- Apr 12, 2021
- Asus z590 ROG Maximus XIII Hero
- RX 6600 XT
- Classic Mac
- Mobile Phone
Since monday I've been working on Macstudio (M1 Max with 24 GPU cores) at work. I use DaVinci Resolve
I run Geekbench and get a Metal Score of 60000
I was wondering if the score would scale up with the number of GPU cores ?
Do you know Metal Scores for GPUs with 32/48/64 cores ?
My RX6800 XT has a Metal Score of 180000. 3x more
Food for thought...
Have you assessed how well does 3x benchmark gain translate into actual Resolve perf?
Does some op go 3x faster?
However much faster some op goes, does it translate into a meaningful uptick in your productivity?
Is this enough to justify hack?
A side from that what is the Future of Apple Mx GPU compared to the increassing raw compute power of AMD /NVIDIA GPUs.
I can't imagine how they gonna close the gap
For Apple, there is no gap. They design total systems vertically to achieve overall mix of product goals in consumer space which they single-handedly define.
To compare, it must be Apples to Apples —yarg I slay me...
For example, Apple doesn't choose GPU marketing based on a light-show and bragging rights. They study graphics workloads that typify market segments and tune their offerings to perform effectively in those segments, while consistently advancing generational performance, maintaining a sane schedule of obsolescence, and surprising their customers with advancements and treats along the way.
Today the trick from Apple is to add hardware neural engine and video encoder/decoder to run Davinci quicker, but I'm not sure it's a good path.
The neural/media engines is a case in point: these are a modest cost in HW that's been carefully optimized to add SW value, from camera enhancement and photo library features, to allowing clever tricks like in-line OCR in messages and publishing, to AV signal processing in teleconferencing, etc. Apple can deliver a more effective experience with its vertical orientation to a sizable and fashionable market. Consider the creeping effectiveness of the "blue" vs green bubble in messaging, where Apple-to-Apple users enjoy a far smoother and more effective and enjoyable SMS experience, which just so happens to make non-Apple users feel like their experience is stupid by comparison (which it is) while remaining 100% compatible. Is there any technical reason why other phone makers can't offer similar advances? I don't think so. So it's an example of how design makes a big difference.
One last thing
Apple GPU performance per watt seem equivalent to NVIDIA's :
With ARM chips, Apple seems to make tiny and silent computers with low power consumption (Laptop usage) but how they gonna replace the Mac Pro ??Understanding the Hardware Capabilities of Apple's flagship SOCtlkh.dev
Any Ideas ??
Nvidia latest showing off is just pure carnival. That's why the 4080 looks so garish. It's just fat for the sake of phat. Nvidia is focusing on compute elements for autonomous vehicles, robots, etc. Stuff in another world from PC. Intel ARC GPU proves how boring the PC graphics space really is. The fact that AMD sticks around in desktop GPUs is a sign of weakness, not dominance. Sony Playstation has shown once and for all that gaming has a very finite upper bound on required gaming gfx performance, that can be met at a full system end-user cost of 1:1 for a midline PC gaming GPU.
My view of the Mac Pro is that it is now a legacy form-factor informed by the history of NeXT and Pixar. It's sold into a specific professional segment of "workstation" targetting media production, and some science and engineering, with no aspirations of dominance, just to stay involved in these segments. The history of computing advances are technical swords into plough shares. Apple is a Silicon Valley company; it's in their bones. (oooh too many clichés)
The most distinguishing traits of Mac Pro have been ECC RAM and max RAM, which serve the purpose of ensuring repeatable and correct results for work with a stake in accuracy and consistency, e.g., collaborative content production, CAD, biology, etc., in a form factor of performance and options that agrees with business budgets.
The new Mac Pro should be expected to maintain these traits while bringing proven advances of AppleSi to bear in efficiency and packaging. I predict the Mac Pro will never again be exciting to regular Joes. If it continues to exist, it will remain expensive. It's Apple in dialog with certain industry segments, of which there's no longer any crossover with PC enthusiasts.