'm not saying the 18-core iMac will make economic sense for everybody (or even anybody?), but can the typical recording guitarist make use of an 18 core computer? Absolutely!

There's a famous (maybe apocryphal) quote attributed to Bill Gates years ago: he claimed nobody would ever need more than 640K of RAM in a computer smile.gif.



--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fzalfa
post Jul 5 2017, 05:48 PM
Post #8


Learning Roadie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.711
Joined: 10-March 15
From: France, provence, vaucluse, carpentras
Member No.: 20.796



about many core arch, please remember one important thing :

ALL CODE CANNOT BE PARRALLISED !!!!


in many case, many core arch can't help......

per example, on my previous SGI Origin 3800 with 128 cores (MIPS64 R14000 700Mhz 16MbL2) , Blender REnder was fast as lightning, but Firefox was slugish...

Cheers

Laurent


--------------------

Yes, i love badges.....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rammikin
post Jul 5 2017, 06:22 PM
Post #9


Experienced Rock Star
*

Group: Members
Posts: 875
Joined: 4-November 10
Member No.: 11.529



QUOTE (fzalfa @ Jul 5 2017, 04:48 PM) *
ALL CODE CANNOT BE PARRALLISED !!!!


Sure, but the point is: for anybody reading this thread, i.e. a recording musician, the most cpu-intensive app for recording music they use (their DAW) is already capable of taking advantage of multiple cores. As Todd says, 18 cores may not be in the cards for many people, but 8 cores would definitely be useful.








--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Todd Simpson
post Jul 5 2017, 07:46 PM
Post #10


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 14.876
Joined: 23-December 09
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Member No.: 8.794



I'd sure like to have 8 cores in my laptop smile.gif I've got 4 hyper threaded so they show up as 8 but you only get about 20 percent or so per hyperthread/virtual core sad.gif The bus arbitration tends to suck 80 percent of the joy out of hyperthreading.

I"m guessing 8 cores on a single chip, that can be cooled in a laptop is quite possible. For DAWS that are multi threaded, it would be great!!!! The new chip from intel (the i9) is the one that will support up to 18 cores!!! not virtual, actual cores. It needs it's own proprietary water cooling system to stop it from melting however. We are on the cusp of a new age of computing power and it's about time. The macbook pro quad i7 I have from 2012 is not that much different from the macbook pro quad i7 that goes for 3 thousand today. A quantum leap in performance in long overdue imho. Of course, the i9 beast with 18 cores costs 2 thousand just for the chip. But hopefully, further down the price chain, will be 8 core chips that can be cooled with a laptop fan smile.gif There may be such a thing on the market already, if not, hopefully soon smile.gif

https://www.engadget.com/2017/05/30/intel-core-i9-extreme/


QUOTE (Rammikin @ Jul 5 2017, 01:22 PM) *
Sure, but the point is: for anybody reading this thread, i.e. a recording musician, the most cpu-intensive app for recording music they use (their DAW) is already capable of taking advantage of multiple cores. As Todd says, 18 cores may not be in the cards for many people, but 8 cores would definitely be useful.


We are just talking mostly about DAWs here. E.g. Recording software, which is mostly multithreaded alredy. LOGIC X, my fave daw, is able to hit all 8 (4 virtual 4 real) cores in my macbook. It would rock if I had 8 cores that hyperthreaded to 16 cores smile.gif I'd be using plugins galore!

QUOTE (fzalfa @ Jul 5 2017, 12:48 PM) *
about many core arch, please remember one important thing :

ALL CODE CANNOT BE PARRALLISED !!!!


in many case, many core arch can't help......

per example, on my previous SGI Origin 3800 with 128 cores (MIPS64 R14000 700Mhz 16MbL2) , Blender REnder was fast as lightning, but Firefox was slugish...

Cheers

Laurent


This post has been edited by Todd Simpson: Jul 5 2017, 08:01 PM


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 


RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th August 2017 - 09:41 AM