Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Arivia
Mar 17, 2011

Cough Drop The Beat posted:

I ended up going for a very slim backpack with plenty of pockets made for a tablet or 13" laptop, phone, power adapters, power bank, and maybe my work lunch because I don't need much more than that and I take public transit to work. Form matters as much as functionality to me!

Oh, I have a small fashion backpack with a laptop sleeve built in for that too. I was just agreeing with the sentiment that buying a good quality backpack is worth it for your own personal needs, not arguing that one or the other was better. Osprey doesn't give a poo poo that I use the backpack to carry around a bunch of books, not a tent and poles and whatever, they'll stand by it and repair/replace it no matter when anyway. (Presuming they survive all this stuff, of course.)

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Last Chance
Dec 31, 2004

IM DAY DAY IRL posted:

reminder that cases from the iphone 7/8 work for the new SE. i got an otterbox knockoff for $8 shipped on ebay that works great w/ my partner's new SE :shrug:

this goes for the battery cases too, i use the apple iphone 7 hunchback smart battery case on my iphone 8 and it's fine. I assume the same for the SE.

trilobite terror
Oct 20, 2007
BUT MY LIVELIHOOD DEPENDS ON THE FORUMS!

Arivia posted:

Oh, I have a small fashion backpack with a laptop sleeve built in for that too. I was just agreeing with the sentiment that buying a good quality backpack is worth it for your own personal needs, not arguing that one or the other was better. Osprey doesn't give a poo poo that I use the backpack to carry around a bunch of books, not a tent and poles and whatever, they'll stand by it and repair/replace it no matter when anyway. (Presuming they survive all this stuff, of course.)

A good frame backpack is one of the single most critical things a person can invest in if they ever find themselves between homes.

Dejan Bimble
Mar 24, 2008

we're all black friends
Plaster Town Cop
I have a MacBook pro 11,4 and I think a power surge at a hotel fried my DC-in. I already bought a replacement for eight bucks, because it was eight bucks. But I'm afraid that I'm just going to gently caress this thing up removing the fan and pulling out cables because I have such a hard time with the tiny screws.

Do you think it's worth the money saving to do this myself, to try and be meticulous as possible, or should I pay someone to try and install this for me and avoid a 700 dollar mistake

sleepwalkers
Dec 7, 2008


Ok Comboomer posted:

so what you're saying is neither of them are macs
hey only one of them isn't a mac!!

Binary Badger
Oct 11, 2005

Trolling Link for a decade


Is the new 5600M discrete GPU with 8 GB HBM2 VRAM on the 16-inch rMBP worth it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HLr9jbx2RI

For games: yeah
For certain video edits/rendering: yeah

Whether or not the $800 is worth it to you depends on what you're gonna do.

Oddly enough, this option is even available on the lower-end 6-core 16-inch model, so you can conceivably save some money as the 8-core may not really help with certain situations.

sleepwalkers
Dec 7, 2008


it's an incredibly bad value and seems like a bad buy unless you absolutely need a powerful discrete gpu on the go in a mac. amd's about to replace this generation of gpus in a few months anyway.

trilobite terror
Oct 20, 2007
BUT MY LIVELIHOOD DEPENDS ON THE FORUMS!
AMD is getting legitimately very good and competitive at GPUs and the incoming generation is very exciting.

I can't say that an $800 5600M upgrade is worth it, but I do think that it's a legitimately very cool thing to see in a MacBook, and apparently some of the stories behind it are a bit interesting (it was leaked a while ago, and ppl were like 'wtf is that even for' and then it didn't end up in any Microsoft or Apple products at the time (one thought I heard was for a new high end 21" iMac and then suddenly it's here).

The 580 that went into a lot of iMacs has aged really well, and outside of the Mac Pro gpus being stupid expensive (although passively cooled/actively cooled by the computer but fanless themselves), Apple/AMD GPUs have never been better. I doubt we'll see them go away entirely anytime in the future. Although I doubt there's some skunkworks project to make an ARM-compatible Radeon or some poo poo.

Between this, ryzen vs intel, apple moving to ARM, the massive power jump of the new consoles....I don't think times have been this exciting for hardware in maybe a decade, since the MBA/early retina days.



All that said I think putting the 5600M into a 6-core MBP would make for a pretty solid gaming laptop for current titles without completely maxing out, but I imagine that multicore will only become more relevant in the future, given the loadout in the new consoles and the way cpus are going in general. Drop that cash on all the cores you can stash, I guess.

Shaocaholica
Oct 29, 2002

Fig. 5E

Binary Badger posted:

Is the new 5600M discrete GPU with 8 GB HBM2 VRAM on the 16-inch rMBP worth it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HLr9jbx2RI

For games: yeah
For certain video edits/rendering: yeah

Whether or not the $800 is worth it to you depends on what you're gonna do.

Oddly enough, this option is even available on the lower-end 6-core 16-inch model, so you can conceivably save some money as the 8-core may not really help with certain situations.

Lol Unigine Heaven is still relevant.

Are modern AAA games are still 100% faster in bootcamp still?

Shaocaholica fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Jun 18, 2020

Lazyhound
Mar 1, 2004

A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous—got me?
Surviving Mars on Ultra in Windows: >120fps

Surviving Mars on Ultra in Catalina: <20fps

~Coxy
Dec 9, 2003

R.I.P. Inter-OS Sass - b.2000AD d.2003AD

Shaocaholica posted:

Lol Unigine Heaven is still relevant.

Are modern AAA games are still 100% faster in bootcamp still?

There's no good, free, modern benchmark for Mac.
(Tomb Raider 2013 is probably the best, but not free.)

Mac doesn't get terribly many AAA to compare, but anything with a Metal renderer is pretty close.

MarcusSA
Sep 23, 2007

~Coxy posted:

There's no good, free, modern benchmark for Mac.
(Tomb Raider 2013 is probably the best, but not free.)

Mac doesn't get terribly many AAA to compare, but anything with a Metal renderer is pretty close.

What is really crazy to me is just how far games have come on the iPhone and iPad. I know they are two different eco systems but drat if I could play some of the games on my Mac I would.

American McGay
Feb 28, 2010

by sebmojo
Most devs used to port their semi-popular iOS games to macOS but that's died down in the past few years. I just don't think it's worth it. I'm guessing a fraction of a fraction of a percent of Mac owners download games from the app store.

American McGay fucked around with this message at 04:31 on Jun 19, 2020

Tiny Timbs
Sep 6, 2008

Lots of new games come with macOS ports these days but they’re usually just middleware crap that don’t seem to run well on any hardware configuration

trilobite terror
Oct 20, 2007
BUT MY LIVELIHOOD DEPENDS ON THE FORUMS!
A lot of games popular on Switch/etc—hyper light drifter, dead cells, the doublefine games, bad north, etc are on iOS and most of those are also on Mac and run about as well on all of them, AFAIK.

I really think Apple missed a real moment to make the iPad the “PC” to the Switch (ie. possibly much pricier but with way more capable and sleek hardware) and they jumped on controllers way late.

I still contend that they should’ve gone/should go after iD/Bethesda, CD Projekt Red, and so forth and do what console makers do— throw a bunch of money and resources at them to port and optimize their popular games for the platform. If it can run on the Switch then it can run on any modern iPad way, way better—and probably by extension it could be easily ported to Mac.

Apple thinks officially sanctioned shovelware like The Floor Is Lava is “bringing tier 1 gaming to the Apple ecosystem” and it’s the most frustrating thing because their hardware is capable now and they have all the money in the world to do it.

Even a few AAA games optimized for Metal and the relatively very very limited number of iPad and Mac SKUs would probably perform on par with versions on more powerful PCs just by virtue of being able to take advantage of similar optimization strategies to what console makers do.

Mister Facetious
Apr 21, 2007

I think I died and woke up in L.A.,
I don't know how I wound up in this place...

:canada:

Shaocaholica posted:

Lol Unigine Heaven is still relevant.

Are modern AAA games are still 100% faster in bootcamp still?

Metal and Vulkan can get MacOS within 85-95% fps of Windows, but OpenCL is still a garbage fire.

well why not
Feb 10, 2009




Ok Comboomer posted:


I still contend that they should’ve gone/should go after iD/Bethesda, CD Projekt Red, and so forth and do what console makers do— throw a bunch of money and resources at them to port and optimize their popular games for the platform. If it can run on the Switch then it can run on any modern iPad way, way better—and probably by extension it could be easily ported to Mac.



