Thread: Introducing MacBook Pro 16-inch

Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 52
  1. #41  
    Senior Member andrewhake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    545
    Quote Originally Posted by Sergio Perez View Post
    Hi Andrew and Jeff,

    If you guys could post your impressions on the following compared to , say the previous top of the line Mac Pro (trashcan) and the iMac Pro (any configuration) that would be great:

    1- 8K 2:1 R3D and 8K WS at 50 and 75fps editing ( number of simultaneous streams , smoothness of playback, etc)

    2- Color of the Monitor compared to first generation Touch Bar 15"

    3- Performance vs Maxed out 2016 Touch Bar MacBook Pro

    This would really be great!

    Cheers,

    Sergio
    I can't give you all the specifics but I can tell you that every single iMac Pro configuration is faster than the highest 12 core configuration of 2013 Mac Pro in the testing I have done. Mostly with 3D renderers that easily take advantage of the additional cores. As well as in more core clock dependent apps like Photoshop. Even the 8 core iMac Pro is faster than the 12 core 2013 Mac Pro. And only gets better as you spec higher CPU and GPU options.

    The display is very similar to the P3 displays on the previous gen 15" MBP, with slightly higher DPI. The extra screen real estate that the 16" display offers is very nice for a variety of pro apps. That is one of the first things I noticed when using it.

    Here is a benchmark I did rendering a car project I am working on in Maya using the Arnold renderer:

    Maya 2020 Arnold S2000 scene
    16” MBP 2.4Ghz 8 Core: 591 seconds
    15” MBP 2.6Ghz 6 Core: 988 seconds
    -397 seconds, 6min36second, 40% less time

    This is a CPU render which will max out all available threads. R3D performance doesn't necessarily translate the exact same way but at least an example for you. The 16" 8 core maintains a higher sustained clock speed at full load than the 6 core even though it has a lower base clock. The performance difference here takes the laptop being a sort of "use it in a pinch" for this type of work situation, to really being no problem to work on. Having 64GB of RAM is amazing for this type of work as well.

    Not exactly all the details you were after but hope that helps. Working with R3Ds has been really nice so far on the 16". I only every really use them in FCPX and always edit in the Better Performance mode because I don't really have a good reason to use the Better Quality mode. I usually just work with R3Ds directly in Better Performance mode. I will usually leave BG render on and let it do it's thing. For final output I am usually able to transfer projects to an iMac Pro, but not really a problem to output on a MBP as well.

    If you are on the fence maybe best to wait until the Metal R3D update is out in the wild to see what kind of performance will be possible then.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #42  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Macau
    Posts
    2,450
    Quote Originally Posted by andrewhake View Post
    I can't give you all the specifics but I can tell you that every single iMac Pro configuration is faster than the highest 12 core configuration of 2013 Mac Pro in the testing I have done. Mostly with 3D renderers that easily take advantage of the additional cores. As well as in more core clock dependent apps like Photoshop. Even the 8 core iMac Pro is faster than the 12 core 2013 Mac Pro. And only gets better as you spec higher CPU and GPU options.

    The display is very similar to the P3 displays on the previous gen 15" MBP, with slightly higher DPI. The extra screen real estate that the 16" display offers is very nice for a variety of pro apps. That is one of the first things I noticed when using it.

    Here is a benchmark I did rendering a car project I am working on in Maya using the Arnold renderer:

    Maya 2020 Arnold S2000 scene
    16” MBP 2.4Ghz 8 Core: 591 seconds
    15” MBP 2.6Ghz 6 Core: 988 seconds
    -397 seconds, 6min36second, 40% less time

    This is a CPU render which will max out all available threads. R3D performance doesn't necessarily translate the exact same way but at least an example for you. The 16" 8 core maintains a higher sustained clock speed at full load than the 6 core even though it has a lower base clock. The performance difference here takes the laptop being a sort of "use it in a pinch" for this type of work situation, to really being no problem to work on. Having 64GB of RAM is amazing for this type of work as well.

    Not exactly all the details you were after but hope that helps. Working with R3Ds has been really nice so far on the 16". I only every really use them in FCPX and always edit in the Better Performance mode because I don't really have a good reason to use the Better Quality mode. I usually just work with R3Ds directly in Better Performance mode. I will usually leave BG render on and let it do it's thing. For final output I am usually able to transfer projects to an iMac Pro, but not really a problem to output on a MBP as well.

    If you are on the fence maybe best to wait until the Metal R3D update is out in the wild to see what kind of performance will be possible then.
    Wow that's really impressive! Seems like a no brainer. It pushes the new XDR display too, correct? Might go for this config. I need portability and having the XDR means a reference display for all possible scenarios.
    Sérgio Perez

    Weapon Monstro #03294 "Amochai" in Macau

    Video Director/Creative/Producer


    http://vimeo.com/user1503556

    https://www.youtube.com/user/spzprod..._as=subscriber
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #43  
    I did a few tests in Resolve on 6 core version with 5500 8GB.

    7 nodes with a LUT applied
    Prores XQ UHD render to DNxHD Op1-Atom 8 bit 1080p: 50-53 fps, then throttles to ~ 35 fps.
    Same ballpark with render to h.264 1080p.
    Pretty good.
    Analog > Apollo wooden handgrip http://omeneo.com
    Digital > Primers - professional image transformation tools http://omeneo.com/primers

    imdb


    "Como delfines en el fondo del oceano
    volamos por el universo incentivados por la esperanza"

    "L'esperanza", Sven Väth
    "It's a poor sort of memory that only works backwards"
    Jung/ Carol
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #44  
    MBP 16 2019, i7, 5500 8Gb, 512GB
    DaVinci 16.1.2


    8min timeline for all tests. All tests start 10-20% faster, after 2min render vents kick in and fps drops and stays at noted fps.

    CPU frequency is then almost never below 2.6GHz.
    Only ARRIRAW does not max out CPU, it almost doesn't use it. GPU is maxed out for ARRIRAW.

    All other codecs max out CPU and GPU.
    All test uses one node LUT for rec709.



    ARRI Amira ProRes 4444XQ HD 25p to DNxHD 36 8bit:

    45 fps


    Gemini 4K DCI REDcode 2:1 25p to DNxHD 36 8 bit:

    30 fps - 1/4 res good
    10 fps - 1/2 res good
    8 fps - full premium


    Canon C200 4K DCI RAW 25p DNxHD 36 8bit:

    28 fps full res



    Alexa Mini LF 4.4K RAW OG zoom to 16/9 25p to DNxHD 36 8bit:

    23 fps full res

    (playback 25 fps )
    Analog > Apollo wooden handgrip http://omeneo.com
    Digital > Primers - professional image transformation tools http://omeneo.com/primers

    imdb


    "Como delfines en el fondo del oceano
    volamos por el universo incentivados por la esperanza"

    "L'esperanza", Sven Väth
    "It's a poor sort of memory that only works backwards"
    Jung/ Carol
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #45  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Macau
    Posts
    2,450
    Quote Originally Posted by Hrvoje Simic View Post
    MBP 16 2019, i7, 5500 8Gb, 512GB
    DaVinci 16.1.2


    8min timeline for all tests. All tests start 10-20% faster, after 2min render vents kick in and fps drops and stays at noted fps.

    CPU frequency is then almost never below 2.6GHz.
    Only ARRIRAW does not max out CPU, it almost doesn't use it. GPU is maxed out for ARRIRAW.

    All other codecs max out CPU and GPU.
    All test uses one node LUT for rec709.



    ARRI Amira ProRes 4444XQ HD 25p to DNxHD 36 8bit:

    45 fps


    Gemini 4K DCI REDcode 2:1 25p to DNxHD 36 8 bit:

    30 fps - 1/4 res good
    10 fps - 1/2 res good
    8 fps - full premium


    Canon C200 4K DCI RAW 25p DNxHD 36 8bit:

    28 fps full res



    Alexa Mini LF 4.4K RAW OG zoom to 16/9 25p to DNxHD 36 8bit:

    23 fps full res

    (playback 25 fps )
    Thanks man this is great info!
    Sérgio Perez

    Weapon Monstro #03294 "Amochai" in Macau

    Video Director/Creative/Producer


    http://vimeo.com/user1503556

    https://www.youtube.com/user/spzprod..._as=subscriber
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #46  
    Senior Member andrewhake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    545
    Quote Originally Posted by Sergio Perez View Post
    Wow that's really impressive! Seems like a no brainer. It pushes the new XDR display too, correct? Might go for this config. I need portability and having the XDR means a reference display for all possible scenarios.
    Yeah XDR works great with the 16" MBP.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #47  
    Senior Member Ketch Rossi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    ITALY | USA
    Posts
    14,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Kilgroe View Post
    Apple made good and delivered it yesterday as promised. Well, UPS made it happen I suppose. Still getting it set up, but now that I've spent more time on it I just have to say it's nice to have a large screen on a MacBook Pro again. Will be pushing it over the weekend to see what it can do.
    Looking forward to hear your toughs Jeff :)

    On my 16" I'll only have Redcine-X Pro & FCPX for Monstro 8K & Komodo 6k to 4K workflows on the go, no other Apps on this portable, so wanted to see what you think and if it's worth to upgrade to 2.4GHz and if the 16GB Memory is enough or if upgrade to 64GB.

    Right now I'm thinking going to 2.4GHz and stick with 16GB Ram since it seems that FCPX won't do much of anything extra with more then 16GB.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #48  
    Senior Member Ty Maier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Fort Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    125
    Apparently some Macs will be getting a Pro mode for boosting performance. Pretty interesting

    https://www.macrumors.com/2020/01/13...catalina-beta/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #49  
    Senior Member Michael Lindsay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    2,668
    My top spec MacBook Pro 16 is working very well with Resolve.. no regrets! ... it also doesn’t have the eject drives issue of some earlier MBPs

    Little Tips.. to consider/test when rendering

    tilt the screen forward and turn the screen off - or nearly off (I also turn the key lights off but I haven't tested if this is effective)

    Pop the whole laptop up on little pegs so it doesn’t sit on a temp insulting surface table

    Consider a cooling plate... I have just ordered one and can report back?

    When doing this I am really close to RT for 4K Monstro R3Ds to editorial mxfs (Full res premium with 16bit precision)

    basically I am at 26fps until the thermal throttling kicks in (and depending on success of the above and temp of the room) I can get it to drop no lower then 20fps...

    I think the metal SDK tweaks have really helped but I'd love to see a bit more optimisation if possible as using the laptop as a Rushes Viewing machine is less satisfactory... (my next test is to try a TB to HDSDI box to see if this will work better than using the laptops own screen)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #50  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    431
    If it's for editorial dailies, I usually switch to bilinear scaling. Might eek out a few more fps.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts