21 Replies Latest reply on Dec 19, 2017 3:55 AM by Brian Stoppee

    More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)

    Brian Stoppee Adobe Community Professional

      Not enough RAM memory in your new Apple MacBook Pro? Big file users of Adobe’s Acrobat, After Effects, Animate, Illustrator, Photoshop, and Premiere Pro will attest to that. Apple’s fully loaded MacBook Pro has a maximum of 16GB of RAM when a minimum of 32GB makes more sense for those memory hungry projects. Time to dump macOS and just to Windows 10?

       

      Is the other big media technology laptop favorite, HP, just figuring if 16GB is all Apple is offering, that’s all they’ll offer, in their ZBook?

       

      In the midst of all that Internet chatter of nasty accusations against Apple and HP, don’t blame them. 16GB is all the RAM those Intel i7 laptop microprocessors can handle. So, is HP’s Book catch phrase of “mobile workstation” just a very far away dream?

       

      If laptop memory power is on your list of New Year resolutions, there’s a confirmation that the Apple executive suite is listening, so that appears to mean Intel is listening, too. (We’re sure HP’s ears are open, as well).

       

      This month, in Washington DC, Smithsonian Magazine held their “Future of Design” event.  In relationship to the RAM issue (and a few other things) Apple’s design chief, Jony Ive said, “…all of your feelings and feedback around the MacBook you use, we couldn't want to listen to more... And we hear - boy, do we hear."

       

      2018 appears to be the year of power computing. Any day now, Apple is promising a desktop revolution with the iMac Pro, an all-in-one computer with an 18-core Intel Xeon processor and 128GB of RAM. In April, Apple announced that a new Mac Pro was on its way, presumably even more powerful than the iMac Pro. So, the studio world is about to have the power it needs, if the workspace is indoors.

       

      If your studio is mobile, it’s tough to say when Apple or HP will have 32GB of RAM. Both companies are on the ever-shortening “recommended” or “only” vendor lists of many corporate and government buyers. Even after Intel releases new processors (supposedly in 2018), there’s extensive testing before the hardware hits the streets.

       

      “Big Data” is the technology phrase for the close of the decade. And, many Adobe experts need big RAM to go with their big documents, animations, graphics, photos, vector art, and 4K video. Many of us work in on-the-go studios. So, it’s good to know that Jonathan Ive and his team are listening.

        • 1. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
          Ussnorway Adobe Community Professional

          https://forums.adobe.com/people/Brian+Stoppee  wrote

           

          when Apple or HP will have 32GB of RAM

          around the same time Windows gives 128gb for half the price would be my guess

          • 2. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
            Trevor.Dennis Adobe Community Professional (Moderator)

            Ussnorway  wrote

             

            https://forums.adobe.com/people/Brian+Stoppee   wrote

             

            when Apple or HP will have 32GB of RAM

            around the same time Windows gives 128gb for half the price would be my guess

            128GB of decent spec memory is >$2000 for a Windows PC.   Google tells me that you'd need another $500 to put 128GB in a Mac Pro. 

             

            I settled on 64Gb for the 7900X build I have underway.  It's very rare that I see the 32Gb in my current 3930K system maxed out, and I have a strong suspicion that drive speed is more of a bottleneck with large Photoshop projects, updating often surprisingly large temp files on the Scratch drive, and referencing Smart Objects.   I have a couple of projects that stalled through lack of performance and unacceptable lag, that I am looking forward to testing on my new build, and more for the improved drive speed with NVMe M.2 drives than extra RAM, faster bus, and more CPU cores that Photoshop won't even be using.  I've harped on about this on several occasions, but I seem to be a lone voice.  Well I'll be looking closely at Resource Monitor on old and new systems, with those problem projects to see if I can pin down what the bottleneck is.

            • 3. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
              Brian Stoppee Adobe Community Professional

              Trevor.Dennis  wrote

              I settled on 64Gb for the 7900X build I have underway.

               

              Are you telling us that you are building your own laptop?

              • 4. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                Ussnorway Adobe Community Professional

                Trevor.Dennis  wrote

                 

                Google tells me that you'd need another $500 to put 128GB in a Mac Pro. 

                are you sure you don't have harddrive mixed up with ram?

                • 5. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                  Brian Stoppee Adobe Community Professional

                  Ussnorway  wrote

                  Trevor.Dennis   wrote

                  Google tells me that you'd need another $500 to put 128GB in a Mac Pro. 

                  are you sure you don't have harddrive mixed up with ram?

                   

                  Trevor may of jumped to a discussion of the Mac Pro RAM instead of the MacBook Pro? It's also always difficult to determine the cost of technology based on the country someone is located in and the vendor they choose.

                  • 6. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                    Trevor.Dennis Adobe Community Professional (Moderator)

                    I mentioned 128Gb memory kits for Windows systems costing $2000.  128Gb for the Mac Pro is $500 more at $2,500

                    More Options for 128 GB Mac Pro RAM Upgrades Now Available - Mac Rumors

                     

                    When I quote prices it is always in US dollars unless I use a prefix like NZ$.  My 64Gb of G-Skill Trident Z 3600 is costing me NZ$1300 which is about US$1000.

                     

                    US Prices

                    NZ  — it looks like I actually underestimated the NZ mark-up by a couple of hundred dollars.  And no I won't be using the RGB glow in the dark modules.  These kits are specifically recommended for X299 and X399 systems

                    • 7. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                      Ussnorway Adobe Community Professional

                      ok I misunderstood your post then

                      imo ram isn't needed in such amounts;

                      8g min I would have in a Windows 10 system and that is something that only does emails | simple work

                      16 is the sweet spot for Windows 10 users and covers Adobe (with a half decent G-card) or mining tasks

                       

                      32g becomes a budget gaming system | server test platfrom and maxed out i7

                      64G is a high end Game rig with a Ryzen | i9 powering it but the returns are min and its more about wow than actual need

                      128g (today) is a server and that will push the price up on Ram because its a small market

                      • 8. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                        Brian Stoppee Adobe Community Professional

                        Trevor.Dennis  wrote

                         

                        I mentioned 128Gb memory kits for Windows systems costing $2000.  128Gb for the Mac Pro is $500 more at $2,500

                        More Options for 128 GB Mac Pro RAM Upgrades Now Available - Mac Rumors

                        You're approaching something which a pretty much "above my pay grade."

                         

                        Here's what I do know. Soon after the current Mac Pro was introduced, HP introduced a tower with a similar, but not identically configured. A friend needed a custom configured tower for his editing suite and asked my help.

                         

                        I came up with a pretty spec but Apple and HP had some components I could not find anywhere. One vendor told me they could get the components for me (all of which was pretty pricey) but unless I had the specific board either company was using, they could not guaranteed it would work flawlessly and I couldn't return it.

                         

                        So, what did I learn from this: not all components are created equal and of course are not priced similarly, especially if you are buying small quantities.

                        • 9. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                          samuels80897907

                          Any idea on when the new Mac pro will be out? 128GB sounds good. I really like sticking to Mac and there are quality issues for that.

                          • 10. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                            Brian Stoppee Adobe Community Professional

                            samuels80897907  wrote

                             

                            Any idea on when the new Mac pro will be out? 128GB sounds good. I really like sticking to Mac and there are quality issues for that.

                             

                            I doubt anyone in the Apple Executive Suite could tell you that.

                             

                            Generally, Apple, HP, and other players (some of whole buy more product from Intel than HP or Apple) beta test Intel processors as Intel is developing them and the manufacturers are working on how they'll be used.

                             

                            Some manufacturers will rush products out the door when the new processor ships. But, all they are doing is dropping the new processor into the slot of where an old one was.

                             

                            Usually, but not always, Apple and HP create completely new products which use the attributes of the new processor. Once the final Intel processor ships there's still work for Apple to do. They'll have target goals, but sometimes they do miss the goal for reason beyond their control.

                            • 11. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                              Kat Gilbert Adobe Community Professional (Moderator)

                              Slightly off the subject but on the topic of new MacPro- email from yesterday is that the new iMacs are out. Bigger, better, etc, etc. What caught my eye was that they are doing trade ins... Haven't delved too deep in the announcement but prob. won't effect me. My IT guy said that the 18th was the kickoff at local Apple store. Just keep hoping that my old 2009 keeps working but not able to upgrade the system stuck on 10.11.6--- that could be a problem if Adobe keeps on the road that they are on! Was hoping to at least get up to 10.12! Oh well...

                              • 12. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                                Brian Stoppee Adobe Community Professional

                                https://forums.adobe.com/people/Kat+Gilbert  wrote

                                 

                                Slightly off the subject but on the topic of new MacPro- email from yesterday is that the new iMacs are out. Bigger, better, etc, etc. What caught my eye was that they are doing trade ins... Haven't delved too deep in the announcement but prob. won't effect me. My IT guy said that the 18th was the kickoff at local Apple store. Just keep hoping that my old 2009 keeps working but not able to upgrade the system stuck on 10.11.6--- that could be a problem if Adobe keeps on the road that they are on! Was hoping to at least get up to 10.12! Oh well...

                                 

                                Well, Kat-

                                This is so on topic that it's the subject of our next thread in this series.

                                 

                                The iMac Pro tosses some interesting decisions onto the table for media professional.

                                • 13. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                                  Trevor.Dennis Adobe Community Professional (Moderator)

                                  Kat, our old buddy Professor Norman Sanders has just replaced his eight year old Mac with a nice new iMac,  Norman has an orange forum badge, as you know, but was still using CS6 because because his hardware would not support later versions of OSX.  He was also staying with the old Mac because some of the software he uses would not run in newer OSX versions. 

                                   

                                  He is keeping the old Mac, and describes its performance as 'chugging along' and 'quaint'.   If and when my new build ever turns up (I paid a hefty deposit at the end of October!   — I'll pass my 3930K system with 32Gb RAM to my wife to use.  On the occasions I have to do a bit of tidying up on her two core AMD system (Q9550) which has 8Gb RAM, and unbelievably slow drives, and a Windows Experience Index of just 4.6, I can't understand how she could put up with such a slow system.  It would drive me demented.

                                   

                                  If anyone reading this is still using an older Windows system and has a lower WEI than 4.6, I'd love to hear about it.

                                  • 14. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                                    Kat Gilbert Adobe Community Professional (Moderator)

                                    Yes- I will keep my old MacPro 2009 as it is loaded with "old" apps that I do use once in a while and I know will not run on the newer machines. The trouble maker- MacPro 2013 that is little over a year old is the monster that has kept me guessing since day one as to whether it will work or not- THAT is the one I would think about trading in but I have so many $$$$ tied up in it that I would have to think long and hard.

                                     

                                    Guess I need to win the lottery or find a pot of gold in my woods! (Neither which I think will happen but one can hope!)

                                    • 15. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                                      Trevor.Dennis Adobe Community Professional (Moderator)

                                      My thoughts are that I spend a lot more time sat in front of my computer than I do behind a camera, and I have ten times as many dollars invested in photography gear than I do in my computer.  I also get more pleasure out of digital content creation than I do out of taking pictures nowadays.   I have decided I am going to strictly limit photography gigs I take on, as I no longer enjoy consecutive eight hour days carrying two 1D bodies with large lenses and large speedlite on each body. So it boils down to it being worth putting a decent percentage of your costs into computer equipment.

                                       

                                      A lot of people appear to have discovered that the serious money they have invested in mega-cored new builds using Threadripper and the high end i9X twelve core and above systems, is actually slower with Photoshop than their old six core systems, so if you had the space and the dollars, it would be nice to have two systems the second with an i7-8700K.  You could almost build such a system for less than you'd pay just for the CPU if you used the 18 core, 36 thread i9-7980X which costs a crazy $1999!

                                       

                                      Whatever your views on Mac vs Windows PC, you get a lot more choice with the latter, and can tailor a build specific for your need.  Or you can get all Gollum, and lust after all those cores regardless of how useful they'd be for your application, my precious.

                                       

                                      I had interesting exchange with our old buddy Noel Carboni yesterday.  Most of us know him for his Star Filter Pro software, but a few will know that he also makes software for astrophotography.  He is apparently leveraging the power of the GPU to do his number crunching, but instead of winning Bitcoins, he is 'Flattening Luminance fields for astrophotographers'.  He describes as '. 'Ground breaking stuff people only dreamed about a few years ago, and we can now do it in an eyeblink inside the GPU'.  He goes on to say that a high end Gaming GPU has 50 times the number crunching power of a CPU, but did not specify what CPU. 

                                       

                                      That is definitely food for thought.  If Noel's two or three person software company can master the potential of the GPU, then how much more can Adobe development teams coax out our GPUs, and are we missing the point when we whine that Photoshop and After Effects mostly only use a single core?  If Noel is right, then we'd need $6000 worth of CPUs to have the potential of a GTX1080, and that's before we start thinking about Volta.  So perhaps we should accept that Adobe's computer scientists know what they are doing, and obsess over CUDA cores rather than Central Processor cores.

                                      • 16. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                                        Ussnorway Adobe Community Professional

                                        Gwiz if only there was a way to send this G-card power across a network in real time then people could remote into a computer that has one or more better g-card and use its power to run their game or flattening your fields as easy as looking glass... ground breaking gpu tech indeed

                                        • 17. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                                          Brian Stoppee Adobe Community Professional

                                          Trevor.Dennis  wrote

                                          then how much more can Adobe development teams coax out our GPUs, and are we missing the point when we whine that Photoshop and After Effects mostly only use a single core?

                                           

                                          There was a time when I used to know all about the chip sets, GPU models, and related things that a user could snap onto Apple and various popular PC motherboards. But, admittedly, Janet & I have gotten in that North American higher education IT mindset which has spread across other government agencies and the world of hotels, restaurants, and entertainment: if it's built by Apple or HP, it's permissible, and if it isn't, it's not. So, that part of IT might as well be part of a pre-historic sign language.

                                           

                                          There was a time in our technology lives when Janet & I had all that under-the-hood knowledge drain out of our heads. Janet used to say to me, matter-of-fact, "Wacom has a new driver for users with 'blah-blah-blah' graphics cards." and I'd think and think and think and then it would come to me as to what she was talking about.

                                           

                                          But, thank you, Trevor, I just realized that I don't see mainstream media tech drivers which are that specific, anymore (no complaints).

                                           

                                          That said, with full knowledge that I might not be up to speed on understanding the deep technology, could you please tell us, Trevor, how you know Adobe apps are only using one core on a multiple core Mac?

                                           

                                          When I open the Activity Monitor, I see what percentage of the CPU is in use. (Janet & I use that kind of thing to do Apple and Adobe troubleshooting.) But, if Apple provides tools to see core use, you'll be teaching us about something. So, thank you in advance.

                                          • 18. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                                            Trevor.Dennis Adobe Community Professional (Moderator)

                                            I can only speak for Windows Brian.  The only experience I have with Macs was at MAX last year.

                                             

                                            I know some of the Blur Gallery filters are multi threaded.  I had to increas the image size to 20,000 pixels wide to get my system to take enough time to make a meaningful sample of the core/thread usage.

                                            What surprised me was that there was not more disk usage as Photoshop helped itself to 30Gb of space on the Scratch drive, and I would have expected a fair bit of read and write to that temp file.

                                            Emboss used a single core.

                                            Smart Sharpen used all 12 cores, and only took a moment to do its thing.  From memory, some of the benefits we are getting from the GPU is in creating the preview.  I also seem to remember something about high system resource users like the Healing brush, and Liquify, use the GPU to show changes in real time.

                                             

                                            Here you go.  5000 pixel Spot Healing Brush using all 12 threads.

                                             

                                            Going back to the Blur Gallery filters, but looking at GPU usage.  This is Iris blur on that same 20,000 pixel wide 16 bit image.

                                            The thing is though, I have look at functions than I remembered as making good use system resources.  That Spot Healing brush for instance with a maxed out 5000 pixel brush.  My 3930K system is six years old, and running that brush right across the above image, tied up Photoshop for about 30 seconds, but I still had full use of the rest of my system.

                                             

                                            I linked to the Threadripper thread on the PremPro hardware forum a few days ago.  That has a bunch of people crying into their beer (where do these weird simalies come from? ) because their uber expensive new computer builds, are under performing with Photoshop and After Effects.  I now can't wait for my 10 core i9-7900X build to be delivered, because it seems that a good bit of Photoshop is not as lightly threaded as I thought.

                                             

                                            One more test, as I know that Liquify is supposed to make special use of resources.  The interesting thing here is that I was able to make the brush as big as I liked, but settled for about 10,000 pixels. The preview window responds completely in real time with zero lag, and the GPU became maxed out.  The CPU was only showing one core two threads with any degree of usage, and that did not change when I committed the Liquify.  Goodness knows where some people, who really should know better, get off whining that the Photoshop Development Team are pants because their 36 thread $2000 CPU is not being maxed out with every operation.  It's a real pity that Chris Cox is not still with Adobe, because so many of his contributions to these forums were pure gold.

                                            • 19. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                                              Brian Stoppee Adobe Community Professional

                                              Trevor.Dennis  wrote

                                               

                                              Emboss used a single core.

                                               

                                              Smart Sharpen used all 12 cores, and only took a moment to do its thing.  From memory, some of the benefits we are getting from the GPU is in creating the preview.  I also seem to remember something about high system resource users like the Healing brush, and Liquify, use the GPU to show changes in real time.

                                               

                                              Here you go.  5000 pixel Spot Healing Brush using all 12 threads.

                                               

                                               

                                              We have had some discussions about Photoshop filters. The tasks which some of them perform do not always lend themselves to maximum uses of hardware resources (understanding exactly why is nothing I would want to pretend I can explain).

                                               

                                              What I'm trying to understand, from your comment "are we missing the point when we whine that Photoshop and After Effects mostly only use a single core?" if things like filters are the culprits you are mentioning or is the core app still back in the Mac OS 9 and Windows 2000 days?

                                               

                                              On the Internet I read complaints that "this app (or that hardware) from so-so is still in the dark ages because…" and it leaves the readers with the impression that the poster knows what he/she is talking about. Sometimes they have honed in on a single task of the product which can only drive in a single lane rather than use every lane on the technology highway. This live people with the impressive that all things Photoshop (or After Effects or whatever use one core which is not true,

                                              • 20. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                                                Trevor.Dennis Adobe Community Professional (Moderator)

                                                Brian, I mostly take a 'black box' view of the inner workings of Adobe apps. [1] They work extremely well for the most part, but this thread on the Premiere Pro Hardware forum features a number of people who are dissatisfied with their new Threadripper and also discusses the higher end i9X CPUs from Intel.  These people even compare their expensive new builds to their old six core systems, and say they are not as fast.  This is all more poignant  when you consider that the new system will almost certainly have the additional advantage of uber-fast NVMe M.2 drives, and faster bus and memory speeds.

                                                 

                                                Plus we have the app specific benchmarks from Puget Systems, which compare Threadripper and 19-7940X disfavorably with the 6 core 8700K, and even the much older 7700K.  So when considering a new build, it would be crazy to ignore this evidence.  Where people are going wrong IMHO is in how they interpret these results by concluding that the 1950X Threadripper has 16 cores, whereas the 8700K has only 6, so therefore Photoshop is lightly threaded.

                                                 

                                                It's obviously not that simple.  I spent way more time and effort into researching the build I am currently waiting on, and I am still nopt sure I made the right choice, but I decided that the Intel i9-7900X was the best compromise because it has a decent single core Turbo speed, but with 10 cores, up to three NVMe drives, 3600Mhz memory, would run all the other stuff in the background.  How many of us run multiple Adobe apps at the same time for instance?  I use three screens, and often have half a dozen different windows running separate processes, and I am assuming that is when I'll see the benefit of 10 cores, 20 threads, and 44 PCIe lanes.

                                                 

                                                [1] To qualify 'mostly' I do have a pet theory about Photoshop and Smart Objects, as I have at least twice run into trouble on my still reasonably spec'd 6 core 3930K with 32Gb RAM system with large projects that used a lot of nested Smart Objects.  When I say 'trouble' I mean I abandoned the projects because of unbearable lag.  Moving one of the Smart Objects would cause my entire system to stall for about three seconds, and I still had a lot more work to do.  One of the first things I will be doing when I get my new build, is revisiting those projects, but thoughts are that the issue is centered around disk usage as the projects generated very large temp files on the Scratch drive.

                                                When Puget Systems first published these articles, I spent ages totaling the long list of results for all the setups that interested me, and I actually found that the cheaper 1920X Threadripper had the lowest total.  That was probably not the best approach, as I personally rarely use a good many of filters etc. that they tested with.

                                                 

                                                https://www.pugetsystems.com/all_articles.php

                                                 

                                                Unfortunately though Brian, I know absolutely nothing about Mac hardware, and I suspect that I harbour a few misconceptions about what us Windows users perceive to be their shortcomings.  Having said that, I never tire of pointing out that the highest placed Mac in Bill and Harm's PPBM5 results table, was way down in 661st place out of 1351 entries, and that my six year old system still stands in 17th place.  It held 4th place for a good while as well.

                                                 

                                                [EDIT]  I forgot the link

                                                 

                                                Benchmark Results

                                                • 21. Re: More Powerful MacBook Pro RAM in 2018? (the reality)
                                                  Brian Stoppee Adobe Community Professional

                                                  Trevor.Dennis  wrote

                                                  Unfortunately though Brian, I know absolutely nothing about Mac hardware, and I suspect that I harbour a few misconceptions about what us Windows users perceive to be their shortcomings.  Having said that, I never tire of pointing out that the highest placed Mac in Bill and Harm's PPBM5 results table, was way down in 661st place out of 1351 entries, and that my six year old system still stands in 17th place.  It held 4th place for a good while as well.

                                                   

                                                  [EDIT]  I forgot the link

                                                   

                                                  Benchmark Results

                                                   

                                                  Is it possible that I am not linking properly or is this link wrong?

                                                   

                                                  Am I supposed to be looking at test of Premiere Pro CS5?

                                                   

                                                  Are these tests going back to 2011?