They should've just bought Epic

trilobite terror
Oct 20, 2007
BUT MY LIVELIHOOD DEPENDS ON THE FORUMS!

well why not posted:

They should've just bought Epic

The problem is that Fortnite or COD mobile are about as gritty as apple gets when working with third parties, and they never release anything themselves that isn't squeaky clean and rated G/"E for Everybody". Look at the utter cultural nonentity that is the Apple TV+ lineup. Hell, I think bawdy humor on the level of Ratchet & Clank is probably too risqué for Apple. The Apple TV+ version of Game of Thrones has Ramsay Bolton going around giving people swirlies.

Apple buys Epic and immediately tanks Epic with their creative decisions.

trilobite terror fucked around with this message at 07:36 on Jun 19, 2020

sleepwalkers
Dec 7, 2008


Apple buying Epic at the time that Tencent did would’ve made close to zero sense, other than “we bought the whole thing so we could get the little part of the studio that made Infinity Blade”

Chris Knight
Jun 5, 2002

me @ ur posts


Fun Shoe
A refurb with a 580X finally showed up so that'll be a nice quarantine present for me. Shame about the 512 SSD but whatever.

Binary Badger
Oct 11, 2005

Trolling Link for a decade


Assuming you're talking about a 2019 Mac Pro, you do know Apple now sells aftermarket SSD upgrades for it now, right?

https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MXNN2AM/A/1tb-ssd-kit-for-mac-pro

Prices are ridiculous, starting at $600 for 1 TB, but hey at least they're available and it's not soldered in like on laptops..

It's also pretty ridiculous that none of the AMD GPU MacPro options actually come with active cooling on board, they will depend on the internal fans/case flow for that.

Chris Knight
Jun 5, 2002

me @ ur posts


Fun Shoe
iMac, man.

Doesn't matter now, a Vega 48 one came up with 1TB so that's on the way too lol.

Gonna be a hot time on the UPS route here.

trilobite terror
Oct 20, 2007
BUT MY LIVELIHOOD DEPENDS ON THE FORUMS!

Binary Badger posted:

It's also pretty ridiculous that none of the AMD GPU MacPro options actually come with active cooling on board, they will depend on the internal fans/case flow for that.

Isn’t that the whole point of the design though?

Like if you want cheaper, actively cooled versions of said cards then you can pop on down to Microcenter and grab them off the shelf but they’re not going to be as quiet as the Apple ones. Also they don’t do the whole ‘2x GPUs on one card’ MPX form factor but if the complaint is cooling it’s a weird one.

Binary Badger
Oct 11, 2005

Trolling Link for a decade


Well, not having any onboard cooling is a plus if it allows them to cram on tech that helps the throughput of the card..

Max Tech is now saying that the HBM2 5600M option beats the Vega options on the iMac Pro, making the 16-inch rMBP the king of Mac gaming, however useless that title is..

Splinter
Jul 4, 2003
Cowabunga!

Ok Comboomer posted:

The problem is that Fortnite or COD mobile are about as gritty as apple gets when working with third parties, and they never release anything themselves that isn't squeaky clean and rated G/"E for Everybody". Look at the utter cultural nonentity that is the Apple TV+ lineup. Hell, I think bawdy humor on the level of Ratchet & Clank is probably too risqué for Apple. The Apple TV+ version of Game of Thrones has Ramsay Bolton going around giving people swirlies.

Hey, Mythic Quest was pretty great.

Canned Sunshine
Nov 20, 2005

CAUTION: POST QUALITY UNDER CONSTRUCTION



Ok Comboomer posted:

Isn’t that the whole point of the design though?

Like if you want cheaper, actively cooled versions of said cards then you can pop on down to Microcenter and grab them off the shelf but they’re not going to be as quiet as the Apple ones. Also they don’t do the whole ‘2x GPUs on one card’ MPX form factor but if the complaint is cooling it’s a weird one.

Then it means the design is compromised, since what's the point of a pro-focused tower that can't handle actively cooler graphics cards.

Also, there are plenty of graphics card options that use multi-fan configurations that can remain virtually silent, if not completely silent, for all but the most intense loads, which is ideally when you want active cooling to be occurring anyway to avoid potential throttling and/or maximize performance.

sleepwalkers
Dec 7, 2008


SourKraut posted:

Then it means the design is compromised, since what's the point of a pro-focused tower that can't handle actively cooler graphics cards.

...if passive cooling keeps the card at the same temps as the smaller, actively cooled version, how is that compromised?

Granite Octopus
Jun 24, 2008

Splinter posted:

Hey, Mythic Quest was pretty great.

Yeah it wasn’t spectacular but it definitely was not family friendly.

trilobite terror
Oct 20, 2007
BUT MY LIVELIHOOD DEPENDS ON THE FORUMS!

SourKraut posted:

Then it means the design is compromised, since what's the point of a pro-focused tower that can't handle actively cooler graphics cards.

Also, there are plenty of graphics card options that use multi-fan configurations that can remain virtually silent, if not completely silent, for all but the most intense loads, which is ideally when you want active cooling to be occurring anyway to avoid potential throttling and/or maximize performance.

Why can't it handle actively cooled GPUs?

What are you talking about?

The situation is literally: You can buy any modern actively cooled AMD GPU and pop it in a new Mac Pro easy peasy, no sweat. That new 5700 at microcenter with three fans on it? Works fine. The upcoming Big Navi GPUs? Yup, it's a pretty big tower.

Or you can spend a bit more and get a special bespoke card from Apple, with a massive fuckoff radiator in place of its own fans, that was designed to work with the three main fans on the Mac Pro with the benefit of more quiet.

That's it. There aren't any other limits except that you can't use Nvidia cards but that's been a thing since like 2010, and even then Nvidia cards will apparently work fine in Bootcamp.

Explain to me what you mean by "the design is compromised".

Canned Sunshine
Nov 20, 2005

CAUTION: POST QUALITY UNDER CONSTRUCTION



Ok Comboomer posted:

Why can't it handle actively cooled GPUs?

What are you talking about?

The situation is literally: You can buy any modern actively cooled AMD GPU and pop it in a new Mac Pro easy peasy, no sweat. That new 5700 at microcenter with three fans on it? Works fine. The upcoming Big Navi GPUs? Yup, it's a pretty big tower.

Or you can spend a bit more and get a special bespoke card from Apple, with a massive fuckoff radiator in place of its own fans, that was designed to work with the three main fans on the Mac Pro with the benefit of more quiet.

That's it. There aren't any other limits except that you can't use Nvidia cards but that's been a thing since like 2010, and even then Nvidia cards will apparently work fine in Bootcamp.

Explain to me what you mean by "the design is compromised".

I didn't say it couldn't handle it, you made a comment, and let me quote, regarding the point of the design being as quiet as possible via integration of non-actively cooled graphics cards (although do you have a source that this was the intent?):


Ok Comboomer posted:

Isn’t that the whole point of the design though?

and the point I was trying to make is that it's asinine, from a proper engineering standpoint where the goal is greater hardware flexibility, to design a desktop chassis around the concept of needing to integrate an Apple-supplied GPU card in order to hit the primary audible AND thermal dynamics of the chassis. So to me, and of course it's my opinion and opinions are like assholes, everyone has one (just like you), I'd have rather they had worked with AMD to evaluate AMD's product stack of what currently is available and upcoming products not yet announced, against what Apple wants to support, and then simply upsized the case fans to support those cards *if* their goal was solely huge, "gently caress off" radiators. So if you're attempting to defend Apple's desire to design solely for their own hardware replacement options, then sure, I agree, good job! Here's a gold star. But from the concept of the new Mac Pro being a user-expandable device focused towards "pros", if that were the approach, it's a poor approach.

And there's nothing wrong with a giant "gently caress off" radiator in lieu of fans, but you're not magically dispersing that heat into non-existence, and there's a limit to what the radiator can dissipate via diffusion before you're either going to have to ramp up and sustain chassis fan performance to avoid thermal throttling of the GPU relative to its potential peak operational rate, or otherwise you need to select a lower-class GPU that stays within a lower thermal budget (which, typically, is often how Apple approached it in the past).

So if it were me, and again it's my opinion so you don't need to get emotional compromised due to someone potentially disagreeing with you, I would rather Apple design any discrete graphics options to have giant fuckoff fans on the card that spins at 400 rpms, have FDB motors, and are inaudible, but allow the card to hit peak performance without having to ramp the chassis fans up to what the "gently caress off radiator" is going to require.

It's as simple as that.

Canned Sunshine fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Jun 19, 2020

frogbs
May 5, 2004
Well well well

Ok Comboomer posted:

The problem is that Fortnite or COD mobile are about as gritty as apple gets when working with third parties, and they never release anything themselves that isn't squeaky clean and rated G/"E for Everybody". Look at the utter cultural nonentity that is the Apple TV+ lineup. Hell, I think bawdy humor on the level of Ratchet & Clank is probably too risqué for Apple. The Apple TV+ version of Game of Thrones has Ramsay Bolton going around giving people swirlies.

Apple buys Epic and immediately tanks Epic with their creative decisions.

Did you watch The Morning Show? It got a lot darker than I was expecting. Steve Carrell's character rapes a woman. Definitely not very family friendly in my opinion.

Splinter posted:

Hey, Mythic Quest was pretty great.

Agreed! Best thing i've seen on AppleTV+ so far.

For All Mankind was also better than I expected, and could be seen as somehwat controversial given that it's playing around with some pretty sacred American history.

FuturePastNow
May 19, 2014


I'm surprised Apple didn't turn the AppleTV into a mini game console for iOS games in the living room a long time ago, like back when it was first introduced.

Corb3t
Jun 7, 2003

FuturePastNow posted:

I'm surprised Apple didn't turn the AppleTV into a mini game console for iOS games in the living room a long time ago, like back when it was first introduced.

There has been rumors of a refreshed Apple TV - for the price point, they definitely should include some kind of controller with it. It would tie in great with Apple Arcade too.

BobHoward
Feb 13, 2012

The only thing white people deserve is a bullet to their empty skull

SourKraut posted:

and the point I was trying to make is that it's asinine, from a proper engineering standpoint where the goal is greater hardware flexibility, to design a desktop chassis around the concept of needing to integrate an Apple-supplied GPU card in order to hit the primary audible AND thermal dynamics of the chassis. So to me, and of course it's my opinion and opinions are like assholes, everyone has one (just like you), I'd have rather they had worked with AMD to evaluate AMD's product stack of what currently is available and upcoming products not yet announced, against what Apple wants to support, and then simply upsized the case fans to support those cards *if* their goal was solely huge, "gently caress off" radiators. So if you're attempting to defend Apple's desire to design solely for their own hardware replacement options, then sure, I agree, good job! Here's a gold star. But from the concept of the new Mac Pro being a user-expandable device focused towards "pros", if that were the approach, it's a poor approach.

And there's nothing wrong with a giant "gently caress off" radiator in lieu of fans, but you're not magically dispersing that heat into non-existence, and there's a limit to what the radiator can dissipate via diffusion before you're either going to have to ramp up and sustain chassis fan performance to avoid thermal throttling of the GPU relative to its potential peak operational rate, or otherwise you need to select a lower-class GPU that stays within a lower thermal budget (which, typically, is often how Apple approached it in the past).

So if it were me, and again it's my opinion so you don't need to get emotional compromised due to someone potentially disagreeing with you, I would rather Apple design any discrete graphics options to have giant fuckoff fans on the card that spins at 400 rpms, have FDB motors, and are inaudible, but allow the card to hit peak performance without having to ramp the chassis fans up to what the "gently caress off radiator" is going to require.

It's as simple as that.

lol what even is this rant you don't seem to have much idea what's going on here

Basic principle #1: an important limiting factor for cooling is mass airflow (how much mass of air moves past radiator fins per second)

Basic principle #2: for any given desired mass airflow, as fan diameter goes up, RPM and flow velocity go down, and therefore so does noise

Basic principle #3: every time airflow changes direction or goes through some kind of constriction, it's an efficiency loss and noise increase. The closer you get to straight-line no-constrictions flow through the whole box, the better off you are.

Observation: the built in fans on a PC graphics card are a shitload smaller than the fuckoff huge fans in the Mac Pro chassis, and are doomed to make higher velocity airflow with more turbulence due to all the flow direction changes

You add all this up and you arrive at the reason why Apple designed Mac Pro GPU cooling the way they did. But it's not just Apple. At work I have some vicarious experience with system specs for supporting Nvidia Quadro compute GPUs, and you want to know something? Most of Nvidia's $5000 ea. pro-as-gently caress GPUs don't have integrated fans since probably 95% of them get installed in rackmount servers, where the standard practice is to do cooling much like Apple does it in the Mac Pro (just with few fucks given about noise).

Basically, the only reason integrated heatsink fans are found in consumer and even workstation PC GPUs is that the ATX standard provides essentially no requirements for expansion slot airflow. If you're designing a 300W card intended to plug into any rando PC, you include a fan because you simply cannot depend on an external flow source. This is not ideal, because chassis provided linear flow is unquestionably a better system design, but it's PC Land. You don't get to have nice things.

Anyways, the point is this. The Mac Pro chassis fans should NOT need to ramp up like hell only because you installed a non-Apple GPU with a heatsink fan. Those fans were specced to move enough air through to handle a kilowatt of factory GPU (two MPX modules at 500W power budget each) and ~400 watts of other stuff. It's not fundamentally different for them to push that air and heat out the back if the source is a non-MPX GPU with its own fan. Will the net result be noisier than MPX GPUs? Almost certainly, but only because you've added an extra, higher-RPM fan installed in such a way that it's gonna generate more turbulent flow.

Another way of looking at this: Assume Apple satisfied your whining by providing fans on all their GPU cards. Now what? If they want to support plugging in any old GPU, they still have the same chassis level airflow requirements! This is because PC video cards are all over the map. Not all of them force their hot air exhaust out the back plate, many just kinda spit it back out inside the PC case, so you gotta make sure you can exhaust it out the back for them. So you're complaining that Apple looked at this chassis fan performance requirement and realized they could just design the chassis flow path to pass through passive GPU heatsinks, eliminating the need for extra fans and turbulent flow etc.

well why not
Feb 10, 2009




sleepwalkers posted:

Apple buying Epic at the time that Tencent did would’ve made close to zero sense, other than “we bought the whole thing so we could get the little part of the studio that made Infinity Blade”

They'd be able to leverage one of the biggest media properties and combine it with Apple TV / Music.

They'd also have control of Unreal, which is expanding quickly into the VFX market.

japtor
Oct 28, 2005
I think a few of us suggested OWC for MagSafe chargers recently, but apparently they're sketchy there too :doh::

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/owc-selling-fake-magsafe-2-power-adapter.2062973/page-2?post=28198905#post-28198905

Malcolm XML
Aug 8, 2009

I always knew it would end like this.

BobHoward posted:

lol what even is this rant you don't seem to have much idea what's going on here

Basic principle #1: an important limiting factor for cooling is mass airflow (how much mass of air moves past radiator fins per second)

Basic principle #2: for any given desired mass airflow, as fan diameter goes up, RPM and flow velocity go down, and therefore so does noise

Basic principle #3: every time airflow changes direction or goes through some kind of constriction, it's an efficiency loss and noise increase. The closer you get to straight-line no-constrictions flow through the whole box, the better off you are.

Observation: the built in fans on a PC graphics card are a shitload smaller than the fuckoff huge fans in the Mac Pro chassis, and are doomed to make higher velocity airflow with more turbulence due to all the flow direction changes

You add all this up and you arrive at the reason why Apple designed Mac Pro GPU cooling the way they did. But it's not just Apple. At work I have some vicarious experience with system specs for supporting Nvidia Quadro compute GPUs, and you want to know something? Most of Nvidia's $5000 ea. pro-as-gently caress GPUs don't have integrated fans since probably 95% of them get installed in rackmount servers, where the standard practice is to do cooling much like Apple does it in the Mac Pro (just with few fucks given about noise).

Basically, the only reason integrated heatsink fans are found in consumer and even workstation PC GPUs is that the ATX standard provides essentially no requirements for expansion slot airflow. If you're designing a 300W card intended to plug into any rando PC, you include a fan because you simply cannot depend on an external flow source. This is not ideal, because chassis provided linear flow is unquestionably a better system design, but it's PC Land. You don't get to have nice things.

Anyways, the point is this. The Mac Pro chassis fans should NOT need to ramp up like hell only because you installed a non-Apple GPU with a heatsink fan. Those fans were specced to move enough air through to handle a kilowatt of factory GPU (two MPX modules at 500W power budget each) and ~400 watts of other stuff. It's not fundamentally different for them to push that air and heat out the back if the source is a non-MPX GPU with its own fan. Will the net result be noisier than MPX GPUs? Almost certainly, but only because you've added an extra, higher-RPM fan installed in such a way that it's gonna generate more turbulent flow.

Another way of looking at this: Assume Apple satisfied your whining by providing fans on all their GPU cards. Now what? If they want to support plugging in any old GPU, they still have the same chassis level airflow requirements! This is because PC video cards are all over the map. Not all of them force their hot air exhaust out the back plate, many just kinda spit it back out inside the PC case, so you gotta make sure you can exhaust it out the back for them. So you're complaining that Apple looked at this chassis fan performance requirement and realized they could just design the chassis flow path to pass through passive GPU heatsinks, eliminating the need for extra fans and turbulent flow etc.

a good article on mac pro cooling design https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gadgets/a30170910/apple-mac-pro/

FCKGW
May 21, 2006

Finally a new thread title :woop:

Pulcinella
Feb 15, 2019

FCKGW posted:

Finally a new thread title :woop:

Glad I could make a small contribution to the zeitgeist :agesilaus:

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

trilobite terror
Oct 20, 2007
BUT MY LIVELIHOOD DEPENDS ON THE FORUMS!

BobHoward posted:

lol what even is this rant you don't seem to have much idea what's going on here

Basic principle #1: an important limiting factor for cooling is mass airflow (how much mass of air moves past radiator fins per second)

Basic principle #2: for any given desired mass airflow, as fan diameter goes up, RPM and flow velocity go down, and therefore so does noise

Basic principle #3: every time airflow changes direction or goes through some kind of constriction, it's an efficiency loss and noise increase. The closer you get to straight-line no-constrictions flow through the whole box, the better off you are.

Observation: the built in fans on a PC graphics card are a shitload smaller than the fuckoff huge fans in the Mac Pro chassis, and are doomed to make higher velocity airflow with more turbulence due to all the flow direction changes

You add all this up and you arrive at the reason why Apple designed Mac Pro GPU cooling the way they did. But it's not just Apple. At work I have some vicarious experience with system specs for supporting Nvidia Quadro compute GPUs, and you want to know something? Most of Nvidia's $5000 ea. pro-as-gently caress GPUs don't have integrated fans since probably 95% of them get installed in rackmount servers, where the standard practice is to do cooling much like Apple does it in the Mac Pro (just with few fucks given about noise).

Basically, the only reason integrated heatsink fans are found in consumer and even workstation PC GPUs is that the ATX standard provides essentially no requirements for expansion slot airflow. If you're designing a 300W card intended to plug into any rando PC, you include a fan because you simply cannot depend on an external flow source. This is not ideal, because chassis provided linear flow is unquestionably a better system design, but it's PC Land. You don't get to have nice things.

Anyways, the point is this. The Mac Pro chassis fans should NOT need to ramp up like hell only because you installed a non-Apple GPU with a heatsink fan. Those fans were specced to move enough air through to handle a kilowatt of factory GPU (two MPX modules at 500W power budget each) and ~400 watts of other stuff. It's not fundamentally different for them to push that air and heat out the back if the source is a non-MPX GPU with its own fan. Will the net result be noisier than MPX GPUs? Almost certainly, but only because you've added an extra, higher-RPM fan installed in such a way that it's gonna generate more turbulent flow.

Another way of looking at this: Assume Apple satisfied your whining by providing fans on all their GPU cards. Now what? If they want to support plugging in any old GPU, they still have the same chassis level airflow requirements! This is because PC video cards are all over the map. Not all of them force their hot air exhaust out the back plate, many just kinda spit it back out inside the PC case, so you gotta make sure you can exhaust it out the back for them. So you're complaining that Apple looked at this chassis fan performance requirement and realized they could just design the chassis flow path to pass through passive GPU heatsinks, eliminating the need for extra fans and turbulent flow etc.

no you see all those apple engineers making half a million dollars a year putting together the cooling system on the seventh version of the mac pro definitely didn't think about things like thermals or air....what was the phrase?...."from a proper engineering standpoint".

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply