
$1600 Ryzen PC has double performance in Photoshop than $5200 Mac Pro - Garbage
http://www.diyphotography.net/1600-ryzen-based-pc-double-performance-photoshop-5200-mac-pro/
======
daenney
> But how does Apple’s flagship desktop system compare to new, much less
> expensive, AMD Ryzen based systems? Well, according to this test from Tech
> Guy, extremely well.

That statement doesn't seem to follow the rest of the article. The Mac Pro
doesn't compare that well at all. In the test provided it performs
significantly worse while being 3.5x more expensive.

~~~
mikenew
The author must have meant to say that the AMD system compares extremely well
against the Mac. There's no other way to interpret double the performance for
almost 1/4 the cost:

~~~
infogulch
Yeah it looks like the author was rewording that sentence and only got half of
it.

------
seanalltogether
Are there any video editors left doing work on mac pros? I know this test was
all about photoshop, but when talking about work that really needs to flex
system muscle, is there anyone left in the mac pro space? All the illustrators
and video guys I know are on pcs now, but I only have a small sphere to pull
from.

~~~
flukus
Is there any sort of cap where the amount of RAM makes no/little difference to
video editing? Could video editing be done more efficiently by streaming more
data (especially off SSD) instead of loading it into memory or is it a case of
lazy developers?

Genuine questions from someone with zero video editing experience.

~~~
tracker1
Well, h.265 encoding alone in software is painfully slow, but better results
than using nvenc... I use nvenc, because it goes 5-6x as fast. Video editing
is bound to be worse considering the number of layers of audio/video, framing,
transitions... with 4K being at least 4x the overhead of 1080p, and needing
two screens to do it effectively (full-screen preview on one display), that's
a _LOT_ of overhead for a system.

4K is what's pushing GPUs to their limit today, let alone video editing's
demands.

------
skyyler
Is this a big surprise? A brand new, cutting edge processor outperforms an Ivy
Bridge Xeon.

Mac Pros are older hardware right now. They haven't really been updated in
four years. I've seen rumours that they're coming out with a new one next
year.

Side note: I don't feel like the cost comparison is fair, here. A large
portion of the cost of the Mac Pro goes towards the design of the thing.
Having a small, arguably aesthetically pleasing object on a desk vs even a
Mini-ITX case is a no-brainer for a lot of creative folks. The Ryzen PC didn't
include the cost of the power supply, case, OS, storage (seriously one of the
big selling points of the Mac Pro is the PCIe flash storage)!

The Mac Pro is definitely a failure, it failed to capture the attention of its
target market. Why not focus on the real shortcomings? The high cost is only a
small part of why that device will probably forever be known as Apple's trash
can that should have seen the trash.

~~~
redsummer
You should pay less for that awful constrictive design. Apple's product
history is littered with failures due to design-led development. G4 cube,
round mouse, tube-shaped Trashintosh. Any time the object is based on a
standard shape like a circle, cube, or tube you know it will fail. I'm
surprised Ive hasn't done a globe yet.

~~~
mikenew
Don't forget the mouse that can only be charged when it's flipped upside down.

~~~
throwaway2048
and you can only right click when you lift up your other finger

------
draw_down
Don't worry! A year from now they'll ship a new Mac Pro that only
underperforms the cheap PC by 50% instead of 100%.

------
hoodoof
It's going to take many years of constant updates of hardware for me to trust
that Apple has changed its spots regarding the Macintosh.

I don't think that personal computers are really in Apple's organisational DNA
any more as a priority.

~~~
georgespencer
Agreed. There's been some disappointment in Intel's roadmap for Apple, but if
you look at the facts as they stand today:

1\. iMac - nothing since October 2015 (545 days since update vs. average of
317 days) 2\. 12" MacBook - now coming up to a year old (April 2016) 3\.
MacBook Air - dead (or at least >2 years since an update) 4\. Mac Mini - last
updated October 2014

When Phil Schiller says that Apple as an organisation is made up of pro users,
prior to the long overdue MacBook Pro update from last fall, what do you think
they were using? Two year old iMacs? Years-old MacBooks Pro?

~~~
hoodoof
And it's not only about frequency of updates.

I only buy Mac Mini - and I don't want a computer that has the RAM soldered
down and I don't want anything that prevents me upgrading or replacing
individual broken components. Apple's level of lock in is just too much.

~~~
Imagenuity
I agree with the Mac Mini only, for the reason it can be upgraded. I've added
16GB RAM and dual storage with an SSD & HDD. Runs current macOS great, despite
being a mid-2011 model.

Now a refresh that supports 4K & 5K displays along with updated CPU/GPU would
be my wish.

------
Flammy
This probably shouldn't be too surprising given:

1) Apple's pricing model ('high margin' is an understatement)

2) The Mac Pro GPU was released in late 2013. The 1080 is a much more recent
GPU.

This is all before looking at CPU differences.

~~~
HorizonXP
In the video in the link, it was concluded that the GPU did not affect the
test, and it seemed to be CPU-bound.

Actually, to me, the issue is more so that it's not truly verifiable that
Photoshop is running the same instructions on Mac vs. PC. A better test would
be to use GIMP, and use strace to confirm that the same code branches are
being executed.

That said, your statement is correct. A 2017 CPU vs. a 2013 CPU isn't going to
fare well, clock-for-clock, given that IPC usually get better. That difference
in performance will be exacerbated if the software takes advantage of the
newer instruction sets too.

~~~
microcolonel
If this filter is written in C/C++, then LLVM would probably have the
advantage over MSVC. If this filter is written with Halide, then they should
be running nearly identical code.

Also, strace is only really going to show you system calls, which should not
be relevant to straight-line code.

------
ericjang
Is it a fair comparison if the operating systems are different? A more
adequate comparison would be if the Photoshop benchmark were run on a Mac Pro
running the same Windows OS via Boot Camp.

~~~
wvenable
Fair but probably not reasonable. Mac Pro users will be using OS X and PC
users will be running Windows. This is what most people would experience.

I suspect there isn't any difference but if OS X eats up that much more
performance that really should still be another mark against the Mac Pro.

~~~
r00fus
Part of the problem with me running Windows is that I won't, unless Microsoft
gives me an option to disable their telemetry spyware.

I'm not alone.

~~~
tracker1
Run the Pro version...

~~~
r00fus
Pro doesn't allow blocking telemetry.

------
makecheck
A couple of grains of salt to take with something like this:

\- Much older machines will naturally be slower hardware.

\- While “costs more the day you bought it” is certainly relevant, it is _not_
an indicator of what you will spend over the life of the machine. The last Mac
Pro I had lasted EIGHT YEARS and _it still functioned when I replaced it_. The
PC statistically will probably be replaced at least once in that time, meaning
that a simple price comparison is iffy at best.

~~~
mikenew
Part of the problem is that it _isn 't_ an older machine. It's what you get if
you buy Apple's most powerful Mac.

------
redsummer
What kind of Hackintosh can you get for $1600? Not as good as the Ryzen of
course, but it might be nearly as good as the $5200 Mac.

~~~
joshmn
10.9 is confirmed on a Ryzen wafer.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/hackintosh/comments/63xw8c/maverick...](https://www.reddit.com/r/hackintosh/comments/63xw8c/mavericks_working_on_ryzen/)

~~~
redsummer
Wow - does that mean Ryzen CPUs could be coupled with Nvidia Pascal GPUs?

------
bingomad123
Mac Pro are not expensive because they are better, they are expensive because
well.. its Apple.

~~~
tracker1
Well, regarding the laptops.. I have yet to use a better touchpad... I have a
logitech keyboard for my htpc that is close, but the right click region is
horrible and after 2 years is "loose"... beyond that, I like the aluminum
unibody shell, but wouldn't mind a black anodized version.

The touchpad is what kept me with a rMBP 2 years ago, today, would probably go
with a different vendor.

~~~
bingomad123
Touchpad on MBP use to be the best as you pointed out but Surface Pro's cheap
dettachable keyboard too seems to match MBP touchpad these days.

------
xiaoma
The question is, "How did he get Windows 10 for free on a custom machine?"

------
CodeWriter23
From 15 seconds down to 9 isn't "double" the performance. Impressive, yes. But
then there's the disingenuous comparison of paying full price for 64MB from
Apple that nobody in their right mind ever pays. This article is a complete
arithmetic failure.

~~~
chmod775
He got 7.8s with an overclocked Ryzen, which is where the "double" came from.
And honestly whether you pay for the most expensive model of the Mac or not
(I'm assuming you meant 64GB of RAM, not 64MB), the point of the article
stands.

Because where's the point in arguing over whether something is a 6x worse
choice, or just a 4x worse choice. Meh.

~~~
CodeWriter23
And you're arithmetically challenged. 7.8s is not half of 14.9s.

------
jordache
who is actually buying new mac pros? Please speak up

~~~
rleigh
There are no new mac pros, just old and very old.

(Mostly joking, but there's little justification for a "current" outdated mac
pro with the competition offering a much better machine for a vastly lower
price. At work, we were told last week that we were no longer allowed to
purchase Apple hardware because the cost/benefit no longer justified the price
premium. That wasn't from the management either, they were just the
messengers; it was from the academic funding bodies which finance our
research. And to be honest, it's difficult to disagree with their assessment;
they aren't wrong.)

~~~
jordache
hmm what if you want to develop in a unix-like environment?

Win10 with its bash shell?

~~~
jrockway
Wouldn't you just use Linux if you want to develop in a unix-like environment?

~~~
jordache
hmm I also use Adobe Creative Suite so no.

~~~
jrockway
Similar situation. I just run Linux in a VM.

Though I think I regret not inverting it and running Windows in a VM instead.

------
jimmies
Although having performance is nice, I don't think people buy Mac computers
for performance. It's known that Mac computers are a couple of times more
expensive than PCs running Windows for the same performance. I can understand
that: I personally wouldn't care if I have to wait 15 seconds or 8 seconds to
get an effect in PS rendered. I would care much more if my computer crashes or
gets infected with malware or has its hard drive crashed, or wouldn't be able
to get support if something happens to it. Windows users have to be much more
careful about those issues than Mac users.

Those are the things that Apple computers excel at. And that's from the mouth
of someone that uses GNU+Linux.

~~~
TTPrograms
This model of Apple/Microsoft comparison is approximately 5-10 years out of
date. MacOs has become a sweeter malware target, and Windows has hardened up
since XP. Similarly, OS stability is not clearly dominated by one or the other
in their latest offerings.

~~~
jimmies
Haha, maybe I'm out of date. I know that Microsoft has stepped up on their
game, but I figure I can share my anecdotal experience. One year ago I was
trying to get Windows 10 or something going on my computer as a backup system.
So I was googling a relatively popular freeware program (can't remember what
it was) and tried to install it from a popular google search that appeared
innocent (like softonic or something). Immediately after installing that I've
got a computer with pop-ups and toolbars on my browser (just because I forgot
to click Advanced install when I was installing it). It was awful - so I
figured I can't be alone. It's more of the practice of the software developers
on Windows more than it's the actual core of it.

But I don't think the average Joe cares who is at fault - he only knows that
his computer is shitty at the end of the day.

~~~
tracker1
I've seen similar malware target Firefox on macOS (been a while, but I have
seen it).

