12/17/2023 0 Comments Plogue bidule coupon![]() The outside consultants they hire to do directed projects are working on things that probably need to be completed. Third-party relationships on this are very important to them and the workflow team is helping to fix their problems faster too. He stresses that it’s not just Apple’s applications that they’re testing and working to help make better. Is it the OS, is it in the drivers, is it in the application, is it in the silicon, and then run it to ground to get it fixed.”. we find it and we go into our architecture team and our performance architects and really drill down and figure out where is the bottleneck. This group is primarily looking at Apple stack, but they are looking at a subset of 3rd party stuff. The next version of LogicX doesn't exist yet but LogicX does exist. Future versions of apps/hardware that don't exist yet perhaps not there is no skew toward "audio and video apps that didn't yet exist". However, "improvements on future products" is inconsistent with apps that doesn't exist yet. Which the first part is telling because the focus of the article has been about how one of this teams primary missing is getting more performance and less bugs out of current applications. It’s also empowered to make improvements on future products, like the Mac Pro." But the Pro Workflow Team isn’t just there to fix current bugs. The closest part to a handwaving references to something non existent and future on products is It is extremely telling that all you have is some variation on an ad hominem attack ( a failure upon my ability to read and comprehend ) as opposed to a quote from the article. I haven't though read "into" it what I want to be there. Multiple times ( about every time someone pops up and swears that it says something that it do not I at least skim of not re-read it again). The improvements didn't exist before they worked on them but the apps did. The 2018 one talked about directed, incremental improvements to FCPX and LogicX. The Tech Crunch articles did not talk about non existent apps. $15K.Īpple's 1,000 track demo audio focused also used Pro XDR display which was spectacle worthy too. Those cards happen to have relatively low bandwidth requirements so it works out the slot bandwidth allocation. And that is somewhat more about having over 90 DSP processors in the box, than on the Apple provided stuff. One reason the Mac Pro is going "up" in spec chasing is that where it was (during first five iterations) is now being covered by other parts of the Mac line up.Īs for Apple's 1,000 VI demo, that was mainly a demo of stuff 5-6 Avid HDX cards into a single box. Intel will have a 10 core ( and probably less than $900) priced solution by mid 2020. In September, there will be a 16 core one that is less than $900 in price. ![]() " proof of the future.Ĥ years ago there wasn't a mainstream priced desktop processor than had more than 4 cores. In that context (the non nebulous distant future), it is more a rational forecast than a "so big I'll be under the limit. There are a much smaller set of workloads where the RAM workload footprint is reasonably close to going over 1TB in the next handful of years at the current rate. So if fastest matters substantive parts of the system will need to be refreshed in the future. And if fastest matters then the rest of the system in 5-6 will be faster also. There are lots of workloads that are growing at less than 25% per year. If over the service lifetime of the working set size never crosses the 1TB limit then that extra 'tax' just bought a whole lot of nothing. ![]() The new Mac Pro is only going to offer processors with that tax included. Intel charges a very stiff tax on processors that go over the 1TB limit. If grew at 10% per year for 10 years it would be less than 300GB. If future workload RAM data footprint grew at 25% per year for 10 years the future data footprint would be less than 950GB. A 1TB (or more ) RAM can cost as much as the whole rest of the system.ġ.5TB isn't really the best path to future proofing if currently have 100GB sized workload. The more money tossed into RAM leaves a smaller budget for other stuff. RAM is the fastest storage but it is also the most expensive storage.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |