- #2013 mac pro processor upgrade 10 core vs 12 core mod#
- #2013 mac pro processor upgrade 10 core vs 12 core software#
- #2013 mac pro processor upgrade 10 core vs 12 core Pc#
TLDR: the maxed 2017 iMac non-Pro is one hell of a machine and I’d recommend it over any other MacĮthan, it's not that the iMac 2017 5K isn't a great machine, very fast and capable, superb value for money with brilliant P3 display. I’m pretty sure only the RAM is upgradeable in the trash can, FWIW. Even on the maxed 2015 iMac at work this isn’t even close to possible because they’re only skylake. In FCPX I’m playing back 4K HEVC with effects like it’s h264. Plus, because of thunderbolt 3 I plan to run an eGPU enclosure (high Sierra native compatibility) at some point and it’s something like 90% efficient. That should tell you something cause that’s one hell of a GPU. I upgraded the shit out of the 2010, including an Nvidia GTX 980ti and I still love using the iMac more. CPUs are old as fuck compared to new Kaby’s with h.265 acceleration. DDR3 not 4.įor reference, I’ve got a 6 core 3.33 2010 Mac Pro collecting dust while I’m running my 2017 maxed out iMac (costs the same as lowest spec Trash Can Pro) connected to a Dell 4K. where do I start? There are many many reasons why people shouldn’t be on a Mac Pro.
#2013 mac pro processor upgrade 10 core vs 12 core mod#
PS - Can you use it without the trashcan casing attached? I plan to mod it and make see-through enclosure.Īndrew, I just.
#2013 mac pro processor upgrade 10 core vs 12 core Pc#
Dual D500 not as fast for gaming as a single GTX 970 in a PC which won't break the bank but then that is what a PC is for and a Mac Pro is not. FCPX runs great on either system, as it is designed for newer architecture.
#2013 mac pro processor upgrade 10 core vs 12 core software#
New iMac Pro smokes it in performance in every way but it is bonkers expensive and you won't see a huge performance benefit in everyday apps like Adobe stuff because Adobe are lazy fuckwits who don't optimise their software for years and years. The Mac Pro doesn't have Intel Quick Sync for hardware acceleration of H.264 encoding so EditReady might take a hit - but encoding to ProRes instead of H.264 might be ok? Will have to test that. If the software only uses one CPU core or one GPU you're not going to see a performance benefit from the Mac Pro and it will even be slightly slower. It's not as fast as the latest iMac 2017 for single core performance or single GPU performance.
There are a few drawbacks of course, as this is a 4 years old computer. Internal SSD (a lot of iMacs still fusion drive - WTF Apple!) Workstation grade ECC RAM (error checking)
Mid-range 6 core / dual D500 model is now £1800 in UK (second hand), quad core / D300 sometimes even less (£1200)īullet proof reliable and long-life pro components You avoid 5K retina display scaling issues in Premiere and can watch 4K material at 1:1 on a 4K display - or even Cinema 4K display (4096 x 2160)Ĭan upgrade CPU, SSD, RAM (unlike iMac where you can only upgrade RAM and rest is locked in or very difficult to change) MacOS upgrades don't break things (risky on Hackintosh) High multicore performance - still right up there in 2018 Liberates your PC from work desk, so you can use it for gaming, which is something it is actually good at Thunderbolt on Hackintosh is again a reliability issue and on PC it doesn't even work as it's a Mac standard. Thunderbolt compatible for external graphics card and RAID drives. Hackintosh often needs wired mouse and keyboard (bluetooth lags) and LAN connection (wifi problems), even if everything else works perfectly Quieter than a PC and much smaller than 99% of them as well In fact it can run 6x 5K displays daisychained! (Ok yes that's overkill) Multiple displays - can have 3x 4K displays on the desk. It was maligned constantly for being a trashcan. Above is how the design should have looked.
0 kommentar(er)
