![]() We are researching ways to bring Apple computer users the speed and capabilities of our Path Tracer, so we are not waiting on Apple to solve this problem. The difference between hardware-accelerated ray-tracing and non-accelerated ray-tracing is the difference between rendering a single image in minutes instead of hours. However, we have not implemented Metal’s ray-tracing functions because Apple has not released any hardware accelerated ray-tracing support so far. Note: Unreal Engine has implemented Apple’s Metal API for using their GPUs. Please be aware that official support of M1-based computers will not include support for path-tracing at this time. We expect to officially support M1-based computers in 2022. However, most users with these computers are not experiencing major problems. When will Twinmotion officially support Apple’s M1?Ĭurrently, we are working on ensuring that the M1, M1Pro and M1 Max work across our feature set, but until we have fully tested and updated our software we can not officially support these computers. Path Tracer Requirements (link to official documentation) This may also affect Redshift performance but I'm not an expert Unreal Engine sort of does ray tracing but doesn't really do Lumen or Nanite (full-on)? Twinmotion doesn't support Path Tracer on Mac The current maxxed out M1 Ultra GPU doesn't have hardware accelerated ray-tracing support: If FQRW was not part of my workflow, an Intel i9-12900K + RTX 3080 machine could be built to order for a comparable price to the Studio, and there would be zero tradeoffs: single core, multi core, compatibility (outlined below) The imminent Mac Pro will probably be 2/3 as fast as that AMD CPU (multi core) for the same price range (or more)Īll of the above is really only a big factor when it comes FQRW The current maxed out Studio is 1/3 as fast as the fastest AMD CPU (multi core) in Cinebench So, I made a Mac vs PC table comparing all the trade-offs, and it basically boiled down to this for me: I have my system for the next five years. I have larger models I need to work on, but for the moment the Mac Studio is perfect. This was hardly a scientific test, but it was the same model in VW 2022 I used on the Intel MacBook Pro. On the Mac Studio Ultra it was a blur and I used only 17% or the GPU and 39% of memory. On the Intel system the eGPU turned into a jet engine but did spin pretty well. One of my favorite graphics tests is to grab a model in 3D and spin it as fast as I can with my 3DConnexion SpaceMouse. System Firmware Version: 1731.120.10.0.0 (iBridge: 1.0.0,0)įirst, the performance difference is amazing for everything, including VectorWorks. Metal Family: Supported, Metal GPUFamily Apple 7 Outside of silence, I’d also rather keep the CMP on Mojave which is a much more stable and reliable operating system than Big Sur.Total Number of Cores: 20 (16 performance and 4 efficiency) ![]() Otherwise, I’d go back to running PhotoLab 5 on the Intel Classic Mac Pro. The M1 Mac Mini is really and truly silent even under load. I’ve been building “silent PC’s” and silent Macs for decades now and it’s always been a compromise. My interest in the M1 Mac Mini is it’s the first silent under load computer which I’ve had. PhotoLab 5 works much better under Big Sur on my Intel Classic Mac Pro with a WX7100 and 96 GB of memory (requires OpenCore and a fair amount of tweaking to run Big Sur on a Classic Mac Pro). PhotoLab 4 works much better under Mojave on my Intel Classic Mac Pro with a WX7100 and 96 GB of memory. While editing, PhotoLab runs fine but I’m not astonished by its power or how agile it is. The M1 Mac Mini more or less completely seizes up while exporting Nikon NEF files with DeepPrime. Keep in mind that I wrote “reasonably well”. The same technique can be applied with the built-in Activity Monitor. I’m running a utility called iStat Menus which allows me to monitor memory (system and PhotoLab) very easily. Thanks to the very fast SSD speeds of an M1 Mac Mini, opening and closing PhotoLab is not that big a deal. ![]() I then quit and reopen PL5 after any significant amount of work, particularly an export. The way I make PL5 run reasonably well on an 8GB M1 Mac Mini is to close almost all applications including browsers (or at least all windows) before opening up PhotoLab (this process is a nuisance and costs productivity). ![]() I’m struggling with an 8 GB M1 Mac Mini myself for now but will probably exchange it for the 16 GB version (got a very good deal on the 8 GB version and will not have any deal on the 16 GB version, it’s not just the book price difference). What settings are you using in PL5 to make it go faster ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |