With 40 gigs of ram and Turbo Boost enabled, I got 47,6 seconds (GPU accelerated).
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
580X Vs Vega 48 in the real world?
- Thread starter Loa
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Could you tell me at which points exactly you start and stop the timer? Then I'll try the same on my machine.
I'm experiencing severe lag on my machine when drawing masks in C1 pro (see this post if you're interested). Combined with my iMac being 10s slower at the task I wonder if there's something wrong with my system.
Yes, sure! I am starting my timer together wih the orange button ("Export 50 photos"). I stop the clock when the window running the remaining time slider disappears.
I am afraid, I have not much to contribute here, as I simply have found no reason to upgrade to version 12 yet.
I may have to reconsider, when Aperture becomes unusable in the next macOS release and if Luminar does not live up to the expectations.
Curious how well does the i5 work with Vega 48? Noticed a good deal on a refurb that’s tempting to order
Superb combo. Runs cool and sustain good performance for the i5.
Sorry, Vega 64 vs. what? a 580?
I have a couple of 64s and a 480 (which is pretty much a 580 not overclocked) and the difference is extremely noticeable.
A single Vega 64 smashes it. Like 2x the speed, especially at higher resolutions.
This is on the PC side... Borderlands 2, 3dmark Firestrike, others.... Can’t remember off the top of my head as i ripped the 480 out 18 months ago.
But lets just say that the difference is extremely noticeable, and its much more noticeable the higher resolution you go.
The 480/580 is fairly ROPS limited and struggles with higher resolution as a result.
If you check the new Geekbench 5 scores, there is an approximate difference or 30% in OpenCL performance between the Pro 580X and the Vega 48. Would this be the difference between both cards in the real world? I do not know.
I recently returned a faulty brand new iMac 2019 27" with i9 with Vega 48 due to a manufacturing defect. But the few moments that I could use and work with it and its Vega 48 before it died were great. Very good combination. Very cool and silent. Played games smoothly and at relatively good resolutions. It is a pity the the computer was defective and died.
Now I face the decision of buying the same iMac i9 and Vega 48 system or another Mac option (iMac Pro) and I am still dedicing (I want to believe that the faulty iMac was only a question of bad luck).
I recently returned a faulty brand new iMac 2019 27" with i9 with Vega 48 due to a manufacturing defect. But the few moments that I could use and work with it and its Vega 48 before it died were great. Very good combination. Very cool and silent. Played games smoothly and at relatively good resolutions. It is a pity the the computer was defective and died.
Now I face the decision of buying the same iMac i9 and Vega 48 system or another Mac option (iMac Pro) and I am still dedicing (I want to believe that the faulty iMac was only a question of bad luck).
As usually, it all boils down to software optimization for a given architecture. As per this thread, in Geekbench 5 the 580X reaches a score of about 34000 while the Vega 48 exceeds 48000. That makes it more than 40% faster.
That depends on the software. If it is full of such instructions, then it is likely in practice to come close to such differences. Similarly for Metal.
Sorry to hear that you had such a bad experience with your iMac. I hope a solution is found.
I have the i5-9600K with the Vega 48 and I can say that it is easily the best Mac I ever used so far. Only very demanding software, e.g. video encoding, relying exclusively on CPU power (as opposed to using also hardware acceleration), or recent games that I don't have, can push the temperature beyond 92-93oC at which point the fans become audible but not intrusive. Otherwise it is a very fast and silent machine, a pleasure to use.
Regarding your dilemma, you have to think about your need in cores and clock speed. The i9 has eight cores plus hyper-threading, while the i5 has only six without hyper-threading. But the i5 can reach higher clock speeds than the i9 in turbo mode. So, it depends on what matters most to you.
The reseller agreed to give me the money of the faulty iMac purchase back very soon.
I like the 2019 iMac i9, it was a great machine before its sudden death, and also de Vega 48 was amazing. I mainly do econometric analysis and music production and I use the hyperthreading a lot normally.
I like the 2019 iMac i9, it was a great machine before its sudden death, and also de Vega 48 was amazing. I mainly do econometric analysis and music production and I use the hyperthreading a lot normally.
I use the Vega 48 mainly for gaming in my (little) spare time. So far it is a good card for gaming in my experience.
Also, it helps to maintain a cooler system temperature, or so I think.
Having said that, I am still deciding if I will put again a Vega 48 if I select a new 2019 iMac i9 or I will choose the 580X, give that my main GPU use is gaming. But it is a nice GPU.
I am intrigued about what was the cause of the iMac defect and death (logic board, PSU, CPU, GPU, or other) the Apple reseller did not tell me the death cause of the computer, only that was a manufacturing defect and that I will obtain a full money refund for this cause.
Also, it helps to maintain a cooler system temperature, or so I think.
Having said that, I am still deciding if I will put again a Vega 48 if I select a new 2019 iMac i9 or I will choose the 580X, give that my main GPU use is gaming. But it is a nice GPU.
I am intrigued about what was the cause of the iMac defect and death (logic board, PSU, CPU, GPU, or other) the Apple reseller did not tell me the death cause of the computer, only that was a manufacturing defect and that I will obtain a full money refund for this cause.