16″ MacBook Pro

Tagged: ,

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Topic: 16″ MacBook Pro Read 1458 Times
  • #11406
    Jack Siegel
    Jack Siegel
    Silver Member
    Posts: 25
    Computers & Displays
    on: November 18, 2019 at 9:53 pm

    I am the proud owner of a Mac Pro (2013) desktop computer.  I had hoped to get the advantages that come with 7 years of advances in technology when the new Mac Pro comes out, but am unwilling to pay $6,000 for the base computer, which as I understand it, needs around $2,000 in additional add-ons to reach meaningful performance.  I don’t want to switch to a Windows machine, because like many, I am stuck in the Apple regime.  I am not interested in buying an iMac because I use Eizo monitors for editing and don’t like the Apple monitors for editing (based on long ago experience).  The mac mini would be a solution, but its specs are still limited.

    So I am wondering whether the new “16 inch MacBook Pro laptop is the solution.  My MacPro has 64 GB of RAM.  It runs at 3.5 GHZ and has six cores.  I see that I can have 8 cores with 16″ Mac Pro laptop, but it only runs at 2.4 GHZ.  So the clock is slower, but there are more cores and it is a newer processor.  Not obvious if the 16” MacBook Pro will improve performance.  In the past, the people at Apple have told me I was till better off with my 2013 MacPro than a MacBook laptop.  Is that still the case?

    Thanks for any thoughtful input.

    Jack Siegel

     

     

    Jack B. Siegel
    Photographer, Attorney, and Writer

    #11429
    Eric Brody
    Eric Brody
    Participant
    Posts: 69
    Re: 16″ MacBook Pro
    Reply #1 on: November 19, 2019 at 7:33 pm

    I too have the 6 core “trashcan” with 64GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD. My photos are stored on a RAID in an OWC Thunderbay box. Not at all sure that I have any reason to get a new machine, but that has never stopped me before. I suspect much of our information is old, as in obsolete. I have many friends who are superb and highly critical photographers who do fine with the iMac screen, including calibrating it. The iMac has user installable memory as well, though not a user accessible drive. I agree that the mini is not the answer either. For now I’m sticking with my 2013 Mac Pro. The new Mac Pro is for serious (rich, or someone else is paying for it) people, not “ordinary” still photographers like me. Lloyd Chambers (love him or hate him, take your pick) just did a blog post in which he postulated that the new 16″ MacBook Pro is finally the “do everything” laptop, usable for travel, and plugged into a dock, allows use of any monitor, including your Eizo (and my NEC). I like having my laptop separate from my desktop so will no go down that road, but for some, (maybe you?). It might be a solution.

    Good luck.

    Eric

    #11464
    Jack Siegel
    Jack Siegel
    Silver Member
    Posts: 25
    Re: 16″ MacBook Pro
    Reply #2 on: November 20, 2019 at 7:01 am
    Eric Brody wrote:

    I too have the 6 core “trashcan” with 64GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD. My photos are stored on a RAID in an OWC Thunderbay box. Not at all sure that I have any reason to get a new machine, but that has never stopped me before. I suspect much of our information is old, as in obsolete. I have many friends who are superb and highly critical photographers who do fine with the iMac screen, including calibrating it. The iMac has user installable memory as well, though not a user accessible drive. I agree that the mini is not the answer either. For now I’m sticking with my 2013 Mac Pro. The new Mac Pro is for serious (rich, or someone else is paying for it) people, not “ordinary” still photographers like me. Lloyd Chambers (love him or hate him, take your pick) just did a blog post in which he postulated that the new 16″ MacBook Pro is finally the “do everything” laptop, usable for travel, and plugged into a dock, allows use of any monitor, including your Eizo (and my NEC). I like having my laptop separate from my desktop so will no go down that road, but for some, (maybe you?). It might be a solution.

    Good luck.

    Eric

     

    Eric:

    Thanks for the input.  Can’t disagree with anything you’ve said.  I am not rushing out to replace the trash can–although I would if I could be guaranteed much better performance.  I am just planning for the day when the trash can is no longer a viable option.  Those of us who have been Mac users for a long-time will eventually find ourselves in a box.  Maybe by then Photoshop for the iPad will be perfected.  One can only hope.

    Jack B. Siegel
    Photographer, Attorney, and Writer

    #17032
    Wayne Fox
    Wayne Fox
    Silver Member
    Posts: 11
    Re: 16″ MacBook Pro
    Reply #3 on: March 5, 2020 at 10:34 am

    I see this is sort of old, but I ran some tests of my 6 core 2013 Mac Pro, and the 16″ MacBook Pro handily beat it in all tests.  Even in Photoshop although the difference wasn’t as remarkable.  A few results

    Create 1:1 previews of 500 Sony a7r4 files … Mac Pro: 13 min 8 sec , 16″ MacBook Pro 10 min 1 sec

    Export 500 unmodified Sony a7r4 files … Mac Pro: 12 min 48 sec, 16″ MacBook Pro 10 min 22 sec

    Export 500 Sony a7r4 with 10 dust spots removed, some global adjustments and 2 graduated filters … Mac Pro 33 min 22 sec , 16″ MacBook Pro 27 min 43 secs

    Batch process 5 panorama merges (IQ180 files) … Mac Pro 8 min 33 sec , 16″ MacBook Pro 6 min 3 sec.

    Run Puget Systems 2019 Photoshop benchmark … Mac Pro 34 min 40 sec , 16″ MacBook Pro 28 min 35 sec

    The 2018 and 2019 MacBook Pros are also faster.  These tests are indicative of better performance, but I haven’ yet figured out how to gauge other things such as lag in local adjustments, etc.  I can only hope it’s better simply because it’s better for the things I tested.

    Note that a 12 core 2013 Mac Pro might do considerably better on several of the tests (such as 1:1 Previews and exporting) because LR does maximize the cores.  To give you a frame of reference, a 2019 12 core Mac Pro (the new one), makes the same 1:1 previews in 5 min 10 secs, and all 12 cores as well as the 12 virtual cores are maxed.  So for those tests, available cores is an important part of performance.  Photoshop not so much, so it will be interesting to run the full set of tests on this new Mac Pro.

    More here if you are interested … https://youtu.be/SrESyyg15Ec

     

     

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